Archive for the 'blog networks' Category

AOL’s new political site already outperforming Politico.com?

I find this hard to believe:

AOL’s PoliticsDaily Quickly Surpasses Rival Politico, MediaGlow Sites Continue To Grow

AOL’s new political news and blog site, PoliticsDaily.com has surpassed rival Politico.com in unique visits in May, after being launched only a month and a half ago. According to May’s comScore results, PoliticsDaily.com received 2.4 million unique visitors compared to 1.1 million unique visitors on Politico.com in May. PoliticsDaily, a “news magazine” site which primarily focuses on in-depth political commentary as opposed to breaking news, provides only original content, from long-form analysis to blog posts on issues in the U.S. political landscape. You can read our original review of PoliticsDaily here.

This is a big deal for AOL and representative of the company’s ambitions to become a dominant player in the online content space. PoliticsDaily is the brainchild of Martin Moe, senior vice president at AOL and is built under Bill Wilson’s new MediaGlow division, which is building new content brands distinct from AOL itself. MediaGlow, which recently launched topic directory Love.com, runs AOL News, Engadget and TMZ.com, among other properties.

Follow me on Twitter

New Yorker writer guest posts on Gawker to defend the magazine

When the book on 21st century media is written, the day that a writer from the esteemable New Yorker, considered by many to be the most important magazine published, dipped her toes into the unchlorinated pool that is Gawker, will be noted as the day that old journalism was irrevocably adulterated. Not to issue a quote, mind you, but an entire 600-word guest post defending the labyrinthine, secretive modus operandi of the New Yorker institution.

What drew Susan Orlean — staff writer since 1986 and author of the excellent The Orchid Thief — into the welcoming arms of the media gossip site? It was Dan Baum, who decided over a week ago to tweet the story of his “firing” from the magazine.

What I’d really like to know is how this guest post came about. Surely Orlean would not have done this without a nod from those atop the invisible masthead (rumor has it that the New Yorker’s masthead exists between the 45th and 46th page of the magazine, just as John Cusack’s character in Being John Malkovich works on the 7 1/2 floor of an office building). Was this an approved hit job, signed off by David Remnick himself?

Gawker Media’s great video promo

Valleywag’s departing editor reflects on his time at Gawker Media

Owen thomasWhen I read the news on TechCrunch that Valleywag’s longtime editor, Owen Thomas, was leaving the gossip site, I wondered whether there was a bit of schadenfreude in this reporting. After all, TechCrunch’s founder, Mike Arrington, was a constant target of the Gawker Media blog and once famously ejected a Valleywag photographer from a party he was co-hosting simply because of the publication the photographer worked for. Not long before that Arrington had penned a melodramatic post titled, “When Will We Have Our First Valleywag Suicide?” arguing that giving the stars of Silicon Valley the same cutting treatment usually reserved for their celluloid brethren was uncalled for. “So how long will it be before Valleywag drives someone in our community to suicide?” the TechCrunch editor wrote. “My fear is that it isn’t a matter of if it will happen, but when.”

In a phone conversation with Thomas yesterday I reminded him of this post. “You know it’s interesting,” he said. “In their write up about me leaving they didn’t report on anyone killing themselves.”

Thomas, 37, has accepted a job as managing editor for NBC Bay Area and his last day at Gawker is next Friday. He signed onto Valleywag mid-2007, replacing Gawker founder Nick Denton, who had taken over the site after firing its previous editor.

Though Thomas wouldn’t give me any details on his new gig or how it came about, we discussed his tenure at Valleywag and how he and others under the Gawker masthead brought a skeptical, unflinching eye to an industry ripe for being disillusioned. As TechCrunch had noted, those who went to the valley were not accustomed to having their personal lives run through the tabloid shredder.

“Silicon Valley has long styled themselves as the new celebrities,” Thomas said. “But they think they are unlike a Hollywood actor or a New York media prince. They think they’re above the fray. They want to be famous, but only in ways they can control — probably like anyone else in the public eye. But there’s sort of this delusion in the valley that you can work on a product that touches hundreds of millions of people’s lives and then remain completely detached from their interest in you. And it’s just not realistic, it’s a fantasy to think that you’re going to start something like Google or Twitter and people aren’t going to want to know who you are and what your ideas are and what your intentions are for them.”

But he said that my thesis that Valleywag had somehow invented this kind of coverage was “ahistorical,” pointing to a site he had written for in the ’90s called Suck.com that had taken on people in the industry back then and continued to do so until its folding during the dot com bust. Still, he acknowledged that the blog, under his editorship, had honed its coverage so that he was “asking the questions that no one else was asking.” In a way, he said, the fact that PR companies and official spokespersons learned to avoid him like the plague was a blessing, because then he didn’t have to waste any time to get the “official lie.” Instead, Valleywag, like most Gawker blogs, made constant use of “tipsters,” regularly leaking memos, emails and the vitriol harbored by disgruntled valley employees.

Thomas said he enjoyed this kind of work because it derailed the self-serving narrative of most tech startups that claim they’re trying to change the world. “I will say that people in Silicon Valley really do want to change the world, but they want to change the world from one in which they’re poor to one in which they’re rich. They’ll try to say they’re trying to save the planet or change the world of media, or what have you, but people don’t come to Silicon Valley because they want to live in poverty knowing they contributed to the betterment of humanity. People come to Silicon Valley because they think they can do that and make a bundle at the same time. So you have the same emotions, the same greed, the same foibles that any other set of human beings have, perhaps made all the more interesting because these people are, let’s face it, people who are socially awkward, who are somewhat outcasts and view technology and the internet as sort of retreats from the ordinary demands that other human beings have to face day to day.”

Though Valleywag was launched as its own separate blog, it was recently rolled into the main Gawker site after Nick Denton announced that he wanted the Manhattan media blog to develop a more national focus (Valleywag’s new content still flows through the original URL as well). Thomas told me that he had wondered about this move initially, but that writing for Gawker’s much larger audience had increased his exposure in ways that only improved his reporting, in that he could write articles that were “consequently more important.” He noted that since joining the flagship blog its traffic has increased significantly.

Replacing Thomas is Gawker’s current night editor, Ryan Tate, who previously worked with Thomas when they were both journalists at Business 2.0. Thomas has always been a fan of his colleague’s work — he told me a humorous story in which both he and Denton coincidentally offered Tate a job at the exact same time — and that knowing that he would take over made him feel better about leaving Valleywag.

I asked Thomas about the enemies he has made over the years and whether he thought that ill will would carry on into his next career. But he replied that he had no enemies, that he was able to maintain proper emotional distance in such a way so that his personal views on these people wouldn’t compromise his writing.

“What I think people fundamentally misunderstood about my career at Valleywag is that I’m not angry at people,” he said. “I’m sad, I’m disappointed. They really could do so much better with their lives. And they have these kind of tragic flaws, like Greek heroes, and that’s the root of what makes a good story. Telling the stories the way that the valley people would like you to tell them — that they’re going from success to success, the brilliant brain flash, the inevitable happy ending — that’s not real. It’s not interesting. It’s at once false and boring. To tell the story with the raw truth is the right thing to do, and I make no apologies for it.”

And so what if Gawker, as it tends to do, decides to throw him through the tabloid shredder after his departure?

“You know, I’m sure if they do, I’ll richly deserve it.”

How much money can a journalist make writing for Talking Points Memo?

The Politico has an article detailing the grueling workload, high turnover rate, and content focus for the Polk award-winning blog Talking Points Memo. It also tells us how much the site is able to pay its 11 writers.

Most of TPM’s reporter-bloggers make between $24,000 and $40,000, according to sources, and those who survive at TPM clearly earn their keep. While describing TPM’s rapid pace, Marshall used words like “intense,” “scrambling,” and the in-house favorite, “full immersion.”

Not exactly Politico’s starting salary (which is reportedly very high) but well within the range of what you’d be paid starting out at most daily and weekly newspapers.

SoapBlox throws in the towel, gives up

UPDATED BELOW

Oh wow, SoapBlox, the host and blogging platform for dozens of mullet blogs, just abruptly gave up its fight against hackers today and shut down. What does this mean? It means that several very influential blogs just exploded overnight. Here’s an email I just received:

My sincere apologies for posting this to several lists all at once, but this is a serious issue:

We are so goddamned screwed right now.

I spoke to Paul Preston a little while ago on the phone, and SoapBlox, according to him, is dead. Hacked, not worth resuscitating, and would cost too much money to restore with his ISP. We need to stop this from happening — if it turns out to be a matter of money to at least get the dead sites back up so we can archive them until we can move them all to another platform, then I would personally and on behalf of the other bloggers who are TOTALLY SCREWED RIGHT NOW appreciate it if the folks receiving this message who are interested in the continued existence of easily-built-and-maintained state-level community blogs could commit to making this happen.

Again, only if that proves to be the issue. But several of us are in true DEFCON 1 freakout mode here, and there’s not a whole lot else we can do.

Thanks for your consideration.

–Joe
(formerly?) MN Progressive Project

And this was posted on the SoapBlox blog today:

It was a good ride, but it’s over.

Thanks for all the fish.

All these hackers messing with our stuff, and we here at SoapBlox have no clue what to do. We don’t have enough knowledge, time, money, or care to fix it.

So I hope the Hackers are happy.

If you want the data from your blog, we will get it. But we are not going to try and restore anything.

Consider this the “We’re Out of Business” post.

Most of the servers have been taken off line because they were being used to hack and exploit other websites. The hackers install this crap on servers after they get in. SoapBlox’s ISP then takes the servers off line.

We do not know when they will come back online.

We do not know if they will come back online.

UPDATE : My coworker Bill Buetler has a comprehensive roundup of the unfolding events.

Publisher of Consumer Reports buys Gawker Media’s Consumerist

Haha, this is rich. Consumers Union, the non-profit publisher of one of the only publications succeeding with online subscriptions (Consumer Reports), has purchased Consumerist.com from Gawker Media.

It’s an odd pair, considering that up until now Consumerist has made all its money on advertising and Consumer Reports doesn’t sell advertising. Does that mean that Consumerist will be some kind of loss leader to attract eyeballs? And the publisher claims it won’t fiddle with Consumerist’s editorial content, but given that Consumerist regularly publishes claims from consumers without much fact checking or seeking comment from the companies in question (I know, because they’ve published stuff I’ve sent them twice), I wonder whether Consumer Reports editors are worried about a tarnished image.


Blog Widget by LinkWithin