Canary In The Coalmine: NYT Sees First Decline In Online Ad Revenues
Posted using ShareThis
Note: I saw I can use “ShareThis” to post to my blog via Social Media - though it doesn’t really add anything more than the link back. More and more, I’m finding that my blogging is spilling into my Facebook Feeds and into Friendfeed - and I’m trying to bring that richness back to this blog - but so far, haven’t had much luck.
It seems none of the plugins I’ve found actually replicates my entire Facebook profile feed as a widget that I can put in the sidebar - Facebook Connect doesn’t seem to do that, either, at least, not yet.
Next year, I think we’ll see more and more blogging morphing into mini feeds, like what we’ve seen in Facebook, FriendFeed and even, the Google Search Wiki.
And mind you, for the New York Times to have declining online ad revenue just bespeaks to the overall weakness of the economy - advertisers are holding back, more and more on spending - partly because, people have less and less money left to buy anything.
With out that - money, liquidity, credit - whatever, the only thing left is advertising for Branding, or to inform of an event or service.
What’s surprising is the downturn in advertising at the New York Times wasn’t more.
BTW, an interesting side thread on more activity going into mini feeds and away from blogs - and dare I say - newspapers - Of Course There Is a Social Media Backlash Coming.
But, so what - maybe mainstream media will turn into one big social network next year (who knows)? My point being - if people are getting more involved in mini-feeds and micro blogging - maybe that’s because they suit us better - in some ways.
That’s what I’m grappling with too - I want to bring the richness of Facebook into my blog - but the functionality just isn’t there quite yet - and I read well over 200 feeds a day - and comment on a lot of it - and that stuff is going into my Facebook feed and into Friendfeed - but not here ….
…. wouldn’t it be nice if it could also be here and illuminate my blog posts?
Gee - TechCrunch had a post today on When Everyone Is A Blogger, Nothing You Say Is Off The Record.
In a way, isn’t that what we’re moving to? With Google Search Wiki - I could pretty much comment on any url from any search result, and anyone else who wants to see my comments can.
Look, this story about a Belgian Diplomat and a New York Based blogger is pretty interesting in the level of “over reaction” that happened - here’s the story, according to TechCrunch:
Current Belgian Minister of Defense Pieter De Crem
apparently stumbled into a Belgian bar in New York City on Monday evening with his entourage.
Ha, ha, guess he was drunk, or something … anyway - here’s the rest of it….
Following his visit, bartender Nathalie Lubbe Bakker blogged about their visit (in Dutch), talking about how disgusted she was of how drunk De Crem was and how embarrassed she was about his behavior. Worst part, she wrote, was the fact that one of the politician’s advisers admitted to her that the meetings they were there for on taxpayer’s money were in fact canceled because the UN was meeting in Geneva (which is about 330 miles from Brussels).
Clearly, one of the Diplomat’s advisers was out of line - and talked about a sensitive issue in a bar - which unfamiliar people.
He reportedly told her they had decided to come to NY anyway despite being aware of the cancellation because the policital situation here was ‘calm’ and that he’d ‘never visited the city anyway’.
A couple of days later, someone from De Crem’s office had a telephone call with Nathalie’s boss, after which she was promptly fired. This was initially denied by the politician, and it remains unclear if her termination was a direct result of the call or the blog post in question.
Somehow, the story was picked up and got a lot of attention from local bloggers and the mainstream media, which ultimately lead to the Minister having to defend himself about the NY trip in Parliament.
That’s how it is with Social Media happens - it’s the democratization of information - everyone can share - there is total transparency - and it can’t be controlled easily, if at all - but if people relax about it - it’s much easier to influence.
Yesterday, he made a statement to the Parliament admitting that a call was made but that there was never any insinuation about the girl getting fired from her job (which makes me wonder why the call was made at all then).
But then, the story unfolds some more and it ends us being blamed on the Blogger -according to what I just read in TechCrunch:
He also stated:
I want to take this opportunity and use this non-event to signal a dangerous phenomenon in our society. We live in a time where everybody is free to publish whatever he or she wants on blogs at will without taking any responsibility. This exceeds mud-slinging. Together with you, other Parliament members and the government I find that it’s nearly impossible to defend yourself against this. Everyone of you is a potential victim. I would like to ask you to take a moment and think about this.
De Crem added that he’s asked his legal counsel to see which measures could be taken to ‘defend his integrity’.
Needless to say, his statements indicating that ‘blogging is a dangerous phenomenon’ spurred a lot of angry (and funny) reactions in the local blogosphere, making the situation for him much worse than it already was (much like that German politician who blocked the local wikipedia.de website).
Let me just say this - is a blogger now sopposed to go out and get training on what he or she can or can’t say?
The TechCrunch Blogger Robin Wauters takes the point of view that it’s not Blogging that is a problem for the Belgian Diplomat, but that he comes from a culture and time that doesn’t know what to do with this kind of media - and treats it like a news story or news leak, when it’s sharing a personal experience in a blog.
People, and especially politicians representing them, need to wake up and smell the coffee. The world is changing, and blogging is now a big part of it, with all of its good sides as well as its bad ones. Live and learn. The sooner you get the hang of social media, the more you’ll see the opportunities in there rather than the threats.
To be totally honest, I would not be offended if there was some sort of Guidelines no so much what we can say, and what we can’t, but what information needs to be included. For example, would it have helped if Nathalie Lubbe Bakker pulled at a Flip Digital Camera and filmed the statements? Or would that be more damaging.
And if the Dimplomat’s party really felt pissed - maybe they should have been more open about it at home, instead of a Belgian bar in NYC - but that’s another story.
Hey, why don’t we just call the Google Search Wiki the Death of Seodanapalus
Personally, I’d be fine with the Death of SEO, as expressed in Marketing Pilgrim -
Google’s SearchWiki Is Here To Stay: Is This The Death of SEO?
Yeah, I’m so sick of Search Conferences that try to take the same gruel and, over and over again, repeat the “dogma“, the usual link stuff, content stuff, reputation stuff.
According to a report from Danny Sullivan it looks like Google’s much talked about SearchWiki is here to stay. Most of the clammer about this new Google feature is focused around a user’s inability to turn it off. While there are several browser plugins available to hide the SearchWiki functions, for most users the SearchWiki is now a permanent part of the Google search experience.
Google’s SearchWiki is a new feature that allows for users to organize search results and make comments. The reorganized results only show up for the user that made the changes, but the comments are made public.
While it seems that most are concerned about turning the SearchWiki off, few have highlighted the effects that this new feature will have on SEO.
At first when I read about SearchWiki I thought that this was the end of SEO. How am I supposed to implement the perfect strategy to manipulate SERPs when all users have to do is click arrows? But now, I think its anything but that.
Now that users are given the ability to reorganize search results it means that listings on the first page are much more valuable. Here’s why: after a user has selected a handful of listings that they send to the top of their SERP, they have effectively locked out the rest of the listings.
Also, the user’s selected listings are saved based on URL, meaning that if another search query is run where the same URL comes up, then the listing/URL is automatically at the top.
Meanwhile, Google is there, listening to whatever anyone is saying and then telling you to forget about 99% of it and just focus on content.
Well, at least, Google came up with a meaningful alternative in the Search Wiki - and it was just what the Doctor ordered. I lost confidence in Google for a while - but with the Search Wiki - I gained it back.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ee2d9aa2-aba5-4956-83e3-79b88fee52e4)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=f64d9ec3-e574-4161-95e4-948704d3ea01)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=8e3f2b09-466d-4b72-82ec-bec8347c9618)
