Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Phil
Is this you? Claim Profile »
1 ヶ月 ago
in Fine-tuning: Facebook makes Pages, Events ads more interactive on VentureBeat
I don't mean to be a troll, but this seems to have very pro-Facebook spin to it.
As an advertiser, I can imagine this artificially inflating ROI (more fans) while reducing the actual return (views of the message on a fan page). I guess that it depends how important you view the stream, since advertisers will get entry into that no matter how a user becomes a fan.
Just one opinion that all these little tweaks Facebook does aren't entirely altruistic or helpful.
As an advertiser, I can imagine this artificially inflating ROI (more fans) while reducing the actual return (views of the message on a fan page). I guess that it depends how important you view the stream, since advertisers will get entry into that no matter how a user becomes a fan.
Just one opinion that all these little tweaks Facebook does aren't entirely altruistic or helpful.
1 reply
Eric Eldon
Phil, everything you say is valid, except for the part about the "pro-Facebook spin" -- I'm not trying to be pro-Facebook. Overall, these changes seem like a good idea to me because they mean less clicking around. In the past, some social network advertising has been focused on making people click around more to create more impressions. As you said, I think the stream is important, much more important than getting an initial click to a fan page.
1 年 ago
in 2007/12/13/citizen-journalism-dangerous-and-irresponsible/ on Mashable - The Social Media Guide
Old media is held responsible through something called "litigation". Bloggers are responsible through comments. Which is more effective?
One necessitates a company check an idea before publication; the other rewards publishing first and checking later. Which is more effective in helping the public get the right idea about a product or event?
As blogs become more influential- see Engadget's various stock-shifting fiascos over the years- hopefully they will be held to old media standards. Until then, the nature of the respective corrective processes incentivizes blogs to publish first and ask questions later. That's the wrong order.
One necessitates a company check an idea before publication; the other rewards publishing first and checking later. Which is more effective in helping the public get the right idea about a product or event?
As blogs become more influential- see Engadget's various stock-shifting fiascos over the years- hopefully they will be held to old media standards. Until then, the nature of the respective corrective processes incentivizes blogs to publish first and ask questions later. That's the wrong order.
1 reply
Mark \
Clearly you cling to the old school definitions of what journalism is. It's no longer time of publication and pre-fact checking.
It's conversation starting, and distilling the truth.
Often, the blog post is just the catalyst for the discussion that ends up getting to the bottom of things.
I agree that blogging, as a journalistic medium, isn't perfect. I disagree that it is in any way inferior to the old system. Furthermore, I don't think it's the logical conclusion of what New Media should be - it's just the stopping point where we currently reside.
It's conversation starting, and distilling the truth.
Often, the blog post is just the catalyst for the discussion that ends up getting to the bottom of things.
I agree that blogging, as a journalistic medium, isn't perfect. I disagree that it is in any way inferior to the old system. Furthermore, I don't think it's the logical conclusion of what New Media should be - it's just the stopping point where we currently reside.
1 年 ago
in 2007/12/13/citizen-journalism-dangerous-and-irresponsible/ on Mashable - The Social Media Guide
I'm guessing that Thomas is referring to the fact that most blogs rarely, if ever, fact check their work before publishing, frequently have massive conflicts of interest that are irregularly addressed, employ writers who don't even maintain a pretense of objectivity, blur ad sales and editorial until the two are identical, publish articles that only casually follow basic grammatical and spelling guidelines, and, perhaps worst of all, tolerate petty ad hominem attacks like the one you've just written which, instead of addressing possible intellectual flaws in an argument through rigorous research and logic, cherry picks examples and focuses on irrelevant issues like the way a reporter looks.
That's just a guess...
That's just a guess...
1 reply
Mark \
Here's the difference you and the rest of those uneducated in the ways of new media completely miss: Old Media (i.e. the media that Thomas loves so darn much) has no self-correcting features (like the ones described in my piece and the process in which we are now engaged).
Next?
Next?
