Just like everyone else I saw the "Scoble Sells Out" post over at TechCrunch. As someone who started their internet career with a hobbyist site that "turned pro" it's a topic that really resonated with me. First off, adding advertisements to your blog does not mean you are selling out. Blogs eat up a lot of time and they can cost money to run, so having a few ads on a personal blog is no big deal. Why not monetize your traffic? If you can do this without angering your users, then you are set. If your blog grows to get the sort or traffic that Scobleizer.com gets, then he is throwing away thousands of dollars a month by not putting up an ad or two- nothing major, even just a few 125x125 boxes could bring in a lot. If anyone is worried about conflicts of interest with that, I'd refer them to thousands of blogs, web sites, and other publications that run advertisements. Yes, on a personal blog there is no editorial separation but if you trust someone enough to read their blog regularly, you probably respect their opinion enough to know an advertisement is not going to make them pull any punches. It will probably make feel more pressure to call things as they see them in fact. The problem I see with Scoble's upcoming addition of 1) advertisements 2) a redesign by Fast Company and 3) other people blogging on his site is that now some lines are being blurred. First of all, this is his personal blog, not his Fast Company page, but are those going to be Fast Company's ads? He didn't say anything about selling the blog, but his new job takes advantage of Scobleizer as if it was part of the package when he was hired. Are Fast Company writers going to be posting there? This is taking his personal blog and turning it into something very different, seemingly a Fast Company property. Fine- that's Scoble's decision- but no one has come out and said that, so no one knows what to think. Or people just assume the worst- i.e. Scoble sold out. One thing that really interested me with all this is the redesign. One of my favorite Scoble posts was back in March 2006 (I'm not sure why I remember stuff like this) when he talked about the advantages of having an ugly web site. I guess the post hit a close to home with me, but what about Scoble's "ugly" and "anti-marketing" design? That's all out the window now that Fast Company is in charge? If I was Scoble I would be worried about the long term life of the blog. He was with Podtech about 18 months. Say he states at Fast Company that long, what then? Did all those years of work just go down the drain? Also, I would be concerned about why I was hired in the first place. Maybe this is just me being neurotic or lacking confidence, but I would be worried that I got my job just so they could leverage my site. From what I can tell Fast Company's web site does not get a whole lot of traffic--they are big, but not huge. The addition of Scobleizer.com's pageviews could be a big growth for them, maybe even as big as posting Scoble's videos on their own site. I'm really interested to see how the redesign turns out and what happens when/if someone besides Scoble posts on the site. It seems to me that he could have done the redesign by himself, hired a few writers, and start to run ads on the blog without Fast Company. Rather then let them borrow (rent? leverage?) Scobleizer.com, he could put a few of those Podtech paychecks to work and turn the blog into your own business. I don't blame him for not doing this- it would be stressful and the chance of failure would be higher- but given the success of some other site that have made the move, we know it can be done. As a side note- I can't wait to see if Fast Company puts meta refreshes on Scoble's site. They have them on Fastcompany.com and it's something I find to be really annoying. This i not something people do on personal blogs, so I see it as a bit of a litmus test.

Just trying to log into Adsense and it looks like the Adsense page is totally down. I am getting a very un-Google page, it's only text, no official logo, and a broken image link at the top right. Here is the page: http://www.google.com/errors/asfe/system_down.html and the image link. And here is the text:

The Google AdSense website is temporarily unavailable. Please try back later. We apologize for any inconvenience. Google AdSense の web サイトは一時的にご利用いただけません。後で再度お試しくださいますようお願いいたします。 お手数をおかけいたしますことをお詫びいたします。 Die Google AdSense-Website ist vorübergehend nicht verfügbar. Bitte versuchen Sie es später noch einmal. Wir entschuldigen uns für eventuell enstandene Unannehmlichkeiten. Le site Google AdSense est temporairement indisponible. Veuillez réessayer plus tard. Nous vous prions de nous excuser pour le désagrément occasionné. El sitio web de AdSense de Google no se encuentra disponible en estos momentos. Por favor, inténtelo de nuevo más tarde. Disculpe las molestias. Google AdSense 网站暂时无法浏览。请您稍候再尝试。 对于造成您的不便我们感到抱歉。 Il sito AdSense di Google è temporaneamente non disponibile. La preghiamo di provare più tardi. Ci scusiamo per il disagio. De website van Google AdSense is tijdelijk niet beschikbaar. Probeert u het later opnieuw. Onze excuses voor het eventuele ongemak. Google AdSense Sayfası geçici olarak hizmet dışıdır. Lütfen, daha sonra tekrar deneyin. Bu geçici sorundan dolayı özür dileriz. O site do Google AdSense não está disponível no momento. Tente novamente mais tarde. Pedimos desculpas pelo inconveniente. The Google AdSense website is temporarily unavailable. Please try back later. We apologise for any inconvenience. Witryna programu Google AdSense jest chwilowo niedostępna. Prosimy spróbuj później. Przepraszamy za wszelkie niedogodności. Веб-сайт Google AdSense временно недоступен. Попробуйте, пожалуйста, еще раз через несколько минут. Мы приносим свои извинения за причиненные неудобства. Google AdSense webbplats är för tillfället inte tillgänglig. Försök igen senare. Vi ber om ursäkt för eventuellt besvär. Google AdSense-webstedet er ikke tilgængeligt i øjeblikket. Prøv igen senere. Vi beklager ulejligheden. Google AdSense 웹사이트를 일시적으로 사용하실 수 없습니다 . 나중에 다시 시도해 보십시오 . 불편을 끼쳐드려 죄송합니다 . Google AdSense-webområdet er midlertidig utilgjengelig. Prøv igjen senere. Vi beklager eventuelle problemer dette medfører. Google AdSense 網站暫時無法瀏覽。請您稍候再嘗試。 對於造成您的不便我們感到抱歉。 A Google AdSense oldal jelenleg nem elérhető. Kérjük, látogasson vissza később. Elnézést kérünk az esetleges kellemetlenségekért. Google AdSense –sivusto ei väliaikaisesti ole saatavilla. Yritä myöhemmin uudelleen. Pahoittelemme tämän aiheuttamaa hankaluutta. Stránka Google AdSense je dočasně nedostupná. Zkuste to později. Omlouváme se za způsobené nepříjemnosti.  Stránka Google AdSense je dočasne nedostupná. Skúste neskôr, prosím. Ospravedlňujeme sa za spôsobené nepríjemnosti. Google AdSense sučelje trenutno je nedostupno. Molimo Vas pokušajte kasnije. Ispričavamo se za neugodnosti. إن موقع Google AdSense غير متوفر حاليا. يرجى تكرار المحاولة لاحقا. نعتذر عن أي إزعا אתר Google AdSense איננו זמין כרגע. אנו מצטערים על אי הנוחות. אנא נסה שנית מאוחר יותר. Google AdSense уебсайта е временно недостъпен. Моля опитайте по-късно. Извиняваме се за неудобството. Η ιστοσελίδα του Google AdSense δεν είναι διαθέσιμη προς το παρόν. Παρακαλώ δοκιμάστε αργότερα. Ζητούμε συγγνώμη για την ενόχληση.

© 2007 Google

So it looks like if you have a pre-Gmail Adsense account you can't change the contact email on that account over to your Gmail account. This seems ridiculous, but that is the roadblock I am at right now. Here is what the Login Change pages says:

!Note: We're not able to update logins to Gmail or Google Account addresses at this time. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience. 

So what are us Gmail users supposed to do? Set up a hotmail account in order to access out Adsense pages if we need to change email addresses? Or set up a new Adsense with the existing Gmail account? If anyone has a good solution for this- or if I am just confused- I'd love to hear back.

I started this blog for a number of reasons, but one of the most important ones was as a testing ground for services, software, and that sort of thing. Obviously I like to play around with Wordpress, but I also wanted to give Media Temple's Grid hosting a shot, as well as test out some theories on RSS readership, and that sort of thing. Up to this point I have not run advertising on this blog (save for a day or two of Adsense), but I finally got around to signing up for Text Link Ads. A lot of people use them, but this is actually the first time I am giving them a shot so I am really interested to see how well they perform given this blog's limited amount of traffic. My basic set up: - 5 link ads - run only on the homepage (this was recommended) - slightly below the fold (this may have to be changed) - colored to blend I rejected TLA's offer for their Inlinks service because I just wanted to demo their basic sidebar link sales. I am not selling links at the post level or using them for RSS advertising. If I have a positive enough experience with them in order to be able to recommend the service, I might add an affiliate link in a post or two, or maybe somewhere in the sidebar. For the time being I haven't... As for the money, I don't think it can make very much in the current state (they don't even tell you how much your links are selling for) , but after the rev share, if all goes well, I might be able to pay for the site's hosting and maybe go out to the movies (by myself, no snacks or soda). Edit- Okay, already had my first error:

 

WordPress database error: [Table 'dbxxxx_wp.wp_tla_rss_map' doesn't exist] SELECT * FROM `wp_tla_rss_map` ORDER BY post_id DESC LIMIT 10

Update: 11:13am : Looks like this happened because I first installed the Inlinks plugin and then moved over to the normal text link ads one. The support people at TLA are working in it, they have been very helpful and responsive so far. The error only comes up after I publish/save an article, the rest of the site seems unaffected. Update: 1:42pm : The issue is resolved. TLA updated their Wordpress plugin in order to fix the issue that happened when Inlinks was installed and reverted back to the standard plugin. Big thanks to Justin, Patrick, and Drew at Text Link Ads for all the help!

Over at Valleywag there is a good post on the ongoing Google/DoubleClick situation. This is something that has caught the attention of more than a few media outlets, but has not gotten as much attention as it otherwise would due to the coverage of Apple/EMI's anti-DRM deal, Kathy Sierra (WNYC's Brian Lehrer show covered it today), and all the April Fool's Day nonsense.

So, why would Google's acquisition of Doubleclick make a difference? The New York advertising group runs the platform, DART, which many publishers use to host the ads they sell directly. It's a system which allows ad sales departments to set the order in which different campaigns run, cap the frequency with which an ad is shown, and squeeze more revenue from a particular slot.

If you don't really follow how internet advertising works, this may not seem like a big deal, but trust me, it is. Once you get past just displaying Google Adsense, online advertising can get tricky because there is a lot of control as far as frequency, targeting, tracking, and serving third-party advertisements (often with complex code of their own). Google plus DoubleClick would be basically have some of the same implications for online advertising controls as what happened when Google bought Urchin. Basically something powerful and expensive can become free and probably easy to use. The situations are not exactly the same, but they do parallel one another. A number of blogs have stressed Microsoft's role in this, in that DoubleClick would be an ideal target for a Microsoft take over. Some have gone so far as to say that it is their last chance to follow through on their internet advertising goals and not simply give up. While this is oversimplifying things, DoubleClick is asuccessful, turnkey operation that would be a great asset for either taker. As an online publisher I am pulling for Google here as they have done a great job with their other services and, from what I can tell, the other companies that they have gobbled up. I would love to see an easy-to-use, quick-to-implement version of something like PHPadsNew (OpenAds) that someone else will pretty much setup and maintain for me. I am not excited about the type of information I would be giving out or the control I would be giving up, but if you are already using Google Analytics this such not be a big deal. Plus the chance of integration with Google Analytics could be incredible.

Over at Searchblog there is a thought-provoking post on the idea of Google buying DoubleClick. The post does not say much about the implications of such a deal, but they would obviously be immense. The addition of DoubleClick to Google's portfolio would mean that it would be able to serve third party advertisements, assuming Google goes the route they went with Urchin (Google Analytics) and opens up the service to everyone for free. On one hand this would be great- a powerful service once reserved for only the largest sites on the net available to everyone. On the other, now Google "knows" that much more about your site, they effectively own your data, and because the service is free (and/or in beta) there is no recourse if something goes wrong. While privacy concerns and the question of data ownership are extremely important, this last issue is something that I find especially concerning, especially after a number of Gmail accounts were deleted a few months back. This is so problematic because it gets to the very heart of the matter- these people used Google's mail service because is was free, but also because Google seems like a company that can be relied upon, at least more so than the alternatives. The same holds true for analytics or RSS reading or notes (etc.). It is not just the performance and availability, but the security. This all goes back to the question of how "free" anything really is. You don't have to pay for Gmail, but it is ad supported, so it's not really free. Plus with certain other services, not to single out Google here, the company reserves the right to collect and store your data (such as search history) so they may not be getting money out of you directly, but they are profiting from the transaction. No one is saying that companies have to be altruistic or that everything you don't have to pay for is bad, simply that it makes sense to weigh all the options before making a choice. The aspect of support is one that is especially crucial in this decision- generally, on the internet, the less you pay the less help you are going to get from the service provider. This may not be an issue 99% of the time, but when your email account is deleted or your ads are not being served, that monthly service charge may not seem as expensive as it once did. Battelle's post ends with this note (his italics):

My advice to Google? Don't make it free. Make it better, make it cheaper, and let those who use it own the data. Ah, hell, make it free, but let those who use it own the data and guarantee them you won't use it to your advantage. But then....why do it at all?

This got me thinking how important it is to examine how free services actually are and if going with something free ultimately makes sense on a case by case basis. I will be the first to admit at many times it does, but it is always something to consider. This reasoning can get really interesting when extended not just to services but to things like open source software, but that is a topic for another day. edit- just when I thought I was picking up on a story of my own, I saw this on Techmeme 

Its been two weeks since the last installment of Federated Media news so this post will be making up for the period we missed. Even so, not that much exciting has happened since that last big announcement.

• Where did that photo of Battelle giving the finger come from?
• Even FM's temps blog
• Chas Edwards is talking at FOOA
• New FM property- New World Notes
• The Business Week article (they didn't even mention me)

There's more, but it's mostly boring or things we have heard before. Sorry for such a half-hearted post... I am just glad this week is over...

XYZ Computing has been working with Federated Media for about 10 months now. It's been a very positive experience and despite XYZ not being very "bloggy" our two organization are perfectly matched- I need more a "boutique" ad agency who can get higher CPMs regardless of the number of pageviews and they need high quality content providers (preferably ones with a recognizable name at them helm). OK, I am not exactly internet famous, but I guess I am getting there... Anyway, regardless of me working with FM, the companies story has been on of the most interesting on any internet company in 2006. They have had explosive growth in the past few months and have snagged some great sites as well as some great people. There have been setbacks, but overall the company seems to be doing about as well as possible. Personally I try to keep on FM news but it's not easy, so I am going to try to post from time to time with weekly highlights.

1. Federated Media is expanding rapidly. Nice to see that they are advertising with their own authors.
2. Federated Media in Facebook NewsFeed? Not sure I understand what's going on here, and I don't see it in my Facebook account, but could be something big.
3. Federated Media is helping sites that get hundreds of thousands of visitors make money.
4. FM and Pajamas are doing well, but are not going to take down Adsense any time soon.
5. FM's making a million bucks a month
6. Blogvertising is growing fast. (Although there is some confusion about networks at the end)

That's it for now. Pretty slow week I guess.

Gigaom had a really interesting article called "The Online Advertising Quandry". It's worth reading, but (for the sake of brevity) he basically points out that though internet advertising revenue is growing and will continue to grow in some segments but agrees with people who refute Jason Calacanis' claim that the market will grow for the next 20 years. The most interesting point the post makes is that almost half of this advertising money is going to Google and Yahoo. The rest is split up by smaller players, like AOL and Facebook, but also Om and me. While this does not bode well for my dream of making millions from my site, more internet advertising (whether over the long term or short term) means less money invested in print advertising and hopefully more for the little guy. This thinking is fine for sites pulling in over 3M pageviews a month, but for smaller sites, where a typical ad buy is a few thousand or even a few hundred dollars, things are not going to be changing drastically any time soon. Small sites have to rely on two things: networks and endemic advertising. These huge insertion orders being pulled away from print are not going to have a tremendous effect on sites that don't have heavy traffic, a big name, or a dedicated sales team. The secret for smaller players is optimizing Google's Adsense, moving to better networks when they become available, and selling advertising when they can. Because they don't have a dedicated sales force and because of how little profit the alternatives bring in a small site can undercut the big site's prices and still make more money than they otherwise would. [This is something this blog will be talking about more in the future.] The most interesting player here are all those startups we read about on TechCrunch. These sites are getting massive amounts of funding and have investors that are expecting to get lots of money back from their investments. A lot of these sites are either planning to sell advertising or are going to us advertising to monetize their traffic as a fallback plan and this is no easy way to recoup considerable amounts of money over the short term. Many are hoping to be purchased by a big player, but when those plans falls through they are going to be left with not enough traffic to pay back the investors or to pay for all those people they hired. Just some food for thought I guess...

Gigaom had a really interesting article called "The Online Advertising Quandry". It's worth reading, but (for the sake of brevity) he basically points out that though internet advertising revenue is growing and will continue to grow in some segments but agrees with people who refute Jason Calacanis' claim that the market will grow for the next 20 years. The most interesting point the post makes is that almost half of this advertising money is going to Google and Yahoo. The rest is split up by smaller players, like AOL and Facebook, but also Om and me. While this does not bode well for my dream of making millions from my site, more internet advertising (whether over the long term or short term) means less money invested in print advertising and hopefully more for the little guy. This thinking is fine for sites pulling in over 3M pageviews a month, but for smaller sites, where a typical ad buy is a few thousand or even a few hundred dollars, things are not going to be changing drastically any time soon. Small sites have to rely on two things: networks and endemic advertising. These huge insertion orders being pulled away from print are not going to have a tremendous effect on sites that don't have heavy traffic, a big name, or a dedicated sales team. The secret for smaller players is optimizing Google's Adsense, moving to better networks when they become available, and selling advertising when they can. Because they don't have a dedicated sales force and because of how little profit the alternatives bring in a small site can undercut the big site's prices and still make more money than they otherwise would. [This is something this blog will be talking about more in the future.] The most interesting player here are all those startups we read about on TechCrunch. These sites are getting massive amounts of funding and have investors that are expecting to get lots of money back from their investments. A lot of these sites are either planning to sell advertising or are going to us advertising to monetize their traffic as a fallback plan and this is no easy way to recoup considerable amounts of money over the short term. Many are hoping to be purchased by a big player, but when those plans falls through they are going to be left with not enough traffic to pay back the investors or to pay for all those people they hired. Just some food for thought I guess...

A pretty interesting situation is unfolding, at least for those of us who follow internet happenings and the advertising world. It's all kind of hard to follow but here is how it seemed to have happened. [BTW, it is a few interesting stories rolled into one, not one big one.]

1. Nick Douglas is no longer the editor of Valleywag. There is no official word on him being fired or quitting, but he did not make many friends during his tenure there, so who knows...
2. Nick Douglas is replaced with Nick Denton, the guy who run Gawker Media, an internet powerhouse.
3. Denton posts about Federated Media's loss of Fark (FM will apparently only be selling remnants) to Maxim's advertising team. Denton alludes to the possibility of FM losing Digg in the future, just like what happened when Reddit was acquired.
4. Battelle responds.

Definitely worth a read if you find any of this even vaguely interesting or you know the names of the characters involved. I was not too impressed with Denton's post on Valleywag, he took a number of pretty personal swipes at Battelle including calling his book "sycophantic". It seems like Denton is picking up where Douglas left off, but instead of being childish and rumor-mongering, he is just trying to be offensive. Or maybe he is just not a John Battelle fan, I guess we'll see...

For the time being I am going to limit advertising on this site to the bare minimum. The goal here is to cover my hosting fees, so I would like the site to make about $0.66 a day. I figure the best way to go about this would be to use Adsense- it's easy to implement and relatively unobtrusive. Until I find a good way to insert Adsense between the posts I am going to put it at the bottom of the first post on the homepage.