The NYT page is like walking into a library, while the HuffPo page is like walking through Times Square.

Felix Salmon weighing in on the HuffPost-AOL merger deal in his piece, “Why the NYT will lose to HuffPo.”  

Fellow member ‘20’ member Anthony DeRosa says he’s not sure if he agrees.

My take: The driving force behind HuffPo’s success is the comments and feedback from readers, who send it along and add their own voices and thoughts on the topic. Although the Times site allows comments, it’s not as open or available.  Despite being run and named after an extremely rich female, HuffPo is the true populist news site —and the reason why, I agree with Salmon, it will topple the Old Gray Lady.  

-KH 

(via the20newyork)

I’m not sure I represent the majority of people since I never go to Huffington Post, despite the fact they’re one of the most frequently trafficked websites on the Internet.

I think the above comment by Felix is spot on, and is exactly why I avoid HuffPo like the plague. I work in Times Square and try to escape from it as quickly as possible. I do agree with Felix’s point that I don’t navigate around the NYT. I go there because I’m directed to single articles. I read the article and leave and wind up coming back many more times to read other single articles, but never seem to be led down a path from one story to another by the Times itself. 

But does the sensory overkill on HuffPo work? The numbers speak for themselves. They get a ton of traffic and they’re profitable. Peter Feld defended the fact that people slam HuffPo for having 3,000+ unpaid bloggers. According to what I’ve heard, the paid staff is somewhere around 60 people.

Peter does make a solid point that we here on Tumblr are very much like that staff of 3,000 unpaid bloggers. When’s the last time Tumblr sent you a check for the billions of pageviews they received last month?

(via soupsoup)


I’m fascinated with how “traditional” media industries - newspaper/magazine/publishing, music, TV/movies, web 1.0 (AOL, MSN, Yahoo!, Google) - are thinking about and REACTING TO the emergence of social media integrated apps, games, business, sites, etc. like The Huffington Post, Zynga games, Tumblr, etc.

It’s still strikes me as we approach nearly 20 years of digital that the media companies usual reactions follows a cyclical pattern of disfunction:

1. Dismissal,

2. Ignoring early signs of success,

3. Looking for & latching onto the “me too” silver bullet gadget/retread business model,

4. Taking a half/wrong steps (e.g. DRM, paywalls, magazine/newspaper iPad apps), 

5. Continuing their methodical death march towards obsolescence hoping their half/wrong steps will work,

6. Going back to step 1 when the next digital innovation occurs.

Influential VC’s and tumblr users Fred-Wilson and Bijan Sabet had interesting posts about music/movie piracy and their frustration at trying to buy content and not being able to because of backasswards attitude/ineptitude of traditional media companies. 

Here’s the deal - while there will always be a market for purchased entertainment and information (Broadway/West End theatre, physical/digital music copies, print/digital information), they will all increasingly become smaller and more niche industries. 

The challenge that has been obvious for well over a decade now: How should media companies best proactively plan, change, and innovate for inevitable massively disruptive technology advances? I’m talking about fundamental repositioning of their value proposition, what they do, how many people they employ, their revenue expectations, HOW CONTENT DEVELOPMENT IS FINANCED, and most importantly, how they create new valuable business models that are not retreads of what worked in the past while realizing that they may not be as BIG as record vinyl discs were in the 70s-80s or CDs in the 90s. All that’s over. 

Unfortunately, my up close experience and work within these industries has shown me that the delusional cycle continues…and continues.

Meanwhile the most innovative thoughts/leadership comes from smart musicians likeDavid Byrne and Radiohead’s Thom Yorke…or bloggers like Anthony De Rosa (SoupSoup).

Hmmmmm…

(Source: nbcnewyork, via soupsoup)

09.02.11
Search engines improve by delivering you more of the results that you were hoping for when you search for something; so it gets better when it relies on social networks than it does when it relies on algorithms. And this is where the future starts to look brighter for “original content” producers: This is a road that leads, ultimately, to the people who produce what they produce and get their readers without tricking them into reading. Which means Arianna Huffington will get better at her job, and your readers will get better at finding you, will stay longer when they get there, and, if you play your cards right, will start going straight to you instead of waiting for Arianna to tell them to. Then, maybe you can capture a sliver of the business she’s going to be getting.
09.02.11
AOL is like a train running down a track that is disintegrating rapidly underneath it. That track is the dial-up access business, which still produces gigantic amounts of revenue — close to 40 percent of the company’s total — but is declining at a rapid rate. What Armstrong is trying to do is to build new businesses that have the ability to generate similar kinds of revenue, which amounts to laying new tracks quickly enough that the train doesn’t go hurtling into an abyss. The launch of Patch was one such attempt, and the acquisition of The Huffington Post was another.
03.03.11
Check Out This Stunning List Of Big Name Startup Investors That Gave Startup Reporter Michael Arrington $20 Million
01.09.11
brooklynmutt:

@erickschonfeld, Editor of TechCrunch.
 
I’m Leaving TechCrunch. Here’s Why. by @paulcarr

brooklynmutt:

@erickschonfeld, Editor of TechCrunch.

 

I’m Leaving TechCrunch. Here’s Why. by @paulcarr

16.09.11

"It’s like a bunch of toddlers on the playground." - Kara Swisher 

#Classic

via soupsoup:

All Thing Digital’s Kara Swisher tells TechCrunch, essentially, to grow the f up, on Reliable Sources.

18.09.11
via zeb:

The Facebook Chart That Freaks Google Out - (time users spend on site)
“The overhaul Facebook rolled out last week is meant, first and foremost, to keep users sticking around. But, hyperbole aside, Facebook is already crushing the rest of the Web when it comes to stickiness.
Check out this engagement chart, courtesy of Citigroup’s Mark Mahaney. It’s a neat illustration of the Web 2.0 era, and does a nice job of explaining why Google is so freaked out about Facebook, and why AOL and Yahoo seem to be in eternal turnaround mode. (Note that just a couple of years ago, someone might have thought to include Myspace in here. Remember?)”
via http://allthingsd.com/20110926/the-facebook-chart-that-freaks-google-out/

I’ve seen similar charts before and they all bear out the Facebook’s mass 2.0 appeal. 

via zeb:

The Facebook Chart That Freaks Google Out - (time users spend on site)

“The overhaul Facebook rolled out last week is meant, first and foremost, to keep users sticking around. But, hyperbole aside, Facebook is already crushing the rest of the Web when it comes to stickiness.

Check out this engagement chart, courtesy of Citigroup’s Mark Mahaney. It’s a neat illustration of the Web 2.0 era, and does a nice job of explaining why Google is so freaked out about Facebook, and why AOL and Yahoo seem to be in eternal turnaround mode. (Note that just a couple of years ago, someone might have thought to include Myspace in here. Remember?)”

via http://allthingsd.com/20110926/the-facebook-chart-that-freaks-google-out/

I’ve seen similar charts before and they all bear out the Facebook’s mass 2.0 appeal. 

03.10.11