I spent the last two days at Comic-Con 2009 here in San Diego. I sacrificed Day 1, and not happily, to cover Microsoft’s fiscal fourth-quarter and year-end earnings. Several big Microsoft stories broke on Friday, but I refused to give up another day at Comic-Con; it’s the 40th show. Comic-Con is fun and chaotic. More importantly, for a journalist, people are willing to talk—and why not? They’re playing a role and ready to perform.
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.
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.
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.
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 […]
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?
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.
Web 2.0 is dead, dead, dead. Thank God!
Last night, in Carlsbad, Calif., D7 Conference organizers Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher declared: “The Web 2.0 era over.” Hell, it’s about time someone did, and why not at a big, splashy conference?
Blogging is a fun, and it’s a great way for creating community across many different types of boundaries. Some bloggers have influence, too, as evidenced by the Sony rootkit DRM or Thomas Hawk’s PriceRightPhoto debacle. But for all the talk about bloggers changing information dissemination and even some bloggers deserving press credentials, the real influence, the credibility remains with real journalists.
And New York Times has done some great investigative journalism of late. Two big stories from the last week—the kind of stuff that requires real reporting and deep editorial soul searching: “Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers without Courts” and “Through His Webcam, a Boy Joins a Sordid Online World“.