Disqus - Latest Comments for Lucas

Re: Hey Google — stop linking to us

Lucas — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 21:22:52 -0000

I agree with Rob. This is about who gets to be readers' first stop to find local information. And there's a lot of money at stake in the answer.

If a reader hears about something happening in his or her community and goes to Google to find more about it, then the newspaper's brand is eroded. And, it's Google then who can capitalize on being considered a reliable source for local news. They're already trying to capitalize by providing business directory listings, etc.

Newspapers need to protect their brand more than they need to harvest empty page views from Google. When someone searches on Google, then finds a link to a newspaper, it's Google who gets credit for being the reliable source, not the newspaper. The person is more likely to use Google, not the newspaper. Aren't we trying to increase usage of our sites, not Google's?

Those one-off pages linked from Google aren't of any value to advertisers. They'd rather not be on those pages at all.

So these links do drive up page views? But they're worthless page views that do more damage than anything else.

Re: Hey Google — stop linking to us

Lucas — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 21:58:51 -0000

Google undestands branding. One of the big reasons it launched Google News is to protect it own brand as your source to find anything and everything.

If a person hears about something going on in their community and begins searching for more information about it, Google wants to be their first stop. They want to be the first stop for finding anything. They don't necessarily care about providing news, just answers.

If you can't understand branding, you won't understand my argument.

Re: Hey Google — stop linking to us

Lucas — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 22:47:47 -0000

You're absolutely right. If Google becomes known as a content provider (meaning people can find the content they want there, via links or otherwise) then newspapers are to blame. That's why I'm advocating they stop providing content to Google.

Re: links for 2007-02-19

Lucas — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:33:39 -0000

Since you've mentioned the IHT story about the Norwegian newspaper, I want to point out that the figure in the story that says 20 percent of the company's revenues is incorrect. The correct word to use there would have been profits, not revenues. Big difference. I've contacted the media relations folks at Schibsted, who have sent the correct numbers, which I've posted in the comments at my blog about the story.

Re: links for 2007-04-08

Lucas — Sun, 08 Apr 2007 08:36:28 -0000

If you've read the posts about this Sam Zell flare up, then you know I'm the minority report on the subject. Most people have reacted like Jason, flying off the handle about how Zell is a moron who doesn't know anything about the Internet.

I just ask that people take a moment to consider the billionaire might have some experience and insight. I have. And I think he's got a point, which I explain at my blog.

Re: New York Times: The Top Player in This League? It May Be the Sports Reporter

Lucas — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 22:41:59 -0000

I saw the Times article, as well. Seems like it could be a harbinger of things to come, which might include the loss of standalone local sports sections altogether.

Re: MiamiHerald.com: Journalism becoming a consumer product

Lucas — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:33:48 -0000

Too bad the entire lead of the column is wrong. I've called for a correction to be issued.

Re: Sam Zell misinformed about Google

Lucas — Sun, 08 Apr 2007 10:15:08 -0000

Any suggestion that The Washington Post should have challenged Zell’s assertion that Google makes money from Google News is short-sighted. Google makes plenty of money from Google News.

By driving up links to newspaper Web sites, loads of remnant inventory is created on those sites. Since local advertisers have no interest in these one-off page views, the remnant space is most often filled with Google AdSense ads. This isn’t coincidence. Google understands the effect of driving up remnant inventory via Google News.

All multi-billion dollar companies are in it for the money, Google included. They’re not featuring Google News prominently on their ever-so-sparse home page just to be nice.

Read more about why Zell is right, and Jason is wrong, on my blog.

Re: What If Google Never Succeeds With Offline Advertising?

Lucas — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:04:36 -0000

Google's problem isn't that its online success doesn't translate to radio. It's that Google isn't exactly mimicking the success it had online in its radio efforts. Google's technology is disruptive, so to be successful it needs to follow the business model of disruption. Start in the low-end market and then slowly work upward.

Re: The Real Problem For YouTube

Lucas — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:19:28 -0000

There's no future for any site that redistributes copyrighted information without the permission of the content's owner. More companies should follow Viacom's lead. Take your clips off YouTube and put them on your own site with all the same services.

Then if YouTube wants to make the embed code searchable on its own site, so be it. It's not like Google copies everyone's Web sites. It's indexing them. YouTube should take a similar tact. My guess is that if YouTube accepted feeds of video embed tags, then media companies would line up to send clips.

Re: Can Pay-For-Performance Improve The Quality Of Content On The Web?

Lucas — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 22:40:12 -0000

It seems everyone on here lives in a world without editors. The only people rewarded in these plans for huge page views are the reporters. And in traditional worlds, all of those reporters have editors, whose job it is to filter out the onslaught of sensationalist crap you doomsdayers predict.

Even at Gawker there are site leads who Denton says (if you read the memo) can strike the page view bonus from any post they deem inappropriate.

And since when are reporters in this business for the money? It's going to take a bit more for all of them to just drop their principles.

I'm a big supporter of the plan and have been for a while.