Thursday, March 26, 2009
For the love of money -- or just for the love?
All this blogging has gotten me thinking...
What's my goal in this anyway? To share personal stories as an adoptive mom? To encourage the sharing of stories within the broader adoption community (families touched by adoption, adult adoptees, etc.) To entertain? To publish and feel the love? Or -- to make a butt-load of money?
I emailed Ben to ask him about the economics of blogging and here's the reality:
Assume a $.50 CPM for impressions to your blog. Then, ask yourself how many monthly impressions would it take to generate the minimum income you hope for. Let's say, for starters, you'd like to aim for $48K per year or $4K per month. For the purposes of rough ballpark calculation, assume advertisers realize a CTR of ~2%.
Here's how to think about it (with thanks and credit to Ben):
At $.50 per 1000 impressions, you'd have to sell 8M impressions per month to clear $4K per month. ($4K / $.50 = 8000 CPM's or 8M impressions)
But with a CTR of 2%, advertisers are hoping those 8M impressions a month will yield (8M x .02 =)160K visitors to their sites each month. That means you, as the publisher, need to prove you can generate minimum regular traffic of 160K users each month -- if you want to attract that kind of commitment from advertisers.
In other words, if you're not serious about this blogging stuff, don't quit your day job.
Lisa
What's my goal in this anyway? To share personal stories as an adoptive mom? To encourage the sharing of stories within the broader adoption community (families touched by adoption, adult adoptees, etc.) To entertain? To publish and feel the love? Or -- to make a butt-load of money?
I emailed Ben to ask him about the economics of blogging and here's the reality:
Assume a $.50 CPM for impressions to your blog. Then, ask yourself how many monthly impressions would it take to generate the minimum income you hope for. Let's say, for starters, you'd like to aim for $48K per year or $4K per month. For the purposes of rough ballpark calculation, assume advertisers realize a CTR of ~2%.
Here's how to think about it (with thanks and credit to Ben):
At $.50 per 1000 impressions, you'd have to sell 8M impressions per month to clear $4K per month. ($4K / $.50 = 8000 CPM's or 8M impressions)
But with a CTR of 2%, advertisers are hoping those 8M impressions a month will yield (8M x .02 =)160K visitors to their sites each month. That means you, as the publisher, need to prove you can generate minimum regular traffic of 160K users each month -- if you want to attract that kind of commitment from advertisers.
In other words, if you're not serious about this blogging stuff, don't quit your day job.
Lisa
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
I have been blogging regularly ...but someplace else
In my "returning to my food blog" frenzy, I almost forgot about this one but Iam here now.Caught up on all the previous posts and wanted to congratulate Lisa on her wonderful new blog"Pack of three".Lisa,I bet you, it will become addictive very soon. I started writing my blog 4 yrs back,almost abandoned it and Iam back again.Very addictive, I tell you:)
I have been writing regularly at Meenal's Kitchen. Catch me sharing my recipes and stories here.Even have a post on our weekly Core Concept team meetings, where we all strategised on our project and ate some Pineapple Upside Down cake:)Read more about it here
Until next time :)
I have been writing regularly at Meenal's Kitchen. Catch me sharing my recipes and stories here.Even have a post on our weekly Core Concept team meetings, where we all strategised on our project and ate some Pineapple Upside Down cake:)Read more about it here
Until next time :)
Friday, March 20, 2009
On Newspapers, Blogs, and.. the Fifth Estate?
I've been reading Sanjay's ("Wretched Scribe's") posts and listening to NPR commentary with great interest about the demise of the newspaper industry. I've also been spending a lot of time online trying to understand the blogging universe (come visit me at Pack of Three... I'm having a blast blogging!), and how one builds traffic for a site (any site), and how money is made.
It's puzzling to me how a site like dooce can bring in $50K a month, while the newspaper industry struggles to figure out a way to leverage the online world and realize profitability. A part of me can't help but wonder if the world of newsmen and journalists are too entrenched in yesterday's model of doing business and propagating news. But then I think, there are a lot of really smart people thinking about this problem -- so maybe its not that simple, and there's more going on.
I do think that the Web, and particular "Web 2.0" -- with all its options for communication and interactivity -- is driving profound, fundamental, structural changes in the way we get information about our world. The Web has opened the floodgates and, while there's certainly a lot of junk out there, there are also huge numbers of people -- who aren't professionally trained journalists -- who have access to valuable inside information who can now share it (blogs are just one way) and share it more broadly than ever before. In doing so, these everyday people help enlighten and educate the rest of us -- while keeping other nefarious types honest. One great example: "Dell Hell" which we discussed in class.
So while I certainly have huge sympathy for the people (particularly journalists) who are caught in the midst of these painful contractions and dislocations, I have to confess I'm not as fearful or concerned as Sanjay when he warns, "There is no guarantee that the press will remain a vital force in our democracy or that there will be a Fourth Estate that is bold enough with deep enough pockets to take on big Government, big Business or big Anything."
My sense is that there's a whole broader public that's vested and now, more empowered than ever before, to be actively involved in keeping "big Government" or "big Business" or "big Anything" honest.
I realize that may be a fairly controversial position or statement. But I'm not alone. David Domke who heads up the UW Department of Communications (fascinating guy!) is not only excited, but hugely optimistic about what the Web, and Web 2.0 in particular, has done and will do for the future of democracy. (Can you hear our anthem playing in the background yet?)
Anyway, my 2 cents. Thanks for reading!
It's puzzling to me how a site like dooce can bring in $50K a month, while the newspaper industry struggles to figure out a way to leverage the online world and realize profitability. A part of me can't help but wonder if the world of newsmen and journalists are too entrenched in yesterday's model of doing business and propagating news. But then I think, there are a lot of really smart people thinking about this problem -- so maybe its not that simple, and there's more going on.
I do think that the Web, and particular "Web 2.0" -- with all its options for communication and interactivity -- is driving profound, fundamental, structural changes in the way we get information about our world. The Web has opened the floodgates and, while there's certainly a lot of junk out there, there are also huge numbers of people -- who aren't professionally trained journalists -- who have access to valuable inside information who can now share it (blogs are just one way) and share it more broadly than ever before. In doing so, these everyday people help enlighten and educate the rest of us -- while keeping other nefarious types honest. One great example: "Dell Hell" which we discussed in class.
So while I certainly have huge sympathy for the people (particularly journalists) who are caught in the midst of these painful contractions and dislocations, I have to confess I'm not as fearful or concerned as Sanjay when he warns, "There is no guarantee that the press will remain a vital force in our democracy or that there will be a Fourth Estate that is bold enough with deep enough pockets to take on big Government, big Business or big Anything."
My sense is that there's a whole broader public that's vested and now, more empowered than ever before, to be actively involved in keeping "big Government" or "big Business" or "big Anything" honest.
I realize that may be a fairly controversial position or statement. But I'm not alone. David Domke who heads up the UW Department of Communications (fascinating guy!) is not only excited, but hugely optimistic about what the Web, and Web 2.0 in particular, has done and will do for the future of democracy. (Can you hear our anthem playing in the background yet?)
Anyway, my 2 cents. Thanks for reading!
Monday, March 16, 2009
Another newspaper prints its last edition
Doubtless you've heard by now that The Seattle Post-Intelligencer will publish its last edition tomorrow.
Anyone who values in-depth reporting will be mourning the loss of that newspaper -- and the 150+ reporters, copy editors, photographers, graphic designers, editors and other staff who will be losing their jobs and likely unable to secure a new one in journalism for the foreseeable future.
Here's a video of the announcement in the newsroom:
Yes, many will be rooting for seattlepi.com to carry on the tradition of the oldest newspaper in the state (actually older than statehood).
I hope that many also will be rooting for the survival of the last newspaper in Seattle, the Times. The economic forces that any newspaper faces today are gargantuan. The New York Times recently carried an important story with an incredible map that shows the carnage across the country.
There is no guarantee that the press will remain a vital force in our democracy or that there will be a Fourth Estate that is bold enough with deep enough pockets to take on big Government, big Business or big Anything.
Right now this important duty is left to the free markets -- and we know the free markets can occasionally fail. We all have opinions on this, and the New York Times has an interesting aggregation of opinions about the future of news.
What's your opinion about all this?
Where do you get your news?
The next time you click on a story or headline online, try tracing back to the source. If you think it's radio or television, you can bet that most of their stories are driven by newspaper reporters. It's not a judgment; it's simple math. Newspapers field bigger staffs and have the capacity and longevity for doing the work.
I thought I would share with the group a remarkable video of the end of another underdog paper in another two newspaper town, Denver.
Final Edition from Matthew Roberts on Vimeo.
I don't have any answers yet to this economic freefall facing newspapers. For now, I just wish everyone could adopt their local newspaper.
Show your support in whatever way you feel comfortable. Show your support for the Fourth Estate as those of us who care about public-interest journalism try to find a sustainable business model for the 21st century.
Anyone who values in-depth reporting will be mourning the loss of that newspaper -- and the 150+ reporters, copy editors, photographers, graphic designers, editors and other staff who will be losing their jobs and likely unable to secure a new one in journalism for the foreseeable future.
Here's a video of the announcement in the newsroom:
Yes, many will be rooting for seattlepi.com to carry on the tradition of the oldest newspaper in the state (actually older than statehood).
I hope that many also will be rooting for the survival of the last newspaper in Seattle, the Times. The economic forces that any newspaper faces today are gargantuan. The New York Times recently carried an important story with an incredible map that shows the carnage across the country.
There is no guarantee that the press will remain a vital force in our democracy or that there will be a Fourth Estate that is bold enough with deep enough pockets to take on big Government, big Business or big Anything.
Right now this important duty is left to the free markets -- and we know the free markets can occasionally fail. We all have opinions on this, and the New York Times has an interesting aggregation of opinions about the future of news.
What's your opinion about all this?
Where do you get your news?
The next time you click on a story or headline online, try tracing back to the source. If you think it's radio or television, you can bet that most of their stories are driven by newspaper reporters. It's not a judgment; it's simple math. Newspapers field bigger staffs and have the capacity and longevity for doing the work.
I thought I would share with the group a remarkable video of the end of another underdog paper in another two newspaper town, Denver.
Final Edition from Matthew Roberts on Vimeo.
I don't have any answers yet to this economic freefall facing newspapers. For now, I just wish everyone could adopt their local newspaper.
Show your support in whatever way you feel comfortable. Show your support for the Fourth Estate as those of us who care about public-interest journalism try to find a sustainable business model for the 21st century.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
The new blog in town
Well I finally screwed up my courage and found time this week to dip my toe in the water. So, its official: I now have a blog of my own. In the process of thinking it through, setting it up, and exploring Blogger.com, I learned a lot about layouts, gadgets (cool!), comments, keywords and links. If you're so inclined, please come visit me at Pack of Three and share your thoughts (as well as links to your site!)
Hope everyone's week is going well!
Lisa
Hope everyone's week is going well!
Lisa
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Jon Stewart on Twitter
I suppose it was only a matter of time before Jon Stewart joined in on the commentary on the Twitter phenomenon. For a lighter note in the midst of these grim economic times, please enjoy:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=219519&title=twitter-frenzy
With best wishes to everyone,
Lisa
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=219519&title=twitter-frenzy
With best wishes to everyone,
Lisa
Saturday, March 7, 2009
How many times will the HDTV transition be postponed??
The media has been full of hand-wringing and concern that a significant number of Americans are not ready for the planned HDTV transition due in the near future. As a result, the Senate has postponed the date until June – so what happens when June rolls around and the same people who are not ready now are still watching their old-school TVs? Are we going to have the same debate and postponement again?
Research shows that in fact more than 82% of households are ready now – 97% area aware of the upcoming transition and know what they have to do. So pull the plug already…
Research shows that in fact more than 82% of households are ready now – 97% area aware of the upcoming transition and know what they have to do. So pull the plug already…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)