Comments on: CNet seems happy to blow bubbles http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/ ... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web Mon, 08 Sep 2008 04:53:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Mathew Ingram http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-41287 Mathew Ingram Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:11:59 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-41287 Thanks for the comment, George -- I think you are probably right on several counts. Thanks for the comment, George — I think you are probably right on several counts.

]]> By: George Tsiolis http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-41285 George Tsiolis Mon, 28 Aug 2006 00:54:37 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-41285 Hi, Mathew. Let me start by saying that your shot was both well founded and well executed. Don\'t make any apologies for it. After 2 questionable Biz Week articles and now one from CNet, I start to get the feeling these guys are suffering from blog envy and are trying to work their way back into the cool crowd by making wild statements that only serve to grab short-term attention - but long-term bewilderment. As a result, they are starting to position themselves as tabloids that make for fun reading but little credibility. Rob touches on this in his comment above. I don\'t mind seeing this from amateur/young bloggers or commenters that might be a little too caught up in Web2.0 excitement and weren\'t around for dot-bomb. But what excuse do BW and CNet have for their work? Given the fact they\'re intelligent people, I can only conclude this is a traffic tactic gone seriously wrong. Blog early and blog often shouldn\'t be at the expense of quality and accuracy. That was true 100 years ago and remains true today. Technology, blogs and competition for readership doesn\'t change that. Best, George Hi, Mathew. Let me start by saying that your shot was both well founded and well executed. Don\’t make any apologies for it. After 2 questionable Biz Week articles and now one from CNet, I start to get the feeling these guys are suffering from blog envy and are trying to work their way back into the cool crowd by making wild statements that only serve to grab short-term attention - but long-term bewilderment.

As a result, they are starting to position themselves as tabloids that make for fun reading but little credibility. Rob touches on this in his comment above.

I don\’t mind seeing this from amateur/young bloggers or commenters that might be a little too caught up in Web2.0 excitement and weren\’t around for dot-bomb. But what excuse do BW and CNet have for their work? Given the fact they\’re intelligent people, I can only conclude this is a traffic tactic gone seriously wrong.

Blog early and blog often shouldn\’t be at the expense of quality and accuracy. That was true 100 years ago and remains true today. Technology, blogs and competition for readership doesn\’t change that.

Best,
George

]]> By: robhyndman.com » Blog Archive » Content Discontent http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-40182 robhyndman.com » Blog Archive » Content Discontent Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:28:50 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-40182 [...] But I’m also wondering whether it’s because of a laxity creeping into writing on the web - someone I think may be happening (unless you’re Jeff Jarvis or Dave Pollard) because of the proliferation of content, the ease of publication and the common attitude that to get one’s traffic up (a common web 2.0 mantra, it seems) one needs to “blog early and blog often”. I don’t think it’s just blogs - last night Mathew took a poke at a credulous “happy shiny web 2.0 people” CNet piece about the latest Youtube valuation nonsense that also irked me when I first read it. [...] [...] But I’m also wondering whether it’s because of a laxity creeping into writing on the web - someone I think may be happening (unless you’re Jeff Jarvis or Dave Pollard) because of the proliferation of content, the ease of publication and the common attitude that to get one’s traffic up (a common web 2.0 mantra, it seems) one needs to “blog early and blog often”. I don’t think it’s just blogs - last night Mathew took a poke at a credulous “happy shiny web 2.0 people” CNet piece about the latest Youtube valuation nonsense that also irked me when I first read it. [...]

]]> By: mark evans http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-40177 mark evans Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:25:39 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-40177 the sign of another bubble or just infatuation? the sign of another bubble or just infatuation?

]]> By: Newsome.Org http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-41295 Newsome.Org Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/24/cnet-seems-happy-to-blow-bubbles/#comment-41295 <!--%kramer-pre%-->all that flailing around looking for partnerships, any partnerships, finally paid off as Cox Communications has agreed to administer a little CPR. Fraser Kelton on branding. TechCrunch reviews four file sharing programs. Mathew Ingram gives a business lesson to C|Net and any number of other bubble blowers. As he correctly points out, the mad money that Sony threw at Grouper was more about the technology than the number of users. Sometimes it amazes me how little business sense seems to<!--%kramer-post%--> all that flailing around looking for partnerships, any partnerships, finally paid off as Cox Communications has agreed to administer a little CPR. Fraser Kelton on branding. TechCrunch reviews four file sharing programs. Mathew Ingram gives a business lesson to C|Net and any number of other bubble blowers. As he correctly points out, the mad money that Sony threw at Grouper was more about the technology than the number of users. Sometimes it amazes me how little business sense seems to

]]>