techTALK

For most people, paying for Internet access means pulling out the credit card. Several startups in the industry want to change that--if they can make a profit.

Subscribers to neophyte bigger.net's new service will pay a one-time $59 account set-up fee. After that, access to the World Wide Web and other Internet services is free for the subscriber's lifetime.

And if you've been to Logan recently, you've probably seen posters advertising Juno's free Internet accounts. Nationwide dial-up access and Web service is provided at no charge to the end user.

Compared with the $10 to $30 per months fees levied by all the other Internet service providers (ISP's) in the market, the bigger.net plan seems like a steal. But there's no free lunch, even on the Net.

The catch is, when you're surfing the Web on bigger.net, there will be a window filled with advertising next to the browser itself. Close the ad window, and you're disconnected. Juno users also receive ads from sponsors in their e-mail inboxes every morning.

Advertising, of course, has existed on the Internet in increasing amounts since the National Science Foundation discountinued government subsidy of the network a few years ago.

It's impossible to visit a site on the Web that doesn't have a tiny banner with advertisements plastering it like bumper stickers. Still, these ads typically defray only a tiny cost of the site. The conventional wisdom holds that most people ignore banner ads as they look through a Web site.

As a result, companies are willing to pay very little to get a link to their home page placed on Web sites. No Web site has managed to subsidize itself completely on advertising revenue. Some famous sites, like Mirzsky's Worst of the Web, have even shut down after failing to find ways to pay for themselves.

These "free Internet access" firms are taking a big gamble: how can they subsidize nationwide networks of Internet access that cost millions of dollars when much less expensive Web sites can't do the same thing?

Their theory is that they can get more ad revenue because they are getting the advertiser's message to all the subscribers who sign up with them. The success of Web site advertising depends on how many subscribers visit the page. The success of ISP advertising, however, depends on how many subscribers you have.

The idea sounds fine, to a point. But investors might want to look at the precedents in another popular technology--television--before jumping on the freeservice bandwagon.

In many ways, these firms are trying to copy the mode, established by television networks 40 years ago. No one pays to watch NBC, CBS or the other over-the-air networks. The programming is free, but you have to watch the commercials.

Well, you used to. Before cable television and the remote control, the networks could honestly claim that advertisers got the full attention of the viewing public. Today, however, it's easy to switch the ads off when they come on and turn back to the program you're watching a few minutes later.

Ultimately, increased viewer control over the set has meant broadcasters have made less money. When they don't have to watch advertising, people won't.

It's appears that Internet ads will be just as easy for Juno and bigger.net subscribers to turn off as well. Ads e-mailed to your account? Delete them. Ads built into the Web browser? Ignore them and surf on.

In the long run, advertisers will probably come to see that the money they're pouring into these free Internet services will lead to fairly few sales. My guess is that the costs of providing modern dial-in lines across the country will be a bit much to bear when Madison Avenue dollars dry up.

There's never been a medium as interactive for people as the Internet. It's a good thing for users who want to avoid ads, since they can browse right past them--and it may prove to be a bad thing for businesses stuck in the "broadcast mentality."