Online reflection 2

I enjoyed listening to Jason Fried talking about why work doesn’t happen at work. I haven’t worked in an office but I guess it’s almost comparable with studying in the library at the university with some classmates. I lose focus immediately if they talk to me. And if I sit at home, like I am doing right now, I can work for as long as I want to and then take breaks when I need to. But the thing that is kind of paradoxical is that I tend to study much better in school. Therefor Jason’s theory isn’t entirely applicable, at least not on me.

But still, I think that it’s sort of insane that people have to go to work every weekday from eight to five! Who finds it optimal to live their life that way? Anyone? You lose so much time from your family and friends who are the ones, sorry for the cliché, who really matters. I’m very pro giving the employees flexible time and freedom in how to get the work done. Of course I understand that you can’t let everyone decide entirely for themselves, and that on several workplaces this is not possible at all. But if I were a manager, I would let people work at home if they wanted to. Since I’m studying economics, I get why people have to work a lot and understand the problematization between the profitability and work time. Everything has to be done in time. But in my dream-office, everyone would be able to decide where they wish to spend their working hours themselves.

Jason Fried also talks about facebook and that it is banned on some workplaces, because it steels too much attention. Seriously, that is kind of strange. He compares it with taking a break for a smoke and that no one would have banned that 15 years ago. Thus, in my dream-office you would definitely be able to visit facebook and other social media on work time.

Also, in my dream-office there would be cake on Fridays. 

Online reflection 1

”Find out what happened to the actors from [put in any old successful tv series here]” or “See how much money [put in any celebrity here] earns” is two very common articles I see that I have to pay for when I read the newspaper on the internet. And yes, I get the urge to click on the article because in that second I really want to know what happened to, for example, Inger Nilsson. But the next second I recall that I can just google it and find it out for free. I guess this is one big issue for the newspapers.

I’m a 90’s kid and we’re used to get things for free. Just a few clicks away we have every, okay almost every, movie, song, tv series or whatever that’s ever been made there for us to enjoy whenever we want. (Well of course I’ve never illegally downloaded anything). But this makes us unwilling to pay for news. On the other hand I recently found out that there are about 150.000 individuals who pay for the paywall-articles in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet. My preconception tells me that there are mostly older people who pay for this.

This leads to the question; what should the newspapers do to make me pay? Maybe it’s a matter of time. In the future there will probably be more articles and news on the internet that you have to pay for, since it’s obviously getting more common. And maybe when there are no options but to pay to get trustworthy articles, then I’ll pay. But the thing is that I believe that there will never be a time where it doesn’t exist a free option, because there will always be a competitor trying to steal readers.

So to sum this up, I will never pay to get information about Inger Nilsson. Please give me something of higher value!

PS. I have nothing against Inger Nilsson in particular.