Would you pay a buck to read New York Times story, “A Cul-de-Sac of Lost Dreams, and New Ones,” online? I would. The quality of reporting—over many months—and presentation, which includes photos and video, simply isn’t easily reproducible by most free-content, commercial blogsites. Perhaps in an alternate universe, the Times charges online for this story, which I saw yesterday on iPhone 3GS and my wife today in the newspaper. We subscribe to the Sunday Times.
Category: News Media
The Price of Talented Journalists
If you went down to our cafeteria, [this bagel] costs like $1.25. That’s what people pay for stuff like this, so you mean to tell me I can’t get them to pay that for online […]
No Thanks: Full-Screen iPhone Ads
Look what popped up on my iPhone 3GS while reading a New York Times story. A full-screen advertisement. I would rather skip the ads and pay the Times, say, five bucks a month for content. […]
Look to ‘The Loop’ for Good Branding Ideas
IDG laid off my buddy Jim Dalrymple about the time I got the boot from eWEEK. Jim wasted no time starting a new enterprise, and at the right place: The brand. Jim brilliantly rebranded himself, and what he did should be lesson to any person or company looking to launch a new product or service.
It’s easy to dismiss Jim, because of “the beard.” You wouldn’t think he’s all that bright, because of the shag, which gets more in your face than his. Jim is so small town he doesn’t live in Halifax, Nova Scotia, but just outside the city. Most Americans would respond “Where?” if asked about Halifax. Hehe, that could be a “Jeopardy” answer. But greater Halifax, the largest city north of Boston and east of Montreal, is home to about 360,000 people.
Can You Charge for News? Ask Google
The pundits opining about Rupert Murdoch’s plans to charge for his media conglomerate’s online content miss the forest for the trees. The majority spout conjecture about whether or not people would pay and in that context whether or not anyone should charge, considering the abundance of alternative online informational sources. What everyone should ask: Can you put content behind a paywall, even just require registration, and fully participate in the Google economy?
Can we be honest, here? If your business is content and selling online advertising around it, you must pay homage to the great Google algorithm. As was with previous age’s deities, the minions must make sacrifices before the great Google god. To receive its blessings, they must do Google’s bidding—quite literally on keywords—and give away all their worldly possessions (e.g., content, for free). But can they give to Lord Google and keep something for themselves, too?
In Jon We Trust
Well, it’s official: with Walter Cronkite gone, Jon Stewart is America’s “most trusted newscaster.” At least that’s the result of this TIME poll that pits him against the anchors of the nightly news shows for CBS, […]
Audience vs Traffic
One of things you rarely hear spoken about in internet business is traffic. I don’t mean traffic numbers—those are everywhere. I mean traffic itself. What it is, what it means, what constitutes value, etc. You don’t see blog posts talking about how page views can be (and very much are) gamed to create the appearance of more page views. Or, that one million uniques means little if the length of time visitors are on the site (aka, session time) is less than one minute without their returning back to visit. That’s like a million people driving by McDonald’s but never actually going into the restaurant. I won’t even get started on flawed analytics services. Unfortunately, the market as a whole hasn’t evolved to where it’s begun to notice things like this. Blogs and media still cite flawed analytics sources in articles, and few ever reference important stats like session times and repeat visitors. That says a lot about the place the market is in.
Process Journalism and Original Reporting
On July 17, I posted, “The Michael Arrington Matter,” where I came down hard on the TechCrunch cofounder for publishing stolen, internal Twitter documents. I wouldn’t have done it.
But in fairness, TechCrunch is successful—and for a reason. TechCrunch publishes lots of original content, as much in the comments as the stories. Readers participate in the process.
It's Original Reporting or Nothing
Ian Betteridge has blogged a couple times recently about the value of original reporting. Ian is one of those long-time journalists who has good common sense. I enjoy his missives about journalism and ethics and also changes new media has on the news media.
His thoughts on the value of original reporting are must-reads.
Social Networking: Everyone is Doing It
I believe it: “Nine Out of Ten 25-34 Year Old U.K. Internet Users Visited a Social Networking Site in May 2009“. As I explain in post “Iran and the Internet Democracy“: Social networking is the […]
The Michael Arrington Matter
There is quite the ethics flap going on over the last 72 hours or so about TechCrunch’s handling of leaked Twitter documents.
Looming questions: Is Michael Arrington wrong to distribute any of the leaked material, which a hacker stole? Is the posting of the documentation unconscionable? Is there journalistic excuse, or justification for it?
‘We Choose the Moon’
Now this is storytelling and the right way to use social media tools. The John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum is celebrating the 40th anniversary of the first manned Apollo moon landing by essentially rebroadcasting the event. This may go down as the mother of all reruns.