“Because of” Not “With” in Traditional Media Also?

Last night, I was chatting with a copywriter about some story ideas. She mentioned how tough it is to get a story in free ad-subsidized weekly newspapers. Even when you get the by-line, the monetary compensation isn’t all that. Over in the music industry, Steve Albini reminds us how record companies put artists in the hole while Thomas Hauser tears apart the “standard” book contract.

Makes me wonder if Doc Searls’ statement about money and weblogs is true for traditional media also:

“I believe it’s far more important (and interesting) to make money because of our blogs, rather than with them.”

For example, musicians don’t make money with a record, they make money on ticket sales and merchandise (because of a record).

If there’s only two nickels to be made, directly, whether self-publishing (weblogs) or via a publishing company (newspaper, recording, book) and all the money is in the “because of”. It seems to me the quest is finding the shortest way to “because of”.