Comments on: Bassackwards http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/25/bassackwards/ by Jeff Jarvis Fri, 09 Jan 2009 04:23:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: William http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/25/bassackwards/#comment-349864 William Tue, 15 May 2007 20:30:19 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1562#comment-349864 I have seen through <a href="http://www.bytheowner.com" title="Homes for Sale By The Owner" rel="nofollow">ByTheOwner.com</a> that the newspapers are for sure worried about online advertisers taking away their business. It seems to took them years to actually realize this. Now they are scrambling to catch up to craigslist and others. I have seen through ByTheOwner.com that the newspapers are for sure worried about online advertisers taking away their business. It seems to took them years to actually realize this. Now they are scrambling to catch up to craigslist and others.

]]> By: Paul Maidment http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/25/bassackwards/#comment-64905 Paul Maidment Tue, 06 Jun 2006 17:27:14 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1562#comment-64905 i don't think I got anyhing backwards. My argument was that most newspaper companies were slow to understand the switch in publishing from being a proprietary medium to a distributed one, and to start creatinig the content that would best exploit that change. I also think most newspaper executives didn't understand, or perhaps prefered not to face, the change in the underlying economics of their business. That tardiness let new competitors with different models establish themselves. I certainly did not suggest that Google or Craig's killed the classified advertising business. They have enlarged it. But they took great chunks of it away from newspapers. i don’t think I got anyhing backwards. My argument was that most newspaper companies were slow to understand the switch in publishing from being a proprietary medium to a distributed one, and to start creatinig the content that would best exploit that change. I also think most newspaper executives didn’t understand, or perhaps prefered not to face, the change in the underlying economics of their business. That tardiness let new competitors with different models establish themselves. I certainly did not suggest that Google or Craig’s killed the classified advertising business. They have enlarged it. But they took great chunks of it away from newspapers.

]]> By: Harry Forbes http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/25/bassackwards/#comment-58314 Harry Forbes Mon, 29 May 2006 02:40:53 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1562#comment-58314 <i>If you’re not aggregated, you’re nowhere. </i> Not much of a reach. I like the above expression very much. Essentially if you're not linked you're nowhere, and aggregators provide the most powerful links. I thought today of one example of how badly newspapers don't get it. Pick up any Sunday paper and see if the paper's Table of Contents gives you the equivalent of a site map for a decent website; does it provide a sorted list containing every story in the issue and where to find it? None do, I think. If you’re not aggregated, you’re nowhere.

Not much of a reach. I like the above expression very much. Essentially if you’re not linked you’re nowhere, and aggregators provide the most powerful links.

I thought today of one example of how badly newspapers don’t get it. Pick up any Sunday paper and see if the paper’s Table of Contents gives you the equivalent of a site map for a decent website; does it provide a sorted list containing every story in the issue and where to find it? None do, I think.

]]> By: CaptiousNut http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/25/bassackwards/#comment-55910 CaptiousNut Fri, 26 May 2006 20:02:52 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1562#comment-55910 I think you are reaching with this "Bassackwards" claim. If would be "Bassackwards" if Google couldn't survive without MSM content. All you are saying is that old line media benefits some from the web traffic. Jeff, Google benefits a lot more. Compare their financials to that of NYT, etc. Furthermore, media is but one component of Google's, Yahoo's, and Microsoft's business. I think you are reaching with this “Bassackwards” claim.

If would be “Bassackwards” if Google couldn’t survive without MSM content. All you are saying is that old line media benefits some from the web traffic.

Jeff, Google benefits a lot more. Compare their financials to that of NYT, etc.

Furthermore, media is but one component of Google’s, Yahoo’s, and Microsoft’s business.

]]> By: David Boxenhorn http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/25/bassackwards/#comment-55478 David Boxenhorn Fri, 26 May 2006 08:40:08 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1562#comment-55478 In other words: The MSM still produces most of the content. That's their strength, they should focus on it. But of course, they're outsourcing that to Reuters et al. In other words: The MSM still produces most of the content. That’s their strength, they should focus on it.

But of course, they’re outsourcing that to Reuters et al.

]]>