Comments on: Site or network? Own or join? http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/ by Jeff Jarvis Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:59:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Allie http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357158 Allie Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:54:13 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357158 Sebastian, As I posted on TechCrunch, Google is full on aware of how Glam is conducting their business, I assure you. In fact, this particular <strong>adjustment</strong> includes a Google partnership with Glam. A simple visit to the Wall Street Journal online will show you this (here's a link): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118092265349123401-search.html?KEYWORDS=glam%20media&COLLECTION=wsji Sebastian, As I posted on TechCrunch, Google is full on aware of how Glam is conducting their business, I assure you.

In fact, this particular adjustment includes a Google partnership with Glam. A simple visit to the Wall Street Journal online will show you this (here’s a link):

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118092265349123401-search.html?KEYWORDS=glam%20media&COLLECTION=wsji

]]> By: Old Media Buying Model Insufficient to Spawn New Media Success » The Bivings Report http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357110 Old Media Buying Model Insufficient to Spawn New Media Success » The Bivings Report Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:34:25 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357110 [...] week The New York Time purchased [clarification: the paper is, as Jeff Jarvis notes, "hosting it, selling ads on it, promoting it, but not buying it or hiring its creators"] [...] [...] week The New York Time purchased [clarification: the paper is, as Jeff Jarvis notes, "hosting it, selling ads on it, promoting it, but not buying it or hiring its creators"] [...]

]]> By: Make Them Accountable / Media http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357098 Make Them Accountable / Media Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:21:49 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357098 [...] Site or network? Own or join? I think it’s wonderful that The New York Times did a deal to bring Freakonomics under its wing — hosting it, selling ads on it, promoting it, but not buying it or hiring its creators and not treating it like so much freelance fodder to go through the Times’ editing mill. That’s new… What I like about this is that we see big-media services starting to act like members of networks. They are beginning to realize that they can’t — and don’t want to — do everything themselves. They are also recognizing that creators want to keep ownership of their creations and so hiring or buying isn’t always the best option. [...] [...] Site or network? Own or join? I think it’s wonderful that The New York Times did a deal to bring Freakonomics under its wing — hosting it, selling ads on it, promoting it, but not buying it or hiring its creators and not treating it like so much freelance fodder to go through the Times’ editing mill. That’s new… What I like about this is that we see big-media services starting to act like members of networks. They are beginning to realize that they can’t — and don’t want to — do everything themselves. They are also recognizing that creators want to keep ownership of their creations and so hiring or buying isn’t always the best option. [...]

]]> By: Sebastian http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357056 Sebastian Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:03:43 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357056 Tish beat me to my point: It's pretty well known in the SEO circles that Glam is one of those sites that could get thrashed by a well-placed Google adjustment, devauling all those in-network links. Tish beat me to my point: It’s pretty well known in the SEO circles that Glam is one of those sites that could get thrashed by a well-placed Google adjustment, devauling all those in-network links.

]]> By: discerning reader http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357016 discerning reader Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:25:05 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357016 The Ad networks strategy has worked in the past with many established media brands such as CNet, IGN. But it is TOO EARLY to tell that it will work for Glam. Glam has a leaky basket due to no strong brand for itself. Glam is doing nothing new, there is no new biz-model innovation, except having the balls and needs to blatantly, desperately pumping up fraudulent claims. Many successful Ad network has been contented on making money without snatching vanity feasts. Part of the reason this controversy won't die is that the media seems to be to so superficially covered Glam Media hype at the beginning and perpetuated a myth of "short-cut for traffic growth in light speed", wowed this new comer's self-promotion without any examination. It encouraged a "land-grabbing wild west" mentality. Finally, civic minded bloggers with tech background and discerning intellect like Arlington and others come to examine the whole thing and do some justice. It is still too early to tell if Glam's business will sustain in a long term perspective when all the name brand media companies start doing Ad networks. Glam can be a flash in a pan. It is especially unfair to see executives in Glam having such balls to make fraudulent claims without being questioned or checked by media. Media in general has not raised questions about how far you can go with fraudulent claims in advertising, executive accountability, and ethic of practice etc. But, maybe it is just a matter of time. The Ad networks strategy has worked in the past with many established media brands such as CNet, IGN. But it is TOO EARLY to tell that it will work for Glam. Glam has a leaky basket due to no strong brand for itself.

Glam is doing nothing new, there is no new biz-model innovation, except having the balls and needs to blatantly, desperately pumping up fraudulent claims. Many successful Ad network has been contented on making money without snatching vanity feasts.

Part of the reason this controversy won’t die is that the media seems to be to so superficially covered Glam Media hype at the beginning and perpetuated a myth of “short-cut for traffic growth in light speed”, wowed this new comer’s self-promotion without any examination. It encouraged a “land-grabbing wild west” mentality.

Finally, civic minded bloggers with tech background and discerning intellect like Arlington and others come to examine the whole thing and do some justice.

It is still too early to tell if Glam’s business will sustain in a long term perspective when all the name brand media companies start doing Ad networks. Glam can be a flash in a pan.

It is especially unfair to see executives in Glam having such balls to make fraudulent claims without being questioned or checked by media. Media in general has not raised questions about how far you can go with fraudulent claims in advertising, executive accountability, and ethic of practice etc. But, maybe it is just a matter of time.

]]> By: David Cohn http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357013 David Cohn Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:56:08 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-357013 That's what is powering the new network of Wired's blogs. Take Jeff Howe's blog on crowdsourcing -- it's still a typepad blog -- Jeff has complete control over it, but Wired has worked it into the fold of their network. Seems like the smart thing to do. Reach out and grab a network. That’s what is powering the new network of Wired’s blogs. Take Jeff Howe’s blog on crowdsourcing — it’s still a typepad blog — Jeff has complete control over it, but Wired has worked it into the fold of their network.

Seems like the smart thing to do. Reach out and grab a network.

]]> By: Freakonomics gives trolling lessons » mathewingram.com/media http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-356999 Freakonomics gives trolling lessons » mathewingram.com/media Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:58:50 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-356999 [...] which is part of what makes the blog so thought-provoking. Meanwhile, Jeff Jarvis uses the post as part of an argument for why he thinks blogs should be affiliated with newspapers rather than “owned.” [...] [...] which is part of what makes the blog so thought-provoking. Meanwhile, Jeff Jarvis uses the post as part of an argument for why he thinks blogs should be affiliated with newspapers rather than “owned.” [...]

]]> By: Freakonomics gives trolling lessons » mathewingram.com/work http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-356998 Freakonomics gives trolling lessons » mathewingram.com/work Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:57:31 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-356998 [...] which is part of what makes the blog so thought-provoking. Meanwhile, Jeff Jarvis uses the post as part of an argument for why he thinks blogs should be affiliated with newspapers rather than “owned.” [...] [...] which is part of what makes the blog so thought-provoking. Meanwhile, Jeff Jarvis uses the post as part of an argument for why he thinks blogs should be affiliated with newspapers rather than “owned.” [...]

]]> By: Tish Grier http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-356991 Tish Grier Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:35:48 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-network-own-or-join/#comment-356991 Glam's also done some rather hinky SEO stuff--buying up a lot of related domains and stoking them with links that go back to their site. Not to mention that many of their "blogs" are either not updated, or are anoymously authored. Now, I've got no qualm with anonymous bloggers, but anonymous bloggers writing stuff that reads like ad copy that then links back to an ad network? Well, that's like reading an ad masquerading as original content....and it sure ain't blogging... then again, the head of Glam was said to say that women *want* all those ads--why, that's part of why we read fashion mags in the first place! (oh, really???) So if there's some anonymous fluff sandwiched between ads, I guess it's okay because it's kind of like magazines ...which it kinda isn't... Still, I'd argue that it isn't the #1 destination because women want to be there--it might be #1 becasue women get lead there through bad search results. Kind a throws the whole idea of who/what's #1 into doubt for sure Glam’s also done some rather hinky SEO stuff–buying up a lot of related domains and stoking them with links that go back to their site. Not to mention that many of their “blogs” are either not updated, or are anoymously authored. Now, I’ve got no qualm with anonymous bloggers, but anonymous bloggers writing stuff that reads like ad copy that then links back to an ad network? Well, that’s like reading an ad masquerading as original content….and it sure ain’t blogging…

then again, the head of Glam was said to say that women *want* all those ads–why, that’s part of why we read fashion mags in the first place! (oh, really???) So if there’s some anonymous fluff sandwiched between ads, I guess it’s okay because it’s kind of like magazines …which it kinda isn’t…

Still, I’d argue that it isn’t the #1 destination because women want to be there–it might be #1 becasue women get lead there through bad search results. Kind a throws the whole idea of who/what’s #1 into doubt for sure

]]>