Slashdot Mirror


Blogs Are Eating Tech Media Alive

Heinz writes with an article in Forbes on how advertising in tech media is drying up and going — where else? — into specialist blogs and Google. "Silicon Valley is booming again. But if you work in tech media, there's blood on the floor. Take Red Herring. It hung onto its offices after getting the eviction notice earlier this month. But gossip site Valleywag is breaking story after story not just on its beat — but about its woes. Meanwhile, bigger publications are hurting too: Time Warner's Business 2.0 saw ad pages drop 21.8% through March from the same period a year ago; PC Magazine's editor in chief walked out the door after ad pages fell 38.8% over the same period; and one-time online powerhouse CNET is reporting growing losses even as the companies it covers flourish. It may be happening in tech first, but there's no reason the same thing won't happen, eventually, in every media niche."

21 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. They waste money on editors by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Funny

    Look at Slashdot, they don't need no stinkin' editors.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:They waste money on editors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not a matter of editors eating up all their money as it is that that they have a reputation for spanning their articles over 3 or 4 times as many pages as they should in a blatant attempt to get more 'clickthroughs' or 'eyeballs' or whatever they call it. If they used ads responsibly and had legitimate content, maybe people would think twice about either turning off their ad-blocking software or clicking on an ad or two. I know I would.

      --
      QuantumG seems like a guy who is bitter he isn't in the same position.

    2. Re:They waste money on editors by BillyBlaze · · Score: 5, Informative

      Multiple pages are annoying, yes, but the biggest problem is the lack of links. When talking about technology, there's usually a relevant web site. Blogs will link to it, maybe adding some commentary of their own. But most journalism is written with the intent that you'll learn everything you want to know from the article itself, or other articles from the same source. Unfortunately I'm not sitting on a bench in the park in 1960 reading a newspaper, I'm on the internet, and if your site won't link to more information about the subject at hand, I'll go somewhere that will. And I don't just mean links to related stories - I want links to other sites. I know it's scary, but don't worry, if your story is interesting, I'll open it in another tab, and I'll continue ignoring your ads when I close it.

    3. Re:They waste money on editors by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That might be part of it, but I think the main reason tech journalism is failing is because so much of tech journalism is really third rate regurgitation of company press releases. Journalism on the whole has been failing the public, but I think tech journalism has been on the leading edge of that failure.

      More broadly, mass media on the whole sucks. And now that it's possible for anyone to produce media, the suck monopoly is broken. There are a lot of sucky tech blogs out there, just like there's lots of bad video on you tube and crappy bands competing for attention on MySpace. Why buy mass media crap or read mass media crap when there is all this other crap? The mainstream can't compete with this inundation of crap, at least not without offering a quality product. And what are the chances of that?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    4. Re:They waste money on editors by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While I agree with almost everything that has been said by posters in this thread, no-one has yet commented on the round that was lethal. Most tech news sites are indeed full of ad-ridden republished press releases edited by people who are technically incompetent. Most tech blogs are indeed full of poorly written "commentary" with no original research. However, with so many blogs around, there are bound to be a few really good ones, which do offer thoughtful commentary, deep understanding of the issues covered, previously hard-to-find information, and/or original research.

      Such blogs also tend to link to other worthwhile source material by their nature. In addition, blogs typically support comments, or more usefully full-blown web forums, mailing lists or Usenet groups. The combination means informed people can share knowledge and ideas once the scene has been set by the good bloggers, and I imagine that most discerning geeks, having found a few such blogs as starting points, simply have no need to bother with the numerous low-quality sites any more. I know I don't...

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    5. Re:They waste money on editors by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why Tech sites are failing?
      1. The readers of tech sites know how to block ads. Heck I have so many wildcards in my ad blocking software that many times when I go to a new site I don't see any ads.
      2. They place ads in such a say as to demand that they are blocked. When they put the ad in the middle of the text that screams BLOCK ME NOW. And while your at it use a wild card. Also any ads that use Flash are also just asking to be blocked. I have to wonder if these people are just clueless or what? The real shame is that in print I value the ads. They are less intrusive and I often seek them out. On the Internet they tend to get into the way. Google ads are the exception.
      3. Lack of depth. Back in the good old days of Byte, Micro, Dr Dobbs, and Computer language the articles where great and in depth. Byte has articles on making your own EEG, SBC, and even how to make your own PC. When I mean make your own PC I mean actually making the motherboard not getting the latest form ASUS. Most articles these days are on which Core2Duo motherboard will let you over clock the cpu .5% more then the others or which $600 graphics card will get you 3 more FPS out of Oblivion.
      4. Web 2.0 Frankly between my.yahoo, iGoogle, and Slashdot I don't need to read any tech site every day.
      5. Bad journalism. This is the real killer. Why can't they stop trying to write flame bait?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  2. Not blogs, but forums by m0nkyman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anytime I want to research something now, I go to the appropriate forum. There are serious experts available at pretty much all of them. e.g: Want to learn about cellphones: HowardForums.com. Want to find out about military firearms: ar15.com . There's a site for everything.

    Blogs are great for some stuff, but forums are just killing the tech magazines, and the special interest stuff.

    --
    ~ a low user id is no indication I have a clue what I'm talking about.
    1. Re:Not blogs, but forums by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... want to find out about last week's news: slashdot.

    2. Re:Not blogs, but forums by GizmoToy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can agree with this. I rarely visit blogs for anything, but will often consult forums for just about everything. Tech support-type stuff is particularly well-suited to the forum/newsgroup format. This is especially true if you have a question you can't find a pre-existing answer for. Just the other day I had a non-trial question about Ruby On Rails, so I went over to RailsForum and had an answer within a few hours. So forums do have specific advantages over both blogs and traditional media.

      Perhaps the biggest advantage for blogs over traditional tech magazines would be product reviews, in my opinion. An online reviewer with dozens of user-posted comments is more reliable than a single possibly advertiser-paid reviewer.

    3. Re:Not blogs, but forums by mrbluze · · Score: 4, Funny

      Blogs are great for some stuff, but forums are just killing the tech magazines, and the special interest stuff.

      So while blogs are eating tech media alive, forums prefer to have tech media medium rare topped with firewire sauce, with a side of tarballs and microchips, washed down with a glass of wine... or something like that.

      --
      Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
    4. Re:Not blogs, but forums by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There needs to be a forums forum, where I can go to find which forums are authoritative on a given subject.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  3. Good by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If, and I hate to use this term, new media has taught me one thing it's that any press but a journal is horrible for science and technology. Time and time again some reporter is sent out to cover pseudoscience, or thinly disguised ads, as if it was actual technological or scientific news. I'm convinced that watered down reporting, writing to a level that should be insulting to a middle school student, is one of the main causes for the publics ignorance and rejection of science. The public isn't stupid, and they know that the watered down analogies to the library of congress are bullshit. I'm only hoping that the websites that also speak to the public at a five year olds level will follow after and people will will find themselves presented with the actual facts of the matter again.

    --
    Everything will be taken away from you.
  4. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've had it enough with mainstream media who are incompetent when they're not being corrupt.

  5. This won't decrease the amount of advertising by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As much as I hate advertising, this is probably a bad sign. Companies won't do less advertising - it works too well, but at least on CNET we know where (most of?) the ads are. Who is sponsoring this or that tech blog? We've already seen "scandals" like that, although blogs are mostly not journalism. It is probably a lot cheaper and effective to buy out a few blogs and get consistent long term shilling than it is to buy recognizable ads on a bigger site. It has consistently been safe to predict that in the future we will be subject to more and more marketing that is more pervasive and less recognizable than ever before. It never seems to end.

    --

    In Soviet America the banks rob you!
  6. They offer so little by DECS · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What do CNET and Business 2.0 offer beyond smart alec FUD columnists and advertiser-friendly reviews?

    It was sad to see most of the serious newspapers dry up, leaving nothing but wire fed papers that write to a 4th grade reading level.

    It was sad to see local radio stations dry up, leaving nothing but Clear Channel fed recordings from Texas.

    However, I have few tears for crappy magazines and their equally vapid online "portals" that never offered much in the first place.

    The real issue is that we've sold off the Fourth Estate to advertisers, and we have very little real journalism left. We're all fed our news from the same ~5 mega corps who own everything. We are not informed because we gave up our media to capitalism, which works well as a way to price widgets, but is not really very good at providing truth. It only knows how to provide marketing spin.

    Bloggers could provide some respite, but the Internet provides little in terms of a reputation system. Anyone can shout down unpopular truths, and any group can astroturf their marketing messages. Few people who follow Digg or Reddit links verify the credibility of sources they visit.

    We've traded our serious tradition of journalism for a cheap bit of daily entertainment from who knows where and a media buffet prepared by a market driven media.

    The fact that the least fit portions of our capitalist replacement for journalism are struggling to survive should be expected. The fact that our media is being run like a free market is the real story.

    RoughlyDrafted Magazine

  7. The problem is editorial, not structural by maynard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The reason these ads are moving to the blogs is because the readership is at the blogs. The reason the readership is there is because bloggers are picking apart opinion pieces throughout the editorial world and reshaping them by arguing against their positions. Thus, readership is fleeing commercial journalism because the commercial rags aren't offering what readers want.

    What do readers want? These days, a little fucking truth would help. I think we're all sick of the clear commercial bias inherent in all these supposed tech reviews and bullshit 'secretly sponsored opinion'. The same is happening in professional news. TV and cable news viewership is down. WAY DOWN. Why is that? Because they don't offer news.

    When these 'tech journals' hire a few more reporters and start publishing real news, you'll see their readers and advertisers follow right back. Because, frankly, the blog-0-sphere offers no substantial news reporting either.

  8. "Upside" went bust, too. by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    A few years ago, Upside magazine went bust. Since I own Downside, I looked into buying their domain, but the assets of Upside were eventually acquired by another tech publishing firm. The article didn't mention Upside, although they mentioned The Industry Standard and Business 2.0, which also tanked.

    We also lost Silicon Valley's newspaper, the San Jose Mercury News. It's been purchased by an outfit that runs cheesy suburban throwaways, and is being brought down to that level. It's still published, but nobody cares.

    And Murdoch is buying the Wall Street Journal. Soon, there will be very few information sources that actually go out and dig out news.

  9. Obligatory by adolf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I, for one, welcome our blog-spewing overlords!

    No, wait -- that's not what I mean at all. In fact, I mourn the loss of proper technical journalism in the world. Nobody bothers actually reviewing a product, or rendering an original opinion anymore.

    Instead, we get twelve pages of ads, with only sixteen paragraphs of whitewash, er, ahem, content spread amongst them.

    I miss seeing reviews produced by competent and well-qualified people about things other than the latest 7800GTX repack. Just try to find useful comparison information on printers, monitors, keyboards, or even simple mice. These products are the human interface for the machine and are therefore among the most important facets of it, but unless it's twice as expensive as it should be and is intended for a child's gaming rig then there will be no reviews of it in the blogs.

    There's a thousand disparate e-commerce reviews to wade through, sure, but at least they're typically honest. Blog entries (if you can find one related) all lack any semblance of depth or integrity.

    The dead-tree derivatives like C|Net and the remains of Ziff-Davis aren't any better these days, as they flail about trying to copy their blog competitor's attention-deficit formatting and lack of editorial oversight, managing only to add more misery to their already inevitable death.

    Absolutely nobody ever bothers setting up repeatable tests for comparative measurement of anything in this century unless it can be done in the form of a Quake benchmark. And even then, products offering 1-2% gain for the low-low price of $200 more than everything else in the review are proclaimed to be the "clear winner" by some spineless high-school kid who is afraid to write a bad review for fear that XFX or MSI or whoever will turn off the free hardware spigot in retaliation.

    The fact that I find Amazon and Newegg customer reviews by the clueless masses to be some of the most meaningful and useful information available makes me feel like we've lost something important. It's probably gone forever.

    I, for one, am not very happy about it.

  10. It's called RSS. by Gordo_1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    RSS helps sites by attracting busy people like me who don't have time to surf a dozen sites to find an interesting article. But at the same time it's killing them, because people like me surgically link in to read an article and then close the tab immediately, never so much as considering looking at other features of their site. (It probably doesn't help that I use adblock and overlay all Flash content with control buttons, but that's beside the point.)

    I skim approximately three mainstream news sources, a handful of blogs and a few independent news sites for RSS headlines that catch my attention. I spend the rest of my online time reading select forums that are mostly inhabited by people who present what I believe to be intelligent/interesting discourse (yes, believe it or not, that *does* include Slashdot from time to time).

    Guess how much time I spend surfing random links and going page to page within a site using their fancy ajax navigation elements? I don't know what the percentage is, but pretty close to zero. 40 page article about Nvidia's latest Geforce gizmo? Skip to conclusion, then go to three of their competitors' sites to see if they concur. There's just too much damn noise and information out there to do it any other way. I use RSS, del.icio.us and a few simple techniques to reduce the web into my own personal CliffsNotes. If I'm representative of any significant segment of the population, then no wonder mainstream news sites are hurting.

  11. A real tech magazine by slashbart · · Score: 4, Informative
    Circuit Cellar is doing fine, and has been doing fine for decades. It's the low to zero information content magazines that'll go away. Well, good riddance.

    The funny thing is that its founder Steve Ciarcia left then market leader Byte Magazine, because it was turning into an advertorial marketing rag. Guess which magazine no longer exists :-)

  12. Bullshit by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yours is a reasonable opinion, but at the same time a little unfair. Take Slashdot, for example. Everybody is always complaining about the lack of editorial quality, yadda yadda yadda. But very few people recognize the fact that Slashdot doesn't break any news.

    Slashdot is really a glorified blog. It aggregates news sources from all over, stories that its members think are interesting. But without the original sources that generate these stories -- media outlets who pay writers to produce stories -- outlets like Slashdot disappear.

    You claim that readers want "a little fucking truth." Fair enough. But, by definition, Slashdot isn't in a position to generate anything but "a little fucking opinion." And you can't hate on it for doing so. That's what it's here for.

    I spent three years as a senior editor at InfoWorld, and I certainly have a lot of criticisms to offer about the tech trade media industry. But I can say, with absolute certainty, that when trade media outlets like InfoWorld disappear you will all be sorry.

    It goes against almost every fiber of my cynical being to say this, but your subject heading is full of shit. The problem is one hundred percent structural, zero percent editorial.

    There has never been a tech reporter who has picked his baggy-eyed head up off a table and blurted out, "You know what? We need to do more stories about the iPhone." Not one. Editors might think that a 300-story onslaught about the iPhone sounds like a good idea, but only because we have people breathing down our necks, too -- people who are beholden to bullshit metrics like hit counts, which look a whole like hard statistics, but are infinitely less reliable than the reader surveys that they used to conduct on newspaper readers.

    The good tech reporters who have stuck with this industry know what they're talking about. They write the stories that blogs like Slashdot link to. They might get it wrong from time to time -- fine. You're all there to call them on it. But they're still providing a valuable service.

    What's really wrong with this industry is the same thing that's wrong with every industry -- the willingness to suck cock for money. If you're putting out a blog, and somebody offers you an opportunity to make a lot of money -- money, you gloatingly think, that won't be spent on a mainstream tech media outlet -- shame on you. The only reason that company was able to buy a story is because you sold it to them. Hope you brushed your teeth afterward.

    You can pull a statistic out your ass that says the readership is all going to blogs. Fine. But can you really blame the management of the media outlets when they hear something like that? The answer is predictable: More blogs.

    Blogs on blogs on blogs. It's great! Blogs don't cost us anything and readers trust blogs more than they do reporters, so screw the reporters' salaries and let's hire more bloggers. The answer is more corporate blogs. And folks like you eat it up.

    Yeah, you heard me right. Is the media industry going to shit? Corporate media is on the blame list, for sure. But first on the list is you. Have you ever written your Congressman? Probably not. But even if you have, it's probably futile to ask that you write to your favorite media outlets and ask -- even beg -- them to cover real news, and not just fluff pieces and fake stories.

    Media outlets cover bullshit because the metrics tell them that bullshit is what people want, plain and simple.

    Hell, the only reason that I still read Slashdot (check out my user ID) is because the demographic of the stories is so narrow that I can guarantee that 5/6 of the stories posted are about something I'm at least slightly interested in. I bet that's not true for half the Slashdot readers, though.

    Yes, the world of media is going to shit. Yes, I hate it. Damned if I can do anything about it on my own, though.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!