Hello! [mturro: in plain sight] is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.
Community Page
- mturro.com/ Jump to website »
-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- best site to post your drunk comments http://mydrunklife.com
- Excellent commentary. I think it's important to note, as you did here, that Clemons isn't saying ads will disappear or not be profitable at all, only that their influence will be...
- nice post
- Thanks, Paul - I appreciate the feedback,
- Great article and great blog. Catching up on previous posts.
Jump to original thread »
I read an article today that got me a bit peeved. The story - Profitable Web 2.0 Tactics - was the cover story for the March 2008 issue of the trade magazine Publishing Executive. In the interest of stirring debate I left a comment on the mag’s site and as of this posting […
... Continue reading »
1 year ago
1 year ago
1 year ago
Read your post on PubExec regarding NewBay Media and I don't disagree at all with your feelings about the article. There maybe should have been a "work in progress" angle to the story since we have 50+ sites, many of them God-awful in their look and backend.
We/I also inherited sites and online products that had been after-thoughts at best by previous management based on their magazine-first mentality.
But has initial cross-marketing of the audiences via forums and content proven to be an increasing source of revenue? You bet.
Perhaps there will be a follow-up article, which hopefully doesn't mention the played out Web2.0 buzzword, and we can then showcase the progress.
I wouldn't mind connecting with you to hear the hurdles you have seen and overcome at M. Shanken.
Talk to you soon.
Joe Ferrick
VP, Web Development
NewBay Media
212-378-0410
1 year ago
Let me be clear: my problem with the article has nothing to do with NewBay - you are doing what all of us in the industry are - trying to figure out a complex and quickly changing technical landscape. From what I see you guys are holding your own.
No, my problem, and what I said in my un-posted follow up to Noelle's editorial reply, is that PubExec is using the "web 2.0" buzz word in order to SEEM like they're on top of what's happening. After reading the article it's almost obvious that they're not.
As I said in that comment at their site that ended up somewhere in the ether - I would have no problem with this article at all if they made one simple change - title it "Profitable Web Tactics." That's it.
The fact that they didn't - and that the feature a story on "web 2.0" that has no "web 2.0" substance is a red flag. Now I have to question whether or not reading PubExec is in fact wise. That this conversation is taking place here on my blog instead of on their site is also reason for concern.
7 months ago
Sent via mobile (so please excuse the brevity and any typos)