Is the internet magical? Thoughts about zero sum games.

I've read on many occasions that competing for readers on the internet is not a zero sum game - - most recently in this post about the competition between gadget blogs Gizmodo and Engadget:

Despite the heated competition, neither site appears to be damaging the other's popularity. Most business battles revolve around a scarce resource — audience or customers or money. But in this case, the battle for readers is not a zero-sum game. "Nothing stops people from going to both," says Jeff Jarvis, media blogger and director of the interactive journalism program at the City University of New York's Graduate School of Journalism. "This is a natural state of media. It's good for everyone."

Unless the internet is magical, competing for readers is clearly a zero sum game. There's only so much time in the day to read blogs. If I'm using my time to read one, I won't have time to read the other. And if I feel one site is more or less covering the gadget news of the day, I'm not going to bother reading the other. Every moment I spend reading one blog is one moment I won't be spending reading another. Thus, zero sum game: a situation in which a participant's gain or loss is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the other participants.

Now certainly I link to lots of other sites and hopefully sites will link to me - - but that just means I have teammates in the zero sum game. That doesn't change the fact that every second you're spending here is a second you won't be able to spend somewhere else.