CNBC on Blogging
By Michael on Mar 8, 2005 in Blogging
Did anybody catch that pathetic segment that CNBC did on blogging just before 8:00 this morning? I’m still amazed by the ignorance (and arrogance in some cases) of some members of the media. It’s not that I expect them, or anybody, to love blogs but I would think that journalists would at least have some basic knowledge of blogs. Given all the media coverage about weblogs over the past year it’s stunning that anybody in the media still doesn’t get it. The guest who was on to explain why Yahoo was positioned to make waves in the blogosphere wasn’t of much help either. She didn’t do a very good job of answering Mark Haines’ questions. Maybe Lawrence Kudlow, who is a blogger, should educate his CNBC colleagues.
Tags: Blogging, CNBC
7 Comment(s)
By demnuts on Mar 8, 2005 | Reply
we know, we know “you just don’t get any respect”
By Roger Nusbaum on Mar 8, 2005 | Reply
Mike, I saw the segment. What you said is correct. There may be a different spin that I have, through the use of several denial techniques, convinced myself is true. Mark played the “I have no idea what this is” on purpose. At my firm we talk to a lot of people and no one knows about blogging. Whoever that woman was could have offered a lot more though.
By Terry Frazier on Mar 8, 2005 | Reply
What, don’t those guys read Barron’s?
By Eric on Mar 8, 2005 | Reply
I got the feeling the main problem was the host, Mark Haines. Although an avid mp3 player user, he admits he simply does not understand how to “use” blogs for commercial gain. The guest did a poor job describing the fact that many bloggers are not in it for the money, or even for the number of clicks. Bloggers usually have their own unique perspective on subjects they care about, and utilize blogs to share that message with others who have their own ideas, and the blog’s comment system allows an interactive place where people (who ordinarily could not interact) may do so. That’s the primary level. Mark is really interested in the secondary blog market, where advertisers and main stream journalists can take advantage of bloggers, by click-through advertising, banner advertising and subscription. So there is still a poor understanding of the unique nature of bloggers. Most of us would blog even without an internet connection. One of my blogs is read strictly by family and close friends and is password protected. My main blog (linked with this comment) gets maybe 40 hits a day (peanuts really) and I converse with a small number of mainly registered nurses and physicians and an assortment of others. I have a trading blog which really is an online repository of my trading research. I think I’m the only one reading that one
Mark doesn’t understand why anyone would go through all of that hassle, without getting a fat check every other week. So, with his history as a lawyer, he drills down on the only thing he truly understands about the new industry — the likelihood of litigation based on slander and libel. –eric
By Michael on Mar 9, 2005 | Reply
Realmoney.com is basically half blog with its trading diaries and columist conversation as the features that separate it from traditional media.
If television could survive on advertising revenues it is not clear to me why blogs can not. CNBC in particular makes its living without original content and basically filters the daily news with added commentary from outside experts. The web still has a way to go but sites with running commentary like briefing.com and minyanville already provide a better stream of information without the need to repeat content.
By Jack K. Miller on Mar 9, 2005 | Reply
The phone rang and I missed most of the segment. Thank you for the post. I am curious to know what Yahoo is offering. I use blogger through Google and feel that it is time for an upgrade. I own Google and Yahoo shares but am a Googleholic.
By Terry Frazier on Mar 9, 2005 | Reply
Did you catch ABC Nightline last night? They did a segment on blogging. I was working and just caught the TV intermittently so I don’t know if it was much good. Seemed to cover “Rathergate” and had some cheesy blogger comments at the end. (Reminds me of when the local news always finds the most ignorant, toothless, backward-looking person around to interview everytime there’s a disaster Georgia.)