Comments on: Man Boobs, Incest, Sarah Palin and how The Times does SEO http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/2008/10/man-boobs-incest-sarah-palin-and-how-the-times-does-seo/ 25-26th April 2009 Wed, 20 May 2009 11:16:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Chris http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/2008/10/man-boobs-incest-sarah-palin-and-how-the-times-does-seo/comment-page-1/#comment-23 Chris Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:16:55 +0000 http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/?p=24#comment-23 More on this here: http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=131569 More on this here:

http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=131569

]]> By: Chris http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/2008/10/man-boobs-incest-sarah-palin-and-how-the-times-does-seo/comment-page-1/#comment-13 Chris Mon, 06 Oct 2008 09:26:28 +0000 http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/?p=24#comment-13 Tom, yes, you can find an audience for niche areas, but unless that page is significant in ad revenue and readership economics dictate that it will not be resourced. Metrics allows us to know precisely what a story is worth now. "As newspapers have lost readers and advertising revenues to Web sites, for instance, they've been forced to lay off reporters and other professionals. A study by the American Society of Newspaper Editors found that between 2001 and 2005 the newsroom staff of US paper declined by 4 percent with a new loss of 1,000 reporters, 1,000 editors, and 300 photographers and artists. "Web 2.0 and the Net in general have been disasters for my profession," says Philip Dawdy, an award winning journalist for the Seattle Weekly. "Newspapers are dying. Talented people are being forced into public relations work". In early 2007, the US Department of Labour released a revealing set of statistics on the publishing and broadcasting business as a whole. Employment in the industry had fallen by 13 percent in the six years since 2001, with nearly 150,000 jobs lost. These were years when many media companies, as well as their customers and advertisers, had been shifting from physical media to the Internet. Yet the report revealed that there had been no growth in Internet publishing and broadcasting jobs. In fact, online employment had actually dropped 29 percent, from 51,500 to 36,600 during the period. "The Internet is the wave of the future," commented New York Times economics writer Floyd Norris. "Just don't try to get a job in it." " - 2008 Nicholas Carr, The Big Switch, pages 134, 135 A very good read I would recommend. Don't get me wrong I am not a socialist, of course increased efficiency and reduced labour costs is generally "good business", but I repeat a page value model will not support, and maintain research where there is no market. In my business I will not pay for research into articles which bring little traffic or low readership. In addition the Internet might actually breed narrower choice due to a user being able to filter out content that doesn't interest one, we may be loosing something by not being presented with information as we are in newspapers. A newspaper actually forces you to read the headlines and content which you may not naturally migrate to. If fact research here also does suggest we migrate to our own interests, and content that bolsters our opinion and pre-conceived ideas. Also, website profiling (cookies) funnels us even more. We are not presented with more choice from Amazon on each successive visit but tighter more focussed content based on our last browse. It's a good healthy debate to have. Tom, yes, you can find an audience for niche areas, but unless that page is significant in ad revenue and readership economics dictate that it will not be resourced. Metrics allows us to know precisely what a story is worth now.

“As newspapers have lost readers and advertising revenues to Web sites, for instance, they’ve been forced to lay off reporters and other professionals. A study by the American Society of Newspaper Editors found that between 2001 and 2005 the newsroom staff of US paper declined by 4 percent with a new loss of 1,000 reporters, 1,000 editors, and 300 photographers and artists. “Web 2.0 and the Net in general have been disasters for my profession,” says Philip Dawdy, an award winning journalist for the Seattle Weekly. “Newspapers are dying. Talented people are being forced into public relations work”.

In early 2007, the US Department of Labour released a revealing set of statistics on the publishing and broadcasting business as a whole. Employment in the industry had fallen by 13 percent in the six years since 2001, with nearly 150,000 jobs lost. These were years when many media companies, as well as their customers and advertisers, had been shifting from physical media to the Internet. Yet the report revealed that there had been no growth in Internet publishing and broadcasting jobs. In fact, online employment had actually dropped 29 percent, from 51,500 to 36,600 during the period. “The Internet is the wave of the future,” commented New York Times economics writer Floyd Norris. “Just don’t try to get a job in it.”

” – 2008 Nicholas Carr, The Big Switch, pages 134, 135

A very good read I would recommend.

Don’t get me wrong I am not a socialist, of course increased efficiency and reduced labour costs is generally “good business”, but I repeat a page value model will not support, and maintain research where there is no market. In my business I will not pay for research into articles which bring little traffic or low readership.

In addition the Internet might actually breed narrower choice due to a user being able to filter out content that doesn’t interest one, we may be loosing something by not being presented with information as we are in newspapers. A newspaper actually forces you to read the headlines and content which you may not naturally migrate to. If fact research here also does suggest we migrate to our own interests, and content that bolsters our opinion and pre-conceived ideas. Also, website profiling (cookies) funnels us even more. We are not presented with more choice from Amazon on each successive visit but tighter more focussed content based on our last browse.

It’s a good healthy debate to have.

]]> By: Tom Whitwell http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/2008/10/man-boobs-incest-sarah-palin-and-how-the-times-does-seo/comment-page-1/#comment-11 Tom Whitwell Sun, 05 Oct 2008 20:41:33 +0000 http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/?p=24#comment-11 Chris - the point isn't that everyone has to write about celebrities - the internet and search means that you can find a vast audience for really niche subjects, if your stories are good and your site is structured in a way that people can find their way to those articles (via search/links etc) Online means the subject matter is much broader, not narrower - at The Times we have blogs which publish thousands of words about relatively niche subjects - the Anglican community in Britain, obscure political minutae, French politics/culture and many more - that would never have been published in a broadsheet newspaper where space is limited. Chris – the point isn’t that everyone has to write about celebrities – the internet and search means that you can find a vast audience for really niche subjects, if your stories are good and your site is structured in a way that people can find their way to those articles (via search/links etc)
Online means the subject matter is much broader, not narrower – at The Times we have blogs which publish thousands of words about relatively niche subjects – the Anglican community in Britain, obscure political minutae, French politics/culture and many more – that would never have been published in a broadsheet newspaper where space is limited.

]]> By: Chris http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/2008/10/man-boobs-incest-sarah-palin-and-how-the-times-does-seo/comment-page-1/#comment-8 Chris Sat, 04 Oct 2008 16:14:11 +0000 http://www.socialmediacamp.co.uk/?p=24#comment-8 Yes this is common practise, and I must admit I have adopted this for about 10 years probably, and in various niche areas. Yes, it works, yes you follow a buzz and publish on trends. But there is grave downside. When we live in a world that is based on "page value" (the latest buzz or trend and page constructed for it, potent ad revenue and search placment) we could possibly be moving farther away from significant broad-based reporting due to funding reduction in un-popular subjects. Broadsheets are becoming narrow sheets in the sense of diminished journalist funding in non trendy areas... Who will finance the research and journalism in the important subjects rather than the latest blu-ray release, or celeb gossip? Yes this is common practise, and I must admit I have adopted this for about 10 years probably, and in various niche areas. Yes, it works, yes you follow a buzz and publish on trends.

But there is grave downside.

When we live in a world that is based on “page value” (the latest buzz or trend and page constructed for it, potent ad revenue and search placment) we could possibly be moving farther away from significant broad-based reporting due to funding reduction in un-popular subjects.

Broadsheets are becoming narrow sheets in the sense of diminished journalist funding in non trendy areas…

Who will finance the research and journalism in the important subjects rather than the latest blu-ray release, or celeb gossip?

]]>