-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- I love Clive's writing. Smart, lucid and geek-abetting.
- Wow. Thanks for that penetrating comment. You must be a lot of fun at parties.
- Mathew - line break FAIL
- My pleasure. I should also note that one of the reasons I wrote about it at all is that I think you have a valid point about Jason and about Mahalo's traffic. It certainly wasn't meant as a personal ...
- Fair enough, thanks for responding.
Jump to original thread »
It may be a new year, but we’re still talking (well, some of us are anyway) about an old issue: namely, the idea of paying writers based on the traffic they get. The focus of the debate right now is Gawker, where Nick Denton has apparently started paying his bloggers based
... Continue reading »
8 months ago
8 months ago
There already is tons of commercial content being submitted as "viral" content - some of it's OK, some of it's horrible. Sadly, The SEO/SMO crowd has infiltrated/merged with many of the site's top and/or prominent submitters.
My concern is that this trend is going to further dampen the already poor signal-to-noise ratio in social media.
Are we in for more "Cosmo headlines" and worse "cosmo content?"
8 months ago
Yes, there’s something to the idea of relationship-building IF the bloggers in question are sticking around for years. But is that really the universe we’re talking about? What’s the average tenure for a writer with a blog network gig? And will this mythical writer actually put more money in his pocket doing an extra-special good job then he might have churning out commodity volume-filler posts?
Of course it’s important to have a strong relationship with one’s readers. But in the end it’s the editor’s responsibility to make sure that the blog owns that relationship. Individual voices are eminently brandable, and can become great businesses. But the biggest content businesses brand businesses, not bloggers.
More here: http://brijit.wordpress.com/