Posts by Keith Ng
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Readers can have a relationship with a blogger that they don't have any more with a masthead. The fact that something appears under the Herald masthead is almost meaningless now.
Curious. You really think so? Is it a result of them trying to be everything to everyone? Do you mean that the trust relationship is gone, too?
In the end, the differences between the two professions are not that huge (and in my mind getting smaller by the day).
Aye. That's why I've decided to go with the Carlos the Jackal business model: Working as a mercenary to finance my campaign of terror. Rather than doing stories I don't want to do for 40c/word, I do copywriting I don't want to do for a lot more money, which then enables me to do the stuff I want to do for free.
Beats the "suffering for my art" business model, anyway.
-
Yeah? I thought it was the whole brown on the outsided, white on the inside.
Or maybe it's a contested term:
-
Ah - resurgent nationalism. Creeps the hell outta me.
It's a shame that this "with us or against us" attitude is alienating Chinese international students from the local Chinese, though to be fair, the prejudice goes the other way, too.
And as I understand it, the term is traditionally "coconuts", while "bounty bar" is a more modern, urban variation of that.
-
I think the fundamental question is whether you can do factual reporting outside the confines of a traditional journalistic format (by that I mean the objective third person voice, not print).
McGregor, for example, said that Russell was great, but actually, he is a journalist and not really a blogger. (Confusing the content with both the format and the medium.)
I think Russell's analogy with the opinion pieces hit the mark. Most of the opinion pieces that get printed in the papers, if not for their celeberity by-line, would fit right in to the grey, murky pits of the blogosphere.
It's a good question, and I had a whole rant prepared (actually, I've had it for the last three years) about how first-person factual reporting can actually be beneficial for breaking out of the talking-heads mode of journalism, where everything-is-just-someone's-opinion, and pointing out objective facts is considered as bias... but I'm going to keep my rant to myself for now, as actions speak louder than words, and I think it's more productive for all concerned if we let our work do the talking.
-
Will it mean that they don't place ads in irrelevant content?
Will it mean, therefore, that "irrelevant" content don't generate revenue?
-
Hamish:
Having delved even deeper into the underbelly of the nefarious marketing journalism...
Ah Hamish, you're the Andy Lau to my Lam Ka Tung. Never getting into an elevator with you again.
But I think your point applies to machine-driven contextual advertising, whereas in the NZ sites, the contextual drive is the bunch of guys in the sales team, and the ads are made at the big ad agencies. These don't scale up or smart-distribute like a text Google-ad does. They're only contextual advertising in the theoretical, rather than technical, sense of the word.
But more to the point (and to address Russell's), the difference between traditional advertising-oriented sub-publications and these new sections are the very defined tracking tools. Travel advertisers won't care about how many readers are in the news section unless their tracking tools tell them that they're in the travel section. And unlike a paper, you don't even have to throw away sections that you don't want, you just ignore them. This will put pressure on the websites to pimp their commercial content more than before, and my ultimate concern is that this will also shift investment towards those sections, away from civic journalism.
-
Paul:
which begs the question: why do publishers think I want to read it on one more than any of the others?
I think the idea is that they just need to have a strong brand, and that brand loyalty will keep readers there till the end of time. There's always going to be *some* local content, so even if there's no unique value from the other stuff they're offering, they just need to be marginally better to keep you. Not everyone surfs through Reuters or have their own news aggregators...
-
Damian, I believe it's called stalking. Or, if you want to get technical, Facebook stalking.
You got any hot friends?
-
But then how will I know the instant someone sends me a message?
Put it on your phone. Then you'll never be away from your friends. Ever.
I don’t know exactly what’s happened, but a number of people I’ve spoken to have noticed it as well – Facebook has gone postal.
It has in NZ. I think it's actually because New Zealand is poorly connected to this particular social network, and it's taken this long for Facebook to penetrate our borders, seek out our social hubs/hotties and take over their brains. But of course, once all the cool kids were doing it, the rest of us could offer little resistance.
Behold the power of social networking.
-
Are any other bloggers finding this Gallery-blogging business creepy? I mean, they're firming getting onto *our* turf, now. Not that I've been in the loop for the last for 8 months, but hey...
The invaders have become the invaded. I feel that my (non-existent) livelihood is being threatened.