Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Business Press Pays Attention To Blog Industry

Comments Filter:
  • That's great to hear.
  • by onion2k (203094) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @08:51AM (#11728117) Homepage
    These blogging sites are great for getting stats with big numbers that will impress the money men, like page impressions, and users, and gigs of bandwidth.. but what about the revenue? People aren't actually very willing to pay for somewhere to write their blog, you can't run a multi-million dollar business on the back of T-Shirt merchandising sales, and online advertising is a business model shown to be flawed in the late 90s..

    So if I were to invest in on of these companies, where would my stock dividends be coming from?

    Or is it another case of a dot.com investor not really understanding what they're buying into?
    • Do you think we're experiencing a mini-bubble?

      What's the proper nomenclature...

      iBubble?
      dot-bam?
      dot-pop?
      dot-pup?
      gumball rally?
    • by natrius (642724) * <.gro.narin. .ta. .narin.> on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:09AM (#11728163) Homepage
      Or is it another case of a dot.com investor not really understanding what they're buying into?

      It makes me cry whenever I hear people say this. I dry the tears with my Webvan stock certificates.
    • by grazzy (56382) <grazzy@NOsPam.quake.swe.net> on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:28AM (#11728201) Homepage Journal
      Online advertising with big flash banners leading to a empty webshop - yes

      Much has happen since... like, amazon, ebay, paypal. Wanna tell them that "online advertising is flawed"?.

      • by CastrTroy (595695) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @10:00AM (#11728258) Homepage
        Much has happen since... like, amazon, ebay, paypal. Wanna tell them that "online advertising is flawed"?.

        All those companies have real services and don't just survive off of advertisements. That said, if your blog pages are generating enough hits you can survive on just adds. What do you think keeps Google alive?
        • How long does it take to write something in a blog every day? If you run enough of them, and scrape togheter enough pageviews / day you'll be just fine.

          For me that cap is at about 1,2m pageviews / month. And no, I'm not even having a own "real" blog. I could probably do it with much much less pageviews but I've chosen to not whore out that much.
    • by SallyMac (815623)
      I'm not so sure you're dead on with the money part - I know that LiveJournal has a large portion of their accounts (large for me, anyways) that are paying accounts, and with blog platforms like Moveable Type you have to pay to get any of the good features. Perhaps if more companies starte delivering easy to use blogging interfaces for the average user they won't be able to charge, but for now they're making a decent bit of change.
      • by Znork (31774) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @11:55AM (#11728705)
        If your buisness plan can be implemented by a pimplefaced teenager in his parents basement, you should be prepared for the competition of several hundred thousand pimplefaced teenagers doing just that.

        The value in such a simple buisness is just too small to support a public company as anything other than a short-term investor aberration.
        • "If your buisness plan can be implemented by a pimplefaced teenager in his parents basement, you should be prepared for the competition of several hundred thousand pimplefaced teenagers doing just that."

          Very astute. Being prepared, in this case, is doing a better job than those pimplefaced teenagers.

          "The value in such a simple buisness is just too small to support a public company as anything other than a short-term investor aberration."

          Not in this case. Those pimplefaced teenagers have been lau

    • by shark72 (702619) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @10:59AM (#11728464)

      "People aren't actually very willing to pay for somewhere to write their blog"

      That's an extremely general statement; can you clarify? What people? Your friends? You're correct, in the tautalogical sense, that people who don't want to pay don't want to pay, but the important thing is that there are people who do.

      The fact that your post was modded "insightful" shows that there are many who agree with you, but this may be similar to the "lots of people pirate music, thus people aren't willing to pay for it, thus the value of music is zero" fallacy. As the volume of piracy grows, so has Apple's business in paid downloads. And despite more and more free blogging services popping up, more people are paying. I'm able to measure this not in the abstract, let's-post-hunches-on-Slashdot sense, but by the amount of money that's put into my bank account each day.

      To your credit, the "there's no business in blogging" sentiment is a popular one, but I'm just not seeing the evidence to support that.

    • companies like Six Apart have an actual product and a weblog platform for people that can't setup their own.

      selling the weblog/cms software, sponsored links or banner-advertisements on weblogging platforms seems to be a decent concept. compared to the dot.com bubble with companies without an actual product to sell.
    • Actually, you're a little behind the curve. Here's an example of a blogger who's selling his content on the honor system [shapeofdays.com]. He says he just started this week, so I'm anxious to hear how it goes over.
  • by mattspammail (828219) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @08:54AM (#11728125)
    I never have caught on to the blogging thing. The only times I ever look at a blog is when it's sent to me as a link (usually because a pic of a hot chick accompanies it).

    Blogging, IMHO, is overrated.

    • Woah! Which blog is that?

      I ask strictly because I want to read the content, of course :).
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Blogging, IMHO, is overrated.

      Would you not consider slashdot to be a blog? Sure the frontpage is controled by an select few and is considered to be a good source of news for geeks, but let's face it. This is a blog.
    • Or, for instance, when you look at Slashdot, which pretty much an archetypal blog:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weblog
    • It's an interesting phenonmemon, it's just not deserving of "Next Big Thing" status. I know of maybe five blogs where most weeks I will read something interesting I wouldn't have seen otherwise. The majority of them (mine included) are painfully dull.

      planet.gnome.org is a good example - kind of a microcosm of the blog sphere. You get people like Miguel and Havoc posting interesting stuff about GTK/GNOME which provides an insight into the dev process you wouldn't get otherwise. You also have people who post
      • by sploo22 (748838) <dwahler@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Sunday February 20, 2005 @10:07AM (#11728274)
        ...it's just not deserving of "Next Big Thing" status.

        I beg to differ. Technorati currently has over 7 million blogs tracked. 3 million of those have popped up just since last October -- that's one every 3 minutes. no matter what the quality is (and I do tend to agree with you there) blogging is big.

        I guess the real appeal is that it's finally an "idiot-friendly" way of publishing content. People are starting to get the desire to make the Web a two-way communication system.
        • 7 Million! - that's a lot of stories about people's pets. I wonder what fraction are regularly updated and read. In order for there to be two-way communication, someone has to be reading those blogs ;).

          Blogging is important, of course - just look at how many Slashdot/OSnews etc. stories link to a blog post these days. But extrapolating from 7 million people moving their journals online to a revolution in journalism is too big a leap for me to believe.
          • I wonder what fraction are regularly updated and read.

            All of them. Technorati has a system whereby blogs that aren't updated regularly are dropped from their index. I don't know how regular you have to be to meet the threshold; I think it's something like once a week, or once every four days, or something like that.
          • But extrapolating from 7 million people moving their journals online to a revolution in journalism is too big a leap for me to believe.

            No-one's asking you to believe that. However, "the blogosphere" becoming the source of an increasing number of stories, increasingly able to set the agenda (to an extent you may not even realize if you're not reading blogs; the evening news has been worthless for a while but for me it's now redundant for a lot of stories), and taking down various importent entities should
            • The evening (TV) news has been redundant for a long time, anyway. Even the BBC's news is a waste of time these days. Not because of blogs, but because it's been simplified down to one-idea-per-story and news readers shouting at politicians to "answer the question".

              I watched News at Ten the other day where a journalist was doing a voiceover saying "As the British military plane touched down...", as a C-5 with a big star and the letters "US" on the side landed. If they're making that kind of mistake, it woul
              • The evening (TV) news has been redundant for a long time, anyway.

                I don't mean it the way you mean it; I mean that I saw the stories and more angles on it than the news will have, two or three days before the news has it.

                Did you know that it is common practice to "release" news on Friday evening so it gets buried? I didn't, until blogs started to help that not work anymore.

                I can't think of any stories where blogs have been the source, though.

                Oh, yes, the mainstream news makes sure to credit the blogs,
    • If you aren't a participant or former participant, the H in IMHO probably should be incremented to I, for Irrelevant:
      I never have caught on to the (crafting, hockey, NASCAR, gay, neocons, rap, college, intarweb, wine, art, photography, religion, burning-man, PTA, michael jackson) thing. The only time I ever hear about X is when a friend mentions it, especially when they talk about all the hot chicks there.

      X, IMHO, is overrated.

  • Hoo boy... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by aendeuryu (844048) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @08:56AM (#11728134)
    The article talks about the company starting to 'think big' after being approached by venture capitalists, and has some stats on the blog industry in general.

    Pardon the skepticism, but...

    You know, it's crazy, but you'd think that after the dot.com bubble burst the venture capitalists would be a little more careful with their money when it came to tech, yet here they are, wanting to get in on an industry where the main product is something that is already available for free. Where will the revenue, and further, the return on the investment, come from? (Firing Berman out of a cannon?) What's worse is that if there's another burst like the last one, investors are going to go back to shying away from small tech companies that actually produce something.

    I think this whole thing is a result of all the press that the mainstream media is giving blogs, and the only reason why I think they're getting all that press is because the media LOVES an opportunity to navel gaze.

    Don't get me wrong, I think blogging is cool and all, and offers a chance for political/media/other watchdogs out there, and there are some blogs I find entertaining, but really, I can't help but think that all that money is just going to go right down the drain, and the only thing they'll have to show for it is a bunch of webpages of people and their cats.
    • Where will the revenue, and further, the return on the investment, come from?

      I don't know, let's ask him [primidi.com]. He seems to be doing okay [slashdot.org]...
    • Re:Hoo boy... (Score:3, Informative)

      by ggvaidya (747058)
      the venture capitalists would be a little more careful with their money

      Actually, I, Cringely [pbs.org] predicted this a while ago. Apparently, any money the VCs collected in '99-'00 which they haven't invested has to be returned to the investors in five years, along with the VC's management fee. To avoid giving the fee back, the VCs have to invest in something - anything - and soon.
    • "you'd think that after the dot.com bubble burst the venture capitalists would be a little more careful with their money when it came to tech"

      I *strongly* suspect that venture capitalists (and brokers) made a killing during the dot com era regardless of the collapse.

      It's the bigger fool idea - each person buys at stupidly inflated prices assuming there is an even bigger fool who will buy after them - but the VCs get in first so there was very often much bigger fools begging to be ripped off.

      I seriously d
    • Re:Hoo boy... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by trufflemage (860010)
      the main product is something that is already available for free.

      This has interesting ramifications. It's free, anyone can do it (and does) and it's spreading. The problem for the reader is sifting the interesting bits out of the sea of inanities. However, a couple of facts prevent this from being too big a problem:
      1. what's of interest to me is not necessarily of interest to someone else
      2. even after culling the 90%, the remainder is still a huge number. There exist enough relevant, interesting blogs
    • Re:Hoo boy... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by disserto (817046)
      Cringley talked about this [pbs.org] last week. The VCs are running out of time to use the money they have, so instead of giving it back (as well as refunding the fees they charged to manage it), they're going to start putting it into everything they can.

      This is both good and bad. Obviously, money is going to go into things that aren't really going to go anywhere. Money will also go into things that sorely need it and will produce something good.

      The question is whether or not we remember the lessons learned
    • "You know, it's crazy, but you'd think that after the dot.com bubble burst the venture capitalists would be a little more careful with their money when it came to tech, yet here they are, wanting to get in on an industry where the main product is something that is already available for free."

      Yet the paid blogging industry is growing. Perhaps this seems counterintuitive, but it's true. I think many Slashdotters are basing assumptions on the fact of free blogging platforms (MSN Spaces being the latest o

    • Re:Hoo boy... (Score:2, Insightful)

      I think the big difference between this situation and the bubble is that the investors are investing in the software and hosting companies that power blogs (for a fee - revenue stream is good), and not specific blogs (i.e., Bob's blog isn't getting 2 million dollars in investment based on his 10,000 unique hits per day).

      I think investing in the moveable type company is a smart investment. You have millions of people willing to pay a monthly fee, and millions more likely to sign up in the coming months.
    • the main product is something that is already available for free.

      It's not free. Yes, you can sign up for something like a Blogspot account for free, but your site is going to be hard to use and difficult to customize. The point here isn't that the services are available for free; the point is that they're cheap -- practically anybody can afford $5 a month. And for only a little more than that, you can have your own dedicated server at a data center like Hosting Matters. It's incredibly easy to make $5 a m
    • Oh, believe me, the VCs will come out on top of this. Remember they are not invested in these blogging companies for the duration, only until a "liquidity event" occurs.

      All they need to do is pubblicize the companies until an IPO or a buyout and then they can walk away. Eventually people will realize that blogging software is not that hard to write and that these super high priced companies have very little advantage over any competent developer in their basement. But by that time the VCs will have walked
  • by improfane (855034)
    SixPart Blog(s) - "You will be a assimilated -- Resistance is futile!"
  • Reality Check (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Xpilot (117961) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:02AM (#11728148) Homepage
    The internet is shit [internetisshit.org]

    Seriously, why is such a big deal being made of blogging?

    • I spent a long time wondering why everyone made a big deal out of it. All I came up with is, for every 4,000,000 blogs published, 1 is made by someone with something important and meaningful to say.

      The bar for posting something on the web has been lowered even further than it used to be. Of course this means (now more than ever) any dumbass is putting up crap to see on the internet.

      The upside is that a handful of people that have something important to say can do so with ease.

      Also, these "blogs" genera
      • Re:Reality Check (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Leo McGarry (843676)
        All I came up with is, for every 4,000,000 blogs published, 1 is made by someone with something important and meaningful to say.

        That's not actually how it's turning out, though. See, out of the 7 million blogs out there, there might be only 10 that are even remotely interesting to you. Somebody else has his own 10. And somebody else has his 10. The net result is that every blog has an audience.

        Ed Driscoll had an article on Tech Central Station about this a few weeks back. He talked about the fact that th

        • I realise different content has different value to different people... but I have a hard time assigning real value to Jane Doe's, "I had such a crappy day cause Bobby doesn't like me" posts.

          I know these aren't the sorts of blogs most people think about, but it seems like that represents the vast majority of content we get in blogs.

          I'd call your coworker's blog one of the few that had real content on it. That makes it the one in a million that is worth anything.

          And of course, the idea of having access to
          • I have a hard time assigning real value to Jane Doe's, "I had such a crappy day cause Bobby doesn't like me" posts.

            They are tremendously valuable to Jane's friends and family, and to anybody who enjoys the voyeuristic rush of reading somebody else's diary. Of course, Jane's online diary becomes massively important to the whole world as soon as she posts, "I had such a crappy day because Bobby doesn't like me, and holy cow look at that giant tsunami!"

            The whole point of blogs is that they comprise a vast,
    • The creator of the website your pointing to there seems to have an incorrect idea of what the internet is.
      The internet is way more than websites or usenet postings.

    • That website is either the best on the net or it is the typical "I'm trying to speak out against the tide in my own ironic sort of way so I can distinguish myself and be noticed."
      But it has a point either way.
    • The link you posted is rather harsh. To me, the Internet is the greatest "pooling" of human knowledge ever created in the history of the world. Ever.

      To decry it as "shit" is just a bit harsh. Yea, there are some internet dead-ends and cesspools, but overall, the world's knowledge is there for you. You just have to find it...

      Perhaps you aren't looking in the right places?!?



  • And now... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:08AM (#11728162)
    What rolls down stairs, Alone or in pairs, Rolls over your neighbor's dog? What's great for a snack, And fits on your back, It's Blog..blog..Blog!! ... It's Blo-og, Blo-og It's big, it's heavy it's wood! It's Blog, Blo-og It's better than bad It's good!!! Everyone wants a Blog, come on and read my blog!

    By Blamo
  • by trufflemage (860010) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:16AM (#11728174)
    From the article:

    The potential of blogging itself elicits strongly divided opinions.


    Denizens of the so-called blogosphere believe the practice is destined to revolutionize the way people distribute and get information, increasingly marginalizing traditional mass media outlets. ...

    Critics, though, view all the fuss about blogs as the latest bout of Internet hyperbole, one that will eventually fade away ones readers realize they are rife with inaccuracies and mundane minutiae.

    The critics are correct--reading blogs means reading a single writer's private quirks--but that works to the reader's advantage as well as disadvantage. Who wants to get all their information from a single, monopolistic, sensationalistic source? That's how I view the local television news--to be fair, they make an attempt, but to me it's obvious their bottom line is ratings. So today we have an alternative model for the dissemination of information (or rather, many models), and one of the sturdiest is the blog.

    I'm reminded of analogies I've heard made between modern AI computing algorithms (ie, neural nets) and the human brain, in which there are so many tiny, self-contained fundamental units (connections, say) that a great many of them can fail without destroying the performance of the whole. Robust & degrades gracefully.

    Blogs may forge that sort of network online. No longer will it be easy to mislead the masses, because the masses are not drinking from a single spring. Each person is reading a finite number of blogs and processing and making their own blog. Everyone is (gasp!) thinking for themselves.

    I like the direction this is going....
    • Each person is reading a finite number of blogs and processing and making their own blog. Everyone is (gasp!) thinking for themselves.

      Do not think, even for a minute, that this will happen. We (the people) will just find a different way to be sheep. Some blogs will get more attention than most, and everyone will again be thinking the same things, controlled by similar people.

      A medium may encourage free-thinking, but people don't seem to like it too much. Most people prefer to be told what to think while

      • You're a fucking elitist asshole, and what's more, you're completely wrong.

        Everybody has opinions. Having an opinion is one of the easiest things in the world to do. Go try and find one of these "sheep" you oh-so-smugly talk about. Go try and find somebody without an opinion. You can't. They don't exist. Everybody has opinions.

        Are most people motivated enough to go to a lot of trouble to express their opinions? No, they've got better things to do with their time. But that's where outfits like Six Apart c
        • Do you trolls even bother to read anymore?

          Anyway, I have time and patience...

          Everybody has opinions. Having an opinion is one of the easiest things in the world to do. Go try and find one of these "sheep" you oh-so-smugly talk about. Go try and find somebody without an opinion. You can't. They don't exist. Everybody has opinions.

          Who claimed that we don't have opinions? We (the sheep) do have opinions, which are shaped by the people we pay attention to. That was my original claim. You have not refute

          • Who claimed that we don't have opinions?

            You, with all your yabber-yabber about how people don't think for themselves. Wanna back off that position, Sparky?

            That was my original claim. You have not refuted it.

            Oh, great. Yet another kid who thinks he's on his high-school debate team. Well, that goes with the smugness and the sense of superiority.
    • Unfortunately, there's a major downside to having a plethora of news outlets: each ends up catering to a narrow target audience, and people tend to gravitate towards those outlets which slant the news in keeping with their own personal biases. Why bother confronting uncomfortable issues when you can switch to a blog that spins them your way or ignores them altogether?

      No longer will it be easy to mislead the masses

      The greatest fault, dear trufflemage, is not in our stars, but in ourselves....
    • Blogs may forge that sort of network online. No longer will it be easy to mislead the masses, because the masses are not drinking from a single spring. Each person is reading a finite number of blogs and processing and making their own blog. Everyone is (gasp!) thinking for themselves.

      Indeed, in the political realm that is already happening, thanks to the fact blogs can outrun the so-called mainstream media when it comes to information dissemination and fact-checking quite easily. It was the blogosphere t
    • Everything you said here is true, but it's wrong to think of blogs as replacing mass media. There's still a big place for mass media. Blogs provide an adjunct, picking up and disseminating stories that otherwise don't get covered, picking apart unfair coverage of stories (or utterly made up stories), and providing a network by which ordinary Joes can share their opinions about stuff. But the mass media isn't going to go away because of blogs. It's going to have to change its model a bit, become more account
  • Blog entrepreneurs (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mparaz (31980) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:18AM (#11728179) Homepage
    More people are looking through cashing in on their blogs, like through Adsense [problogger.net], and other schemes like BlogKits BlogMatch [blogkits.com] which show that AdSense doesn't work for blogs. Then we have the commercially sponsored blogs from companies like Gawker Media - such as Lifehacker for Sony.

    Here's some analysis [paraz.com] on commercial blogging. (Yes, it's from a blog!)
  • by rifftide (679288) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:19AM (#11728180)
    FORTUNE ran a cover story on the impact of blogging on business [fortune.com] last month, featuring Six Apart among others.

    Not long after, Bill Gates did an interview with Gizmodo. Coincidence? (Gizmodo was not featured in the FORTUNE article - Engadget and Microsoft's own Bob Scoble were).

  • by Realistic_Dragon (655151) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:26AM (#11728194) Homepage
    20/2/2005

    Woke up. couldn't find any clean underpants because the lighbulb is broken. Maybe the underpants gnomes stole the lightbulb to cover up the missing pants until they made their getaway.

    19/2/2005

    Posted in my blog today.

    18/2/2005

    Man I shouldn't have eaten those beans. I had to destroy all my underpants.
  • gmail invites (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is nothing new. The rebulican party has been paying bloggers big bucks for some time now. "Grassroots" propaganda. Dig deep into the "Jeff Gannon" story for more details.

    On another note, I have gmail invites for the first 50 who ask at safety.account@gmail.com
    • Re:gmail invites (Score:3, Interesting)

      by strelitsa (724743) *
      A poster at conservative website FreeRepublic.com [freerepublic.com] is credited as first discovering evidence of CBS News' and Dan Rather's clumsy attempt to rig a US Presidential election by exposing the incredibly bad Bush Killian memoranda forgeries that CBS had "authenticated". Here is the historic "Post 47" that exposed Rather's perfidy:

      Post # 47 To: Howlin

      Howlin, every single one of these memos to file is in a proportionally spaced font, probably Palatino or Times New Roman.

      In 1972 people used typewriters for th

    • Them and the Democrats both. The Dean presidential campaign was bribing bloggers with kickbacks -- commentators and amateur journalists are especially susceptible to this sort of stuff (back to the red side of things, Armstrong Williams makes a good example). The reason the politicians are so big on blogs is that they provide an outlet for manipulable amateur journalists. Bribing the paper for an endorsement is the oldest political dirty trick in the book, and now it's a lot easier to do it, particularl
    • -1 off topic

      I think everybody has 50 invites .. I've been trying to use mine, but they keep refilling .. Furthermore I've been invited by the Gmail Team .. the result of signing up for further information 8 months ago ..

      even this initiative [isnoop.net] has 291,820 invites available to share. ...

      Anybody who doesn't have a gmail account by now, hasn't figured out how to write gmail account invite [google.dk] in google ..
    • The rebulican party has been paying bloggers big bucks for some time now. "Grassroots" propaganda. Dig deep into the "Jeff Gannon" story for more details.

      Yes, please. Dig deep into the Gannon story. Because when you do, you'll find that it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the Republican party, or with bloggers, or with anybody paying anybody for anything.

      I wouldn't have bothered to reply but for the fact that some Slashdot moderator with more points than sense felt the need to call this compl
      • Of course it has nothing to do with the republican party. Any idiot with a fake name can get into the White house and ask the president questions at news briefings.
        • He didn't use a fake name. He gave his real name, and published under a pen name. Just like lots of reporters do. And yes, any reporter who asks can get into the White House and ask the President questions at press conferences. That's called having a free press.

          (Point of order: the events where the President stands up and takes questions are not briefings. They're press conferences. The President doesn't participate in the regular press briefings.)

          Go read this [kingpublishing.com]. Unless, you know, you just don't give a damn
          • Right, and that's why he was identified in C-Span under a fake name, because he "gave his real name". Publishing under a pseudonim means exactly that -- publishing under a pseudonim, not providing a pseudonim instead of your real name in real life situations.

            And not any reporter can get into the whitehouse. There are hundreds of good reporters that do not get into the white house no matter how much they ask. And those are reporters who can show better journalistic experience than being gay whores (see http
            • Publishing under a pseudonim means exactly that -- publishing under a pseudonim, not providing a pseudonim instead of your real name in real life situations.

              Um. I don't think you really have the foggiest idea what you're talking about here. He was identified on C-SPAN by his pen name because that's the professional name he uses. Just like how Mara Liasson uses her maiden name instead of her married name, because that's the name under which she works.

              Gannon's day pass was under his legal name, not his pen
              • Now I am really pissed, but to think of it, I deserve everything that I get because I got into an internet argument with an idiot. And as it often happens in these situations, apparently everything that I am saying has been proven wrong by various random blanket assertions (with no support).

                And now I have two choices (i) shut up and thus indirectly admit that every thing I say is wrong, or (b) spend countless hours reasearching the white house press handling procedures on the internet in order to come back
                • at least one AP journalist says that they saw gannon wearing apress pass that said gannon

                  Except Gannon never held a press pass. Instead, he was given a series of day, or "A", passes, none of which have anybody's name on them. Your "at least one AP journalist" is either misremembering, or lying.

                  According to you, anybody from any kind of news website can get into the white house and once there, Bush will answer everyone's question. I REALLY doubt this is true.

                  Kay. Because you're uninformed about how the
  • Oh. My. God. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by samael (12612) <Andrew@Ducker.org.uk> on Sunday February 20, 2005 @09:56AM (#11728248) Homepage
    The whole fuss over people on both sides of the debate "Blogging will change the universe!" and "Blogging is just pointless!" misses the point.

    Blogging is _exactly_ what happened at the start of the internet craze - it's _home pages_. Blogs are just home pages that are easier to update than they used to be back in the olden days, so people don't have to worry about HTML in order to create them.

    Blogs: Just easy-to-use web pages, nothing more, nothing less.
    • You're looking at the blogging craze from a purely technical viewpoint. But the real news is not the technology (homepage plus CMS). The news lies in the fact that citizen journalism, sometimes paired with a bit of personal exhibitionism, has suddenly become reality. The blogosphere has good potential to change the way society deals with information exchange, reducing the power of media monopolies. It gives back control over information management to the readers, but leads to more scattered, biased and ofte
    • Most blogging sites are exactly that samael, and you've hit the nail on the head.

      Multiply.com is a bit different though; they've integrated blogging with social networking and basic communication (like e-mail), so the people in your life who might actually care to read your blog, get automatically notified. Between that and it's support for Photo Albums, it might have a leg up on basic blogging sites like blogger and LJ.

      Check out my Multiply site [multiply.com] or start your own [multiply.com].

      Disclaimer: I work for Multiply.
      • Cheers for that. I'd be very tempted, but I already use Livejournal, which also have email notification, photo albums, security settings, etc. Your site looks pretty cool too though. Good luck with it.
    • I'll second that. Read about Rich Text Editing and Spell Check Come to TypePad [sixapart.com] and thats pretty much what the dog [sausage.com] was designed for when I was working for sausage [sausage.com] back in '95.

      The key difference is that with a server based model you have a simplified platform (browser) compared to targeting an operating system (MS Windows) with a binary.

      • Yup. Although you have to manage different browsers , of course.

        And mostly I post to my Livejournal using the Semagic client, which does lots of useful stuff for me (like shortcut keys for hyperlinks).
        • Semagic client, which does lots of useful stuff for me

          yeah I spotted this just today (and appreciated the significance). For example ecto [kung-foo.tv] (commercial blog client) which acts as a binary client supporting multiple blog api's [kung-foo.tv]. Thus theres a sort of binary revenge here because the web based systems have their minuses (until I tried out gmail [google.com]) .

          I must say though users are voting with their dollars - enough even to move binary boys such as Joel [shorewalker.com] and Miguel [ximian.com] rethink.

    • Re:Oh. My. God. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by corblix (856231)
      Blogging is _exactly_ what happened at the start of the internet craze - it's _home pages_.

      Excellent point. Just what I've been mumbling to myself for a while; I'm glad someone came out and said it.

      To amplify: Personal web pages, a.k.a. "Blogs", are revolutionary. They are changing the world, and I imagine they will continue to do so. They started doing so around 1990. The techies got involved in big numbers around 1993. The man on the street started noticing around 1997. A while later someone came up

  • Blogs (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CastrTroy (595695) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @10:06AM (#11728271) Homepage
    I have to say that blogs are a good way to generate traffic. I read about 4 blogs a day, most just from friends. However, most of my friends, like myself, have their own domain name, and pay some kind of hosting service. Geocities was one of the first free web page services. But nobody knew HTML and everybody's page looked really bad. It also took a lot of work to get what you wanted to say onto the web in a nice organized fashion. But still, Geocities was immensely popular, and is still around, although bought out by Yahoo. People want to express themselves on the web. And even if each blog only generates 5 hits a day, if you can get 5% of web users to have a blog, you're still going to generate a lot of hits, while only paying for bandwidth and servers.
  • History repeats (Score:3, Insightful)

    by HMarieY (316249) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @10:20AM (#11728309) Homepage
    First, in reference to those who don't get blogging: It is finally a way for all of us would-be writers and journalists to express our humble opinions in a place where they might actually be read. It is a diverse community without the usualy limits and editing done when something is written within major media.

    Historically speaking this has happened numerous times. Each time a new media appears it changes the way all previous media performs, killing that which is no longer viable, gradually reshaping "old media" and creating a new means of information. Think about how the printing press, television, and computers have all changed the way major media reacts with the masses. As the price of producing in that media lowers more people will begin to produce in that media, creating a more diverse body of knowledge than "popular opinion" that big media tends to stick with. For instance as the prices of printing came down during the industrial revolution many would-be activists printed pamphlets of their beliefs. I actually own a pamphlet printed from that time insisting that we should move to a 12 digit numeric system, not exactly something that would be put forth by main stream media at the time, especially with the push for metric. And so it is to be expected that blogging will recreate media, providing a check and balance system for main stream media, just as has happened in the past.

    That said, part of the point is that the price must be low in order to be used. Bloggers that are read daily by large masses: Instapundit and Lileks for example can easily manage to pay for their bandwith costs and to use purchased blogger software, but the average blogger doesn't have a ton of readers and unless he gets discovered, more than likely eats hiis bandwith costs each month and will prefer the free model for blogging apps. So, as far as investments go, I am not sure that that particular model will prove productive.
  • by night_flyer (453866) on Sunday February 20, 2005 @10:42AM (#11728399) Homepage
    I submitted this a couple of days ago, but it seems it wasn't important enough for its own story.

    A local news paper, The Tulsa World [tulsaworld.com], sent out a cease and desist letter saying to stop quoting their opinions/articles (in whole or in part) and to stop deep linking to their unprotected .pdfs to these websites:
    Batesline.com [batesline.com], Chris Medlock's blog [blogspot.com] (a city councilor who is the subject of a recall), and TulsaNow.org [tulsanow.org] because some messages in the forum include links to articles.

    The Tulsa World's webmaster apparently didn't know how to stop unauthorized linking until just recently. Wednesday he said it couldn't be done, today it is fixed. [tulsaworld.com]

    Two other websites are involved in this story of so called copyright infringement, freedom of speech and deep linking. Tulsans for election integrity [tulsansfor...egrity.com] also received the letter, they are against the recall. The coalition for responsible government [coalitionf...rnment.org] are for the recall and has directly copied, in their entirety, articles from the Tulsa World and have received no such letter (the we know of) the Tulsa World has been informed, so either the coalition for responsible government is ignoring the demand or the Tulsa World has given them blanket permission to do such a thing.

    This story has been covered locally [ktul.com] and nationally [cnn.com]
  • I would first off like to say that I hate the word "blogging". The first time I saw it I thought it was something "new and exciting". Just shook my head in disgust when I found out it was "glorified HTML".

    I avoided the weblog thing not really seeing the value. One day I realized I have a bunch of information I would like to post but it really did not "deserve" a full webpage dedicated to it... Duh!

    Hell it may not deserve a "blog" but here is The iMovie FAQ News [danslagle.com] If nothing else it looks "clean and ne

  • Blogs are fine and dandy for private use, or for little people to have a voice, but yesterday evening (about 3amish) I was watching BBC world news (in the UK). So I'm watching this ABC broadcast I believe it was and they had some story about an Iraqi girl some army unit saving a little girl.. and the source quoted was "A blog". Now this is where I get problems, as soon as blogs become "well known media" we start to see them corrupting.

    No long is it "An opinion and no media bullshit" it's just "media bulls
    • by Jerf (17166)
      So I'm watching this ABC broadcast I believe it was and they had some story about an Iraqi girl some army unit saving a little girl.. and the source quoted was "A blog". Now this is where I get problems, as soon as blogs become "well known media" we start to see them corrupting.

      I don't see blog corruption in your example, I see a Major News Organization who either didn't research the story enough to verify it, or convey the fact that they did that research well enough to convince you.

      All stories start o
  • My girlfriend and I updated a list of newspapers with RSS that Tom Biro of Media Drop started last year. There are now 85 daily newspapers with RSS feeds. [sidewalktheory.com]
  • And I do not like weblogs inc, I think that thier veneer of terminology and technology hides nothing more than a two bit review whack site, and it is sad that such an opinion will be modded as a troll.

    I hate blogs, always have, always will. Give me news, give me reviews, give me opinions, keep your blogs.

    Weblogs inc is evil, sorry, not playing devil advocate or anything, I just do not like it.

    In Korea, blogs are only for old people. future slashdot posting.
    • Well not that I have looked, but the feeling is all thier blog sites that they are getting people to splurg into are fairly spammyesque, they gripe me up in bad ways.

      autoblog, engadget, pocketlintblog, ohmygodthinkofsomthingfunnyblog, somethingthatgwillhithighgooglerankblogs

      each one posting and cross posting onto each other, and leaching favourable sounding verbiage linkage from sites such as well-meaning users of /.

      They are poisoning google.

      I wish google had a blacklist for its users.

      Oh wait, I bet am

Thus spake the master programmer: "When a program is being tested, it is too late to make design changes." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

Working...