Sarah Perez at Read/Write Web wonders whether or not content is finally / just now becoming a commodity, referencing the Shyftr saga over the weekend, and with particular reference to bloggers.  The funny thing (of course, not in a ‘ha ha’ way) is that this truth that she is stumbling upon, is one of the oldest and well known — and yet, hardly appreciated — by most bloggers.

Blogging, as an activity in and of itself, rarely pays.

More to the point: up until recently, it has never really paid for anyone.

And by “pay” I mean that it the most mercenary, and yet, the most metaphorical terms.  Compared to whatever day job you hold or once held, on a per hourly basis, it will not compete (perhaps even within an order of magnitude) with that level of compensation and never will.

Nor, for many individuals, will it ever pay out in the larger sense — from a sense of joined participation, of the validation of one’s thoughts and one’s words, and perhaps thought leadership in any one category.  Not that it doesn’t ever return any of that at *all*, but that compared to what many bloggers put *in* to this hobby, the return is infintismal.

No, unless you command the attention of hundreds of thousands, or perhaps, millions of eyeballs very few bloggers will have the indulgence of having their thoughts and opinions (i.e. their content) subsidized at a high advertising rate by anyone.

And that’s the problem, I suppose, that this weekend meme is getting to.

There are many *many* ways to answer the inevitable questions “… so now what?” and “what can I make of this?” and “should I just be happy with writing as a means in and of itself?”

The way that I will answer it is thusly.

The actual content in your blog may not be worth so much that anyone is going to pay for it; but blogging as a vehicle and not a means to an end is how many bloggers find success, however they want to define it.  I am going to presuppose that you have the will, the time, and the energy to keep plugging at it day after day, when no one is listening, no one is replying, and it seems like no one even knows you’re writing.

And furthermore, that you have no inclination to sell anything except yourself and your words.

But that base of content is something free that you will build upon.

And once you know — and accept — that its something in and of itself that you will probably never be paid outright for, certainly not in a way that can compensate you for the blood, sweat, and tears that have made your blog what it is, you can turn get over how little you’re getting out of your work, and leverage that blog into something else.

A lever for what you do and what you stand for; what some people recognize as your personal brand.

What you ultimately do after that is up to you.

Will you use it as a stepping stone to a new job?  Another occupation within the new media sphere?  Perhaps as a paid gun at part of a well known blog?  A means to meet more like-minded bloggers and personalities?  A a font of ideas where perhaps you *will* end up selling something?  Perhaps your unique services and opinions on your particular area of interest?  Or perhaps organizing a conference in that same area?

And that’s just one way to answer this broad question around what bloggers can do to leverage their time and energy.

If you’re comfortable with selling something now (products or services), and the circumstances fit, it can complement your writing nicely.  Or perhaps you’re going to make it your goal to achieve stratospheric numbers in terms of eyeballs, RSS subscribers and attention.

But at end of the day, one of the first things any blogger needs to know is that blogging as an activity unto itself doesn’t pay.  We live in a world where content is devalued.  And its up to every one of us to make the most of what blogging *can* do.

And for some people, given the right time, the right circumstances, and the right amount of work (hellishly hard amounts), it can work out like gangbusters.

Just ask Robert Scoble.

(Who doesn’t monetize his site at all; but rather, has used his blogging fame and brand to launch PodTech and now FastCompany TV.  Being a blogging rock star is nice, but it, by itself, doens’t pay your mortgage — unless it actually does, as I have no first hand knowledge of being one)

So its fairly breaking news, but Marc Zuckerberg has just outlined Facebook’s best attempt at monetization, which involves three separate entities — allowing advertisers to build their own pages, facilitating the engagement between Facebook fans and those advertisers (and the promotion thereof on their own profiles), and perhaps most importantly, something called Social Ads.

Social Ads are ad units that will be customized to a users interests based on the kind of information that that user has given Facebook, with these ad units appearing both in the profiles and as banner ads.

Now, if I was an advertiser, like the 40 some-odd partners that Facebook has, I’d be salivating at the possibility of having unprecedented access to such a large petri-dish of consumers — and the ability to have unprecedented ability to *track* those actions in some kind of cookies/behavioural-based mish-mash of technology (haven’t actually heard what this will be).

But if I was someone who really enjoyed Facebook, someone who enjoyed their sense of privacy, and who might feel threatened, and perhaps angered, at their attempts at cashing in at the expense of the relationships I have — well, I who knows what I might do?

After all, I don’t think any one begrudges Facebook for wanting to monetize its social capital.

What I think people *WILL* take exception to is how these intrusive these ads will feel, how some people will feel like their privacy will be violated for the sake of “highly targeted ad units”, and perhaps, most importantly, how people will *not *be able to opt out.

That’s right. According to Eric Schonfeld’s transcript:

“People will not be able to opt out of these social ads or turn them off, at least for now, unless they stop revealing information about themselves on Facebook. Says Zuckerberg: “It is an ad-supported service. It is a free service.”

Now, its hard to read into what someone else has transcribed, but not only does it sound wrong that you’re not able to opt out of an ad service that is based on your personal data and relationships — but it also sounds, quite frankly, a little arrogant.

What happens now is too nascent to know how things will turn out. But with these changes Facebook will arrive at a crossroads. The question remains, I think is the following: Will people be enjoying Facebook for its benefits to be bothered — or, will lock-in into the Facebook network be too strong — for people to notice, or care, that these kinds of changes will be made?

Too early to tell, I know … but all it would take, I think, is for a few liberally-minded individuals to act like the spark when all of this rolls out in earnest, because something tells me there is a whole lot of tinder that is liable to go up pretty darn quick if given the opportunity.

Bonus: Valleywag has the low-down on how your privacy is an illusion at Facebook

Old-News: You already knew that Facebook pretty much owns everything you put on your profile, right?