Why traditional ‘print’ media is doomed
It’s their own fault.
Recently, I had the pleasure of being interviewed for a front page story at the LA Times and a feature spread in BusinessWeek. I have a huge amount of respect for both publications, and was honored to be interviewed. And the interviews themselves didn’t disappoint – both reporters were extremely thorough, knowledgeable, and detailed. There were lots of follow-up calls, and both stories were then exhaustively fact checked and reviewed by an army of editors. Everything top-notch publications are supposed to do, they did, and then some.
Blogging has become my go-to resource for up-to-the-minute news, but both these interviews really brought home for me why traditional media continues to be so much better at well-researched pieces. So great, right? They each have a business niche. Traditional media can focus on deeply researched articles and exposés while bloggers cover all the timely news and commentary. Traditional media can still thrive – it’s not gonna die.
Wrong.
Where these august publications fell down was in their online presentation. Someone running these businesses hasn’t figured out that their online business model is advertising. They’ve made it impossible to link to their articles directly (ie, drive money-making traffic to them). On the LA Times’ site, nearly every link you can find forces you to log in to view the content. Lots of people have told me, personally, that they couldn’t read the article because they weren’t going to sign in. Imagine how many people don’t know me or simply didn’t speak up and just walked away.
And BusinessWeek is far, far worse. BusinessWeek actually asked us specifically *not* to link to the article. Yes, that’s right, an ad-driven publication doesn’t want us to drive traffic to them. They were kind enough to point us to their User Agreement where, sure enough, they prohibit deep linking. Talk about stupid. Ok, fine, so I’ll link to Google (who’s apparently allowed to deep-link?) and they’ll link you to the article for me. Like so – this link behaves like a deep-link, but in reality I’m linking to Google, who’s redirecting you to the article. (Ironically, this is nerfing BusinessWeek’s PageRank so they show up lower in Google than other publications that allow deep-linking).
I can’t imagine what must be going through the minds of the stellar reporters and editors they have at the LA Times and BusinessWeek, but I’ll bet “frustration” is only the very tip of the iceberg. To spend all of this time and energy on their articles, only to have the crazy business people make it impossible for people to read their work, must be incredibly trying.
On a related note, try clicking the ‘Digg This’ icon at the end of the LA Times story. You’d think this would be a smart way to drive traffic, no? It would be, except they’re sending digg *Page 2* of the story – so even if it makes Digg’s homepage, people clicking through will start in the middle of the story, instead of the beginning. I’ll bet that makes the LA Times a lot of money. Not.
After doing these stories, I’m more likely than ever before to trust stories from publications like the LA Times and BusinessWeek – but less likely to link to them.
Feed readers: Click here to digg this.
Tags: blogs, BusinessWeek, digg, LA Times, smugmug, traditional media
January 24th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Wow, I can’t believe they won’t let you link. I feel the same way, I am letting my subscriptions to a couple magazines die, and I am about ready to cancel the newspaper, as all they do is reprint the socialistic crap from the AP and only talk about Hillary Obama and never talk about underdogs like Ron Paul.
How true your comments are! The print media is dying….
January 24th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
I am amazed that big companies are still doing this sort of thing in 2008.
In 1998 it was stupid, but relatively understandable given that the people making the policy decisions were were likely to be in the 50+, suit wearing demographic and unlikely to be internet users. Internet usage in that demographic is now significant, so fighting against the flow must just be pure obstinacy.
January 24th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Next time, tell your friend who didn’t want to register to check http://www.bugmenot.com/ for a login. It usually works pretty well for the major sites.
January 25th, 2008 at 9:05 am
Hmmm. I think BW’s linking possible is not only dumb and impossible, its possibly not within their right to govern. Its like saying that you must refer to BW in a certain way if you are using it in normal conversation with your friends…
Overall I disagree. You’ve only cited two companies that have awful policies and worse sites. They will get eaten by the other sites with much better web policies (NYT etc.)
January 25th, 2008 at 9:11 am
[...] read more | digg story [...]
January 25th, 2008 at 9:30 am
I have on my blog an analysis of the new media and its impact to its quality. Maybe you’ll find it interesting; I talk mostly about Romanian media but I think it applies to other countries as well: http://my.opera.com/alex_boly/blog/2008/01/15/the-new-media-is-coming-to-romania-too
January 25th, 2008 at 9:34 am
so they’re doomed because they don’t embrace the web like you do? what if they decide to change their ways? according to you it’s too late for that and they’re doomed no matter what……right.
yes, they’re behind the curve and need to make some changes. calling them doomed is probably going a bit overboard here.
January 25th, 2008 at 9:44 am
erie6, are you that clueless? Get a clue.
BW was busted for being stupid. They have shown no signs that they learn anything new.
So unless they *change* then they are doomed. There are no signs to indicate that they are changing.
Dang noobs, get off the Net. You’re making the InterTubes Cry.
January 25th, 2008 at 9:55 am
I’m a member — and strong supporter — of the traditional print media. But this article is right. Many of the print media’s owners, publishers and editors simply don’t understand what’s going on. They’re trying to run their websites with a print media mindset and mentality. They just cant seem to think outside the print media box. It’s truly sad. When the Internet goes completely wireless, you’ll see print media taking its last gasps. And unfortunately, many wont survive the transition to the Web.
January 25th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Thanks for the well written article. I have had a problem with this ossified thinking ever since the Internet went public.
I was working for the University of Wisconsin as a graphic designer in 1991 and told my boss I wanted to charge departments for designing and upkeep of University websites. I was met with, “Why would a Graphic Designer want to know HTML?” When I said that video would go through the Internet I was told that “The pipe is too small” and “No one will want to watch video in a small window on their computers” and “We will never go faster than 28.8 modem speed.” and on and on and on.
I did save the newspaper article that quoted Bill Gates as saying that the Internet will never amount to anything.
Could someone please hire me as a consultent for God’s sakes? I hate to see so much ignorance out there causing so much loss of revenue.
January 25th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Oh, I am 50 years old.
January 25th, 2008 at 11:26 am
I wholeheartedly agree with you. Not only is traditional media slow on the draw, but in many ways so is the traditional music industry. We’ll see who makes it and who doesn’t.
However, I disagree on one point. I don’t think the quality of traditional media is better. Yes they cross-check their sources, but not in a truly scientific way. What we get in traditional media is merely a reiteration of whatever established “experts” say. Sometimes experts are correct and sometimes they are not. I think the new media is better because it mixes this established “expert” view with the average Joe. Some are more well-read than others, but I’d rather make my own decision about that than just lap up whatever the “experts” say.
January 25th, 2008 at 11:32 am
This post has NOTHING to do with PRINT media and why it might be doomed. Don’s arguments only do to show that BusinessWeek and LA Times have lousy online policies. What does that have to do with their print business?
I don’t think you are talking about print media at all. You trying to show us that older publishers, publishers that started out as print businesses, are fundamentally incapable of getting it right online…right?
…which is still a dopey premise. Why can’t you just comment on BW and LA Times without making a huge sweeping statement about the future of print media?
January 25th, 2008 at 11:58 am
[...] !!! [...]
January 25th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
The same basic prediction was made about radio. Television was once dismissed as a fad that couldn’t last more than a few years.
Print “media” (a deliberately shapeless, nearly useless term) will not go away. Lots of people, old and young and in-between, simply like it and want it. They want to read newspapers, magazines, and books. Some newspapers, magazines, and books will fail, and others will succeed, as always. But the forms will remain for much longer than Mr. M expects.
January 25th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
The technical problems are not going to cause the demise of newspapers, though it sure doesn’t help. The real problem is funding reporters and editors with online advertising. It doesn’t pay the bills yet and it seems unlikely ads will anytime soon.
January 25th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I encountered a similar problem where I work when we were featured in a cover story in BW. The story was good, but for all the time and effort we did not even receive a link, despite being the main featured advertiser and providing unique data and analysis. It was still a big win and the reporters were professional and knowledgeable, but for traffic and pagerank it actually would have made more sense to go after a popular blogger on the subject.
Print won’t go away but as more readers flock to online the inability of many traditional publishers to monetize quickly enough combined with decreasing circulation could pose quite a significant challenge. Further, as more advertisers realize the targeting and ROI of online advertising budgets will be pulled from print and other sources to online. This is already causing layoffs and downsizing in many publications and it is only going to get worse if these companies do not reinvent themselves.
Michael @ SEOG
January 25th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
A few years ago the Providence Journal was bought by Dallas based Belo Corp. Since that time the paper is pretty much fit to line the cat littler pan and not much else.
They too require compulsory registration to read full articles. And more chillingly they won’t allow you to paste into the login field which defeats BugMeNot.
It’s gotten so bad though that they have people in the stores at least once a week giving away papers.
January 25th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Well, from a publishers POV, their business model has their website revenue as frosting (companies that spend lots of money on print ads are given “value added” ads online etc…). Traditional magazine business models are based on sales from advertising and subscriptions to their PRINT publication- so why would they want someone to be able to link to their page and read the article for free? They want you to get up from your computer and go look at their pretty CMYK ads.
I am not quite sure if print is dead (and since I am one thesis away from my masters in publishing I hope not) but it certainly needs a facelift, a pairing with online sites. Don’t get me wrong, there are lots of magazines who have website that charge for their online content and this response is a really simple explanation of the magazine industry but I hope it sheds some light on why something seemingly simple and obvious would be turned down like that.
January 25th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
I tend to agree with many of the comments here that print media will not die. Even though I spend most of my day online and get most of my news through the Internet I still like to read the paper on the way to work and relax with the Sunday morning paper. Print media is in the midst of a huge change though. They do see fewer subscribers and that means less in ad revenue. That’s why many newspapers give away free papers on occasion. I get the Sunday Star Ledger but every once in a while they will send a weekday issue. It’s not because they want to be nice. They are essentially inflating their readership numbers so they can charge a bit more for advertising.
The savvy print media publishers will find a way to incorporate their online presence with their traditional publications and extract ad revenue with the combination of the two. NY recently opened up much of their content. This has allowed them to increase Internet visitors and therefore increase online ad revenue. There are ways to leverage the power of the Internet to drive users towards ad supported (free) content as well as content that users must pay for. WSJ and others are working within this model and it will be interesting to see how it evolves.
As far as not allowing links, I agree that is dumb. Most bloggers understand the value of a link but some traditional publishers simply don’t. I have a feeling that will change too.
January 25th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Yup they are doomed, and with the price of gas 3x what it used to be they have refused to help out those who deliver their crap. Unless they all find some interesting reason to make a person walk outside for a newspaper when all the news a person wants can be pulled up online, there’s no hope.
The company my family works for is one of the biggest, McClatchy, and they have really started sticking it to us. Instead of just delivering the local paper we now deliver the USAToday, NYTimes, WSJ, Barrons, Investors Business Daily, Financial Times, all of which have a higher cover price and rate than the local paper. Guess who is keeping that extra profit? Not us poor suckers who deliver them. They also have this lovely model of calling you an independent contractor, so you have get no benefits, no days off yet they work us like employees, telling us when and how.
We get no extra copies of these other papers in case of shortages or damaged papers, yet they direct the customer complaints to us. The rumor is they are going to start charging us for complaints next. At $1.00 each (Twice the cover price of the local paper) the many complaints will diminish our paychecks even further after gas & taxes.
January 25th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
[...] MacAskill recently ranted on how much of a closed community traditional print media companies impose on their users. While I [...]
January 25th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
You made an easy criticism of these publications over their linking policies. But I was a bit disappointed.
Why do you think these publications have these linking policies in the first place?
What I was looking for in your post was an analysis of why the business models of these print publications force them to do things with their websites that are anti-thetical to anyone with the least bit of web savvy, compared with what you would expect them to do, and find an argument as to why the latter is superior.
Instead, we’re offered the same usual complaints that any casual observer can make.
January 26th, 2008 at 8:31 am
[...] publications should try to control where and how you link to them, right? Wrong. According to a post by Don McAskill, CEO of image-sharing site SmugMug, BusinessWeek specifically asked him not to link directly to a [...]
January 26th, 2008 at 8:32 am
[...] publications should try to control where and how you link to them, right? Wrong. According to a post by Don McAskill, CEO of image-sharing site SmugMug, BusinessWeek specifically asked him not to link directly to a [...]
January 26th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Speaking of the LA Times and BusinessWeek…
BusinessWeek Revenue Awful, Layoffs Coming Soon?
http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/01/businessweek-revenue-awful-layoffs-coming-soon-mhp.html
Editor Fires Parting Shot at His Chain
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/business/media/22paper.html
January 26th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Don,
Awesome write up of a complicated subject!
Thanks
January 26th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
[...] of talk about Don MacAskill’s post detailing his experiences with BusinessWeek and the LA Times. Reading the bits about the Times [...]
January 27th, 2008 at 12:11 am
It is also probable that they don’t allow deep linking because of their partners requiring the exclusivity. As you know the little world of big medias are controlled by more or less the same financial elites.
January 27th, 2008 at 9:17 am
While I think Business Week’s no deeplinking policy is a little repressive, I don’t think this in and of itself spells the end of traditional media. Traditional media have screwed themselves in so many other ways. The LA Times and other papers with a “YOU MUST REGISTER” policy are far bigger barriers. Though I should add that I am registered with the LAT, as well as the NYT and Wash. Post, among others.
I found the article about you and your family by going to the BW home page and putting in your name in the easily found search box. That’s a lot easier than linking to Google. And I pasted in your name from the Slashdot blurb that mentioned this issue. I’d rather do that than follow a deep link in a blog that may be out of date in as little as seven days.
As a former longtime newspaper reporter myself, I still get the vast majority of my news from traditional media. I probably don’t need to go into the deep mistrust I have for blog “reporting.” And most bloggers don’t report anyway, they just rehash, opine and whine about news they’ve read from traditional media sources. Thanks, but I’ll go to the source and think for myself.
January 27th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Ooops, the article I pasted your name from was on CNET News. My friend emailed it to me and said Slashdot and even though I clicked through to CNET, I had Slashdot on the brain. See why fact checkers are good??
January 28th, 2008 at 2:22 am
Why does BusinessWeek have “Add to Digg” and “Add to delicious” buttons on its story tools?
January 28th, 2008 at 8:09 am
[...] web traffic! Turns out they don’t want your stinking clickthroughs. As a recent story subject discovered, should you be inclined to push traffic their way via a direct “deep link” to a story, [...]
January 28th, 2008 at 9:27 am
Well, Businessweek is just a terrible periodical. So it would be expected there. The LA Times is probably like most newspapers, it sees its market declining because of free online news, but doesn’t see anywhere near the revenue from online ad sales that it does from selling its print edition.
January 28th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
How incredibly stupid and nearsighted of Business Week. In terms of the L.A. Times, that is one of my regular sources for material for my blog, but the fact that they put their stories behind the paid firewall after a week has caused me to reduce my use of their articles as citations in my blog entries. Typically I will grab a fractional piece of an article for one of my posts, and of course include a link to the full article in the original publication, then add my own thoughts to my posting. But that is kind of pointless if the L.A. Times articles can’t be opened, freely and easily by my readers when they try to link to it.
So here I am trying to send eyes to the L.A. Times, that just might visit other content on the Times website, including ads, and the Times makes it all but impossible.
Incredibly short sighted.
January 28th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
I had just submitted an article on SmugMug for next Friday’s Mountain View Voice – and you should be able to link to it! The Mountain View Voice’s sister paper, the Palo Alto Weekly which according to its website was ” the first paper in the United States to publish its editorial content to the World Wide Web in January 1994.”
And for those who still like newspaper layouts, each section of the Mountain View Voice (www.mv-voice.com) is available in PDF format.
I have made a new screen for my iPhone just for newspapers – thanks Steve for the latest feature – so those that don’t get the web will be in Big Trouble.
January 29th, 2008 at 12:22 am
[...] about more about BusinessWeek’s ‘revolutionary business model’ over at Gawker, SmugMug, and on the Tech news [...]
January 29th, 2008 at 2:10 am
Uhoh – you’re deeplinking to their user agreement page in this blog post. Better remove that link before they come after you!
Ridiculous.
Their robots.txt does not disallow gatehring links for their articles:
http://www.businessweek.com/robots.txt
(Uhoh… now I’m deep-linking to their site in this comment also, better stop here)
/Michael,
Denmark
January 29th, 2008 at 7:16 am
[...] one, I come across Don MacAskill’s post (who’s posts I generally love) entitled “Why traditional ‘print’ media is doomed.” ARGH! First off, why does everyone need to use “quotes” in their titles? Any [...]
January 29th, 2008 at 11:50 am
[...] folks at Business Week. Mathew Ingram points us to a post by SmugMug’s CEO, who claims that Business Week demanded he take down a link to a story about his company, pointing to this user agreement that forbids deep-linking, among other things. In the past, [...]
January 30th, 2008 at 8:40 am
[...] Vía: SmugBlog [...]
January 31st, 2008 at 11:04 pm
[...] business making all the wrong moves, you’ve got to check out Don MacAskill’s (SmugBlog) post about why traditional print media is doomed. It’s an entertain well written commentary on the mistakes of traditional print [...]
February 7th, 2008 at 10:30 am
Couldn’t agree more with how stupid the policies of traditional media companies are. I was in a meeting with someone from our local paper talking about how I link to their articles from my blog and he told me I should get permission to do that. Their site doesn’t even require a subscription and you don’t have to sign in to view the page. The trees are too close to see the forest I’m afraid.
I don’t get the deep linking thing either. Why does Google get a free pass from the TOS?
February 18th, 2008 at 8:58 am
[...] Businessweek apparently hates the web even more than Fast Company! Don Askill of Smugmug has a great posting about how Businessweek actually blocked him from deeplinking to an article [...]
February 20th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
[...] my cubicle and medium was thru an e-learning module. Going thru my daily reads, I was lead on to a blog post about the archaic TOS of BW. At a superficial level it was about reinventing oneself to survive in [...]
March 28th, 2008 at 6:02 am
When compare to traditional publishing, online publishing is shining in this age. Through this online publishing, publishers and readers are getting mutual benefits. Publishing through web, RSS, pod cast, mobile, etc… are the new circulation mediums (I heard that these services are providing http://www.pressmart.net for all print publications.).
March 30th, 2008 at 1:20 am
[...] to SmugMug CEO Don MacAskill , after he was interviewed by Business Week, they asked him not to deep-link to the story. They told [...]
April 4th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
[...] read more | digg story [...]
May 9th, 2008 at 4:51 am
[...] good site/mag like BusinessWeek should be getting it, right? Well, obviously they’re not, as SmugMug CEO Don MacAskill found out, after wanting to link to an interview with him from his blog. My, my, very [...]
May 9th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
[...] exactly what Business Week told SmugMug “Head Geek” Don MacAskill after they put him on a feature spread (this links to Google by the way). In the words of the Head [...]
June 5th, 2008 at 5:26 am
[...] 25, 2008 in Uncategorized by fdeparis Tags: Advertising, Big Media, Google Don MacAskill recently ranted on how much of a closed community traditional print media companies impose on their users. While I [...]
September 11th, 2008 at 6:25 am
[...] MacAskill recently ranted on how much of a closed community traditional print media companies impose on their users. While I [...]
November 25th, 2008 at 12:39 am
well… i visit your website first time and found this site very usefull and intresting !
well… you guys doing nice work and i just want to say that keep rocking and keep it up !!!!
Regards
Alishba
January 16th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
The trick, if there is such a thing, is variety. Make certain you collect a steady and varied collection of links
January 22nd, 2009 at 1:27 am
Did they really "ask" you specifically to not link to them? Did a human being actually say or write those instructions to you? Or are you using poetic license to make your (accurate) reading of their (clearly-backward) Terms of Use sound like a far more onerous *active* policy?
Lots of sites have prohibitive Terms of Use that are equally ridiculous, just as many of the technologies we use every day have, somewhere, ridiculous patents theoretically prohibiting their use. Lawyers write dumb overprotective stuff like this all the time, and normal people like me (and you, presumably) know that these rules are not only never enforced, but are in fact often unenforceable and quite likely not even legally-binding.
It sounds like you are willfully manufacturing a scandal here.
February 2nd, 2009 at 9:40 pm
what a impressive article. last days I didn' t read post like that. I am now your blog' s follower thanks for this useful blog. I am now your blog's rss follower.
February 3rd, 2009 at 6:30 pm
what a impressive article. last days I didn' t read post like that. I am now your blog' s follower thanks for this useful blog. I am now your blog's rss follower.
May 4th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Thank you for this informative read, I really appreciate sharing this great post. Keep up your work.
July 2nd, 2009 at 10:08 am
Thanks to a good explanation ..
July 18th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Hergün kahvaltıdan yarım saat önce 2 su bardağı ve lida diyet zayıflama r10seoogle ile birlikte tercihen ılık su ile 1 lida yosun kapsülü alınır.
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:40 pm
Traditional magazine business models are based on sales from advertising and subscriptions to their PRINT publication- so why would they want someone to be able to link to their page and read the article for free? sarah james
August 23rd, 2009 at 9:16 pm
thank you very much kral oyun
biber hapı
adult forum
August 24th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Typically I will grab a fractional piece of an article for one of my posts, and of course include a link to the full article in the original publication, then add my own thoughts to my posting. But that is kind of pointless if the L.A.
September 5th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
biber hapı
Fx15
September 9th, 2009 at 10:28 am
I wholeheartedly agree with you. Not only is traditional media slow on the draw, but in many ways so is the traditional music industry. We'll see who makes it and who doesn't.
September 20th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Couldn't agree more with how stupid the policies of traditional media companies are.
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Lots of sites have prohibitive Terms of Use that are equally ridiculous, just as many of the technologies we use every day have, somewhere, ridiculous patents theoretically prohibiting their use. Lawyers write dumb overprotective stuff like this all the time, and normal people like me. marry
October 5th, 2009 at 9:15 am
link to them, right? Wrong. According to a post by Don McAskill, CEO of image-sharing site SmugMug, BusinessWeek specifically asked him not to link directly to a [...]
October 5th, 2009 at 9:15 am
inability of many traditional publishers to monetize quickly enough combined with decreasing circulation could pose quite a significant challenge. Further, as more advertisers realize the targeting and ROI of online advertising budgets will be pulled from print and other sources to online. This is already causing layoffs and downsizing in many publications and it is only going to get worse if these companies do not reinvent themselves.
October 5th, 2009 at 9:16 am
that the people making the policy decisions were were likely to be in the 50+, suit wearing demographic and unlikely to be internet users. Internet usage in that demographic is now significant, so fighting against the flow must just be pure obstinacy.
October 7th, 2009 at 1:33 am
I wholeheartedly agree with you. Not only is traditional media slow on the draw, but in many ways so is the traditional music industry. We'll see who makes it and who doesn't.
October 12th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
No matter what type of independent mortgage advice and mortgage broker services you need we can help. mortgage adviser mortgage advice mortgage advisorsWith access to the whole UK mortgage market, with a wide range of lenders and rates to choose from. Why spend hours looking yourself for your next mortgage .
October 15th, 2009 at 6:03 am
Great post
Livescores
basketball live score
October 21st, 2009 at 3:45 pm
I don't know about the linking policies of my local newspaper, but it's clear they are suffering like many across the country. Both the number of pages as well as the page size has been reduced. Front page has gotten more glitzy and a bit "web page" looking. In their desperation to rebuild ad revenue, they're also now putting ads on the front page. Many reporters and staffers have been laidoff while subscription prices have been increased. I'm staying with them just to support them, but they will likely fail soon. mercedes c-class
October 28th, 2009 at 2:26 am
Why do you think these publications have these linking policies in the first place? Fashion Handbags and Purses – Including Handbags, Wallets Fashion Handbags cheap handbags the best handbags store specialize in sale different kinds of cheap handbags with well after service. buy handbags buy handbags Handbags Shop Canvas Handbags Provide high quality silver Tiffany jewellery including necklaces,rings and other style jewelry at wholesale prices.Pick your dreaming Tiffany jewelry Tiffany and co
October 28th, 2009 at 2:27 am
Why do you think these publications have these linking policies in the first place?
October 31st, 2009 at 3:20 am
It was stupid to them not to allow linking. In this network economy, links are the new currency. Without links, our pages cannot reach Google's front page and without search traffic, the kind of advertising you can obtain will be limited.
November 6th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Love it! You got me so excited to get one and start shooting video!
November 11th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Yup they are doomed, and with the price of gas 3x what it used to be they have refused to help out those who deliver their crap. Unless they all find some interesting reason to make a person walk outside for a newspaper when all the news a person wants can be pulled up online, there's no hope.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Is this still the case or have these print media companies woken up to how online media actually works??
November 16th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Print media has to learn from what online media has achieved. I am not saying that online media is perfect as there are things that traditional media can learn from. Links is definitely one of them.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
They too require compulsory registration to read full articles. And more chillingly they won't allow you to paste into the login field which defeats BugMeNot.
debt recovery