...while [Time Inc.] claims that none of its titles lose money, it has seen earnings fall by nearly 65 percent since 2006. The number of advertising pages in the flagship Time has dwindled by 50 percent over the past five years. Even People is sputtering: Newsstand sales slid 12 percent last year, and the news budget has been cut in half. Layoffs have become an annual rite. In the past four years, Time Inc. has churned through three CEOs and endured nine months during which there was no single executive running the company.
New York Magazine on Time Inc.
, the split from Time Warner, native advertising and the company's attempts at digital media. [more inside]
AdDetector is a browser extension that spots articles with corporate sponsors.
It puts a big banner on top of any article that may appear unbiased at first glance, but is actually paid for by an advertiser.
For example, it turns the small, light-grey-on-white "Sponsored" on this deadspin article
into a giant red banner.
"Native advertising" previously.
is an ambitious new automated application built by the Washington Post, which fact checks political speeches, ads and interviews "in as close to real time as possible.
" The prototype is intended to be a complement to the paper's Fact Checker Blog
. More on the project from TechCrunch
Ben Kuchera, a video games journalist who has written for Wired
, Ars Technica
, and now the Penny Arcade Report
, discusses the seedy underbelly of Kickstarter promotion
How To Save Media
Jason Ponti from Technology Review offers some suggestions as to how traditional print publishers might save themselves from becoming irrelevant.
Sony writes 'article' for Salon.
In an effort to find new revenue streams, Salon has published an ad/article written by Sony Corp. National Geographic
and Parent Soup
have also published ad/articles, though the New York Times said no
. While the articles do not directly reference Sony products, the feature people who do fascinating things with technology... technology which, it just so happens, is advertised conveniently right next to the technology featuring passage.
Is this sort of thing ever ethical? If so, what sort of disclosures are necessary. Clearly the ad/articles are intended to appear to be regular content.
MSNBC taking advantage of high site traffic; FORCING ads.
Personally I'm speechless. I think every other major site out there (no doubt the crippled Yahoo also) is doing this oor will be in the upcoming hours.
Kottke.org, now with x10 ads.
Sad, but true. I don't like them, but I suppose if you need the money... Look in the source for confirmation:
var url = "http://ads.x10.com/bluefish/bf23.htm";
var domain = "kottke.org";
at least the girl in the camera ad is kinda cute.
Is this a typo?
Salon's David Talbot in the NYT: "'A lot of our audience pays $300 a year to join National Public Radio and they don't have to pay anything,' he said. As early as next year, Mr. Talbot said, Salon hopes to impose a fee of $75 to $150 a year to read any of its site with ads."
Now, I would have read that last sentence as "to read any of its site without ads", but perhaps I'm just being naive.
Salon's new strategy: make the banner ads AS ANNOYING AS HUMANLY FUCKING POSSIBLE.
Now it's either the subscription model
or horrifying Flash ads that take up more column inches than the articles. Are they on crack, or merely dumb?
'Is media bias real?', part two:
Left-leaning media criticism folks FAIR
have produced a report detailing some examples of of publishers, advertisers, and government officials killing stories they don't like and placing stories they do. What about the Chinese Wall between the business of news and the actual newsgathering? To quote a CBS news producer on the distinction between entertainment and news, "That line was over a long, long time ago....That line is long gone."
Is this annoying to anyone else?
I usually get most of my news from either ABCnews.com or CNN.com, then this morning I noticed that every time I load ABCnews, an annoying ad banner pops up for AT&T over the browser toolbar. I know that big sites have used popups before (usually as announcements or something else), but an ad popup on such a major site seems like an even further blurring of that line between media and advertising. I guess I'm switching news sources.
Salon gives in.
Back to readability, baby.
Stupid new marketing word of the day: "Advertorial" (spotted on this NY Times page
). Here's a screenshot
- what exactly are they trying to say? Do their advertisements now contain editorial copy that should help shoppers make a more informed decision, or are they just trying to fool us into thinking these advertisements have more credibility because they are "editorialized"? (disclaimer: I hate marketing BS)