- @hblodget my objection is i don't see the benefits for us doing the work that's then aggregated.
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298825753213161472
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:09:46 - @hblodget this piece was result of knowing colleen for 8 years. copy and pasting the juicy bits = 15 mins or work. http://www.digiday.com/agencies/why-i-confessed/ …om/agencies/why-i-confessed/
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298825955361837056
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:10:34 - the pageview ad system is driving a media aggregation economy that can stink for original content creators. http://bit.ly/Uty5cn
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298830173875343360
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:27:20 - @bmorrissey In the old days (5 years ago), publications paid PR people to try to get other pubs to write about their stories.
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298831041135800320
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:30:46 - @bmorrissey They didn't do this for return "traffic" (there was none). They just did it for publicity.
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298831555135156224
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:32:49 - @bmorrissey Our perspective is that we are thrilled when anyone writes about our stuff. We are honestly grateful for being "aggregated"
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298831722496286720
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:33:29 - @hblodget but that's not my model. my point is why is everyone opted in to this aggregation model?
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298831848883240961
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:33:59 - @bmorrissey There are a billion sources of information online, and readers only see a handful. So the more exposure, the better.
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298831883012304897
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:34:07 - @hblodget i get that's YOUR model. it's not ours. maybe we'll change if i find evidence it works to build a long-term brand.
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298832155025485824
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:35:12 - @bmorrissey If you don't want us to write about your work, we won't. Last thing we want to do is frustrate you.
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298832171219681281
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:35:16 - @bmorrissey I would again respectfully suggest that you get value from having people discuss/share your work. But if you disagree, no prob
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298832619217506304
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:37:03 - @hblodget that's a false choice. nobody will discuss our work unless you copy and paste large parts of it?
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298832772259270656
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:37:39 - @bmorrissey But to be very clear on this: If you do not want us to alert our readers to your articles, we won't. Full stop.
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298833300980637696
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:39:45 - @bmorrissey I would again suggest, very respectfully, that we helped create a lot more awareness of your work, beyond your audience.
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298834338315902976
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:43:52 - @bmorrissey It's all perspective. Murdoch thinks Google News bad because he used to be only gatekeeper. We LOVE Google News--sends readers!
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298834685436506113
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:45:15 - @hblodget i get the 'promiscuous' theory. i don't see long term benefit. i want a particular set of readers. you don't drive many of them.
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298834705426567169
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:45:20 - @hblodget i love mediagazer and other places that drive traffic. linkedin? i LOVE linkedin to death.
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298834888621166593
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:46:04 http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298835509399150592
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:48:32- @bmorrissey Does it "benefit the end creator" as much as the NYT when the NYT writes about a WSJ scoop? Or CNN reports Reuters news?
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298835785837318144
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:49:38 - @bmorrissey Fair to say you assign zero value to publicizing your work and introducing it to non-Digiday readers? (Honest question)
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298836795741851648
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:53:38 - @hblodget nope, if you go to the cases i cite, i would like your take on where BI added real value.
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298836195784413185
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:51:15 - @bmorrissey I ask that because we think there's a lot of value in others writing about our work--whether or not we get direct traffic back
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298837169609535489
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:55:08 - @hblodget people will discuss our work if it's good, doesn't matter really if BI copy and pastes large parts of it.
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298837365915529217
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:55:54 - @hblodget and i get you guys think differently, but when did all publishers get opted in to this system?
http://twitter.com/bmorrissey/status/298837484387856384
— Brian Morrissey (@bmorrissey)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:56:23 - @bmorrissey When someone links to us and sends readers, those are readers we would not have gotten. That's helpful! So we are grateful!
http://twitter.com/hblodget/status/298838297516601345
— Henry Blodget (@hblodget)Tue, Feb 05 2013 16:59:36
