wirtes’s Techdirt Profile

wirtes

About wirtes




wirtes’s Comments comment rss

  • Jan 7th, 2010 @ 12:05pm

    Ad disabled when warranted

    I run AdBlockPlus in Firefox, but I'm careful to unblock it on the sites that give me real value, like TechDirt.com.

    Seriously.

  • Dec 30th, 2009 @ 5:26am

    Streisand Effect?

    I'd love to see Seppukoo's Google Analytics since the LA Times picked up the story...

  • Dec 28th, 2009 @ 4:04pm

    Has the NYT "disappeared" his OpEd from their "Most Popular" block?

    His OpEd is down at #10 on Most Emailed & doesn't even register on Most Searched. Why is the NYT using their clout at the newspaper of record to subvert Foundem?

  • Nov 9th, 2009 @ 10:46am

    And Texas will secede from the USA

    This is saber rattling, plain and simple. Businessmen usually make this type of statement during a negotiation to strengthen their position, though I fail to see how this helps Rupert/FOX.

    I actually WELCOME Fox News being removed from Google. I've been requesting that Google News give me the ability to EXCLUDE FOX News from their iGoogle News module since launch. I don't WANT to see them, but I can't seem to filter them out of the aggregator's feed.

  • Nov 3rd, 2009 @ 9:25am

    Streisand Effect, Anyone?

    I didn't know that this was even possible. Now I do.

    Wanna bet we see a spike in modded cable modems?

  • Oct 29th, 2009 @ 9:47am

    Imma let you Finnish, but...

    I was once a very junior executive in Knight-Ridder, fresh out of B-F Indiana. After a rather informal meeting with other executives, a senior executive pulled me aside and said, "I can't believe that I heard the word 'irregardless' come out of your mouth -- that is not a word! You're not a hayseed. You work for the second largest newspaper chain in the country. Speak like it."

    Was he a jerk? You bet.

    Have I ever said "irregardless" again? Not even once.

    Take the criticism and an opportunity. Grammar matters.

  • Sep 21st, 2009 @ 6:22am

    You guys are SOOOO blogosphere!

    So what did Obama actually say?


    • He'd READ a rescue bill for newspapers.

    • There is much less context and fact checking in the news today.

    • When you loose context/fact checking in favor of opinion/dogma, you end up with a bunch of people yelling at each other.


    I agree with the president on all three points. Obama is fond of standing in Detroit or Ohio and saying "these jobs are gone, and they're not coming back. We need a new plan." He needs to say the same thing to newspapers.

    Unfortunately for newspapers, as they were bought up by large conglomerates, corporate management found that it was cheaper to make a paper that consisted largely of ads (display and classified) with syndicated content wrapped around them. Actual reporting, when it occurred, was limited due to the expense of actually reporting.

    This worked fine when there were only one or two sources for this syndicated content in any given region.

    But the internet exploded that monopoly on syndicated content. Now there are literally thousands of sources for the same content. Oh, yeah, and there's Craig's List. Suddenly, people don't want to pay for day-old syndicated content printed on dead trees.

    If Obama rescues newspapers -- which I'm betting he won't -- you can be assured that he'll make actually reporting on your community a requirement for rescue.

  • Sep 4th, 2009 @ 6:58am

    Dead On

    You're dead on with this. Newspapers are only in this pickle because they don't understand how their market is changing.

    It's an entire industry whose leaders are in denial. These are the death throes.

  • Sep 3rd, 2009 @ 7:15am

    Apple did this with .Mac

    After their horrible week(s) of botched .Mac service following the iPhone launches in 2008, Apple credited all .Mac customers 3 months free without anyone asking.

    Nice move, but I still turned off auto-renew & let my service lapse.

    I'm betting that proactive credits are more common that you think. Large, faceless corporations are still run by human beings. And a certain percentage of those human beings understand the positive marketing value of not acting like a large, faceless corporation.

  • Sep 2nd, 2009 @ 7:17am

    Providing all the value

    The book industry provides three kinds of value to authors:

    1. Production/Distribution - so you get paid
    2. Marketing/Promotion - so people know about your book
    3. Professional Editing - so your book doesn't suck

    Robin Sloan appears to have the first two covered, but does anyone know if he's self-editing? Seems that this business model has to cover #3 if it's going to take off in a big way. Even Salinger had an editor.

  • Aug 20th, 2009 @ 11:02pm

    People ARE paying for content...

    ...they pay with their time.

    While users spend money on a few websites, they spend a lot more of their time on the Interwebs.

    The leaders in the newspaper industry should concentrate on giving their users more value for the time they spend with them.

  • Aug 14th, 2009 @ 4:24am

    This ship has sailed

    When I first had access to the AP wires in the early 1990s, I thought it was Nirvana. Perusing (relatively) unfiltered news in (almost) real time was stuff of science fiction -- and I was using a PDP-11 green screen terminal. I felt like I could make my own, personal newspaper. I read the wires incessantly.

    Then I beta tested MyYahoo, and it WAS my own personal newspaper.

    My point is that like most of the newspaper industry, the AP has become a bit player in a business that they once owned. And while this idea is the best one they've come up with yet, it's a decade late.

    The AP is struggling for relevance in world of free information. And by blocking/charging for/restricting information, they will become increasingly irrelevant.

    My prediction is that in a year or so, you'll see the AP move to a more Wikipedia-like format where more people are allowed into their distribution channel as both creators (expert bloggers) and consumers (aggregator blogs). But that will only be after the company has been de-valued by half again. And they'll be struggling not to stay relevant, but to stay alive.