Why Is Nick Denton So "Old School"?

I have a lot of respect for Nick. He's built a great media business in Gawker Media using blogs as the platform. Valleywag is one of my "must reads" every day. My girls tell me that Jezebel, Gawker's new women's gossip blog, is fantastic. If you don't read Lifehacker, you should. I could go on and on. Nick is a brilliant media mogul in the age of the Internet.

But he's got a few blind spots. He's stuck in the old media mindset at times. Take comments. He wouldn't have comments on his blogs for years. Didn't want to "sully them" with user generated comment. Now he's got comments, but they require registration. It's like Nick doesn't really want to be new media. He wants to be old media on a new media platform. Forget the conversation, I just want to talk to you and you should listen.

He showed his stripes again yesterday on Valleywag when he took a swipe at his competitor Federated Media (and me by association) in his critique of the "People Ready" campaign that Microsoft is running on this blog and many other Federated blogs.

Nick says:

One would have thought that tech opinion-leaders as influential as Om Malik and Paul Kedrosky would ration their credibility more carefully, and reserve it for companies and products for which they felt real enthusiasm.

Maybe we (Om, Paul, and the rest of us) were just excited to participate in an ad campaign that wasn't just mindless banners Nick. Maybe we wanted to try to bring "the conversation" into the banner. Maybe I really did mean this when I wrote it:

I am in the venture capital business which is all about building relationships
with people. And yet many venture firms aren’t “people ready”. That’s why
venture capitalists as a group have a reputation as being arrogant, aloof,
hard to reach, and hard to talk to. I’ve been struggling with how to build a
“people ready” venture capital firm for years. I learned the venture business
from some great people who taught me to always respond to every deal that
comes in, say no as quickly and nicely as possible, and be attentive and
gracious in every meeting. But even that is not enough. We’ve used blogging to
make ourselves and our business, Union Square Ventures, even more “people
ready”. And it’s been a success in more ways than I could have ever imagined.

Nick sent me an email yesterday asking about the campaign. I should have known something was up when I saw this subject line:

did you really write "people-ready" just to get Microsoft sponsorship?

I told him yes I did and that I didn't really think about it. It seemed like a neat idea and still does.

Bottom line is that I am all for any form of advertising that takes some risks, makes the medium a bit more interactive, extends the conversation.

Blogging doesn't play by traditional media rules. That's why it's great. Blog advertising shouldn't play by traditional media rules either. I am proud to be a participant in this campaign and think it makes me even more credible.

Comments

[Sridhar Vembu]

I remember seeing those ads, and the (not very consciously thought out) impression I had when I saw them was that they were quoting the bloggers from their regular line of work.

[paul]

Is this campaign from Edelman PR's Me2Revolution team?

[fiat lux]

I don't even know what "people ready" means, nor why Microsoft's products are more "people ready" than anyone else's. So much for an effective campaign.

The whole thing strikes me as a massively misguided branding attempt. Perhaps Microsoft should be spending their time and money improving Vista and less money on lame branding.

[Steve]

G'day, Fred!

Great post. Why should I give a bloomin' care if you decide to sell advertising on your site? As you say, it's all about finding the next type of online advertising - one that's efficient and directed to how people use the net. After all, on the net, there's no rules, there's just right.

Nick's shortsighted criticism of this practice is going to boomerang on him in the end. He's sitting at the top of his tower, completely ignoring the thunder from down under. This are changing, Nick, and you can't hang on to old-media notions of how to do business. If you do, you'll find yourself in cinnamon oblivion.

Me, I'm gonna go have nice chicken lunch with my lady, Alice Springs.

[Sally]

Nick is right, you are wrong.

This has nothing to do with "old media" and "new media". Having comments or not having comments does not make you one or the other. This post has shown that you fundamentally don't get new media in the first place. Neither this blog nor Denton's blogs are new media. This blog is a pamphlet from the 1770's done in real time. Gawker Media blogs are magazines done in real time. New medium, not new media.

Anyway, the MS campaign is cheesy, and you added nothing to any 'conversation'. Just because MS is a tech company does not mean you or they are doing anything new. You could just as easily be parroting any meaningless corporate slogan, how about "We'll leave the light on for you" and how it relates to VC (and Motel 6)? I'm sure you could've written a post about that too.

[Dean Richardson]

I'm afraid the whole 'blogging content corrupted by advertising' meme doesn't intrigue me as much as it does the many commenters above. What *does* interest me is your depiction in the original FM banner ad of your (sincere, I sense) efforts to make your VC firm an 'entrepreneur friendly' one (by, e.g., responding to every submission, saying no quickly and nicely, etc.).

Even if you're falling fall short of your goal in that regard, the mere stated intention would put you at the top of my list of potential VCs to seek funding from for my startup. Do you get entrepreneurs who seek you out specifically for that reason? Have any colleagues elsewhere in the VC realm ever questioned how your approach affects your returns? Have you ever been tempted to abandon your lofty goals in the face of such criticism?

[Robert Seidman]

I don't know who's right or wrong, but I know that if Fred, Michael, etc actually use Microsoft Outlook or any of the products in the Office Suite, they're both people ready (whatever that means) enough for me and Microsoft.

I don't know if Sally is right about Nick, but she's 100% right about new medium, not new media. The media is the written word and the way your blog is set up it's very easy to go straight down the middle, focus on the words and ignore everything else. It's good design.

P.S. does the Curve have wi-fi capabilities?

[Kevin]

It was OK for Fred to participate in the campaign.
It was not OK for Matt Marshall, Om Malik or Arrington.

Here's why: Fred is not a journalist, nor does he pretend to be one. This blog is personal and, to a certain extent, in the persuit of his biz interests. But Marshall, Om and (to a slightly lesser extent) Arrington are journalists first and foremost. It's what they get paid to do. And journalists do not advertise any product they might in any way cover. It is an obvious conflict of interest.
"Old" media might be in trouble because of technology, but not because of the ethical code it developed. What a shame to see it discarded in the name of progress.

[Webomatica]

The ultimate end result of this is that I have no idea what this conversation-people-microsoft thing is trying to communicate. Congrats to the ad geniuses that have come up with yet another garbled message, and I now have a wary opinion of Microsoft and all the blogs (or should we say flogs) that participated in this confused campaign.

[Bruce]

"And journalists do not advertise any product they might in any way cover."

Journalists with Google ads never cover Google?

PLEASE!!!!!

[Kevin]

Bruce,
I should have been more clear: Journalists do not appear in ads for companies they cover.

[Juha]

Don: you're telling us that Microsoft getting embroiled in a new blog payola campaign isn't... dumb?? What is it then?

How about organising "conversational advertising" for comments next? What do you mean, akismet would block that as comment spam?

[rick]

In defense of Nick's comments... he doesn't let folks like me comment on Deadspin, and as a result, the comments are usually hilarious.

[Frankie Carbone]

Nick Denton is a mean spirited, fag, who uses his blogs to make personal attacks on people. He also takes money from people to write positive and negative stories. He's a complete fraud.

[NEAL]

You've let us down! First, You took money to produce content for an advertiser (basically, you lent them your voice). This is the same voice I have come to respect over the years through your blog. Second, you've taken the arrogant road here.

no more Fred Wilson blog for me unless you re-evaluate your stance! Good luck.

[Shivering Timbers]

Fred:

My initial reaction to the "People Ready" web page is that it's a collection of paid endorsements of Microsoft and its (transparently lame) new slogan. I think that's correct, however indirectly you're getting paid for the endorsement.

Which left me scratching my head. I couldn't figure out why you, of all people, would be shilling for Microsoft, of all companies. Of course you have the right, but it just doesn't seem like an obvious fit.

So I tried to figure out why you might have done this:

1) Money. You're probably the last person who needs the money, so scratch that one.

2) You really believe in it. To me, at least, the slogan "People Ready" is about as vapid and meaningless as technology marketing gets (right up there with Lucent's abortive slogan from the early days of the Internet bubble: "R/Evolution." Evidently they couldn't decide if they wanted to sell to ISPs or telecoms). I think you're smart enough to realize that endorsing a marketing slogan is tantamount to endorsing the markeing campaign behind it, and you would not spontaneously endorse Microsoft (though perhaps particular Microsoft products, but not the company in the abstract).

3) You didn't realize that your blurb would be presented as an endorsement of Microsoft. Again, I think you're smarter than this, but it's possible that some fast-talker sold you a bill of goods.

4) You honestly believe this is somehow different from a traditional old-media product endorsement. Well, it isn't.

So back to my initial reaction: I scratched my head for a bit and wondered "Why the heck is Fred Wilson endorsing Microsoft when he's also backing companies Microsoft would probably like to put out of business?"

Then I read your explanation, and that just made me wonder even more. It sounds like you got taken in by a combination of #3 and #4 above (i.e. you thought it wouldn't come across as an endorsement, and this is a cool exploration of new advertising models).

I suppose I can excuse you for getting overly excited about what looks new and innovative. I'd like to remind you, though, that it's also important to be able to tell when "new and innovative" is just "same old stuff" with slightly different packaging.

At the end of the day, this is no different than a ballplayer shilling for Wheaties, or Paul Harvey selling vacuum cleaners. So endorse all you like, just remember that credibility is earned by the teaspoon and burned by the gallon.

[SpragueD]

What you did was modest, compared to this:

http://news.com.com/Gawker+Media+mystery+ads+appear+on+YouTube/2100-1025_3-6155627.html

[Robert Seidman]

I posted the following comment on VW, I'm just reposting it here in case it isn't approved. :-)
--
Is it really fair to compare TC or VW or even PC Magazine to…the New York Times? I mean is it a realistic comparison?

Nick, I wouldn’t necessarily “trust” you OR Michael as an arbiter of fair and unbiased *news* to begin with. Why would I? You’re both very opinionated with your own agendas and mostly what your sites are about isn’t journalism, but about what you guys think.

It’s often quite interesting, and almost always entertaining. But journalism?

I do trust you and Michael to give your real opinions and whatever Arrington did with “People Ready” doesn’t strike me as a breach as long as he actually uses any MSFT products in his daily life. I make no inference from that at all that TC is opposed to non Microsoft products and I’d go $100 that Arrington’s favorite portable media player is a non-Microsoft product. The “people ready” nonsense changes none of my thinking on this.

I’ve seen this NYT comparison all day and it’s dopey. This isn’t the New York Times running a paid endorsement of a radical cancer treatment that winds up looking like a news story and not a paid advertisement. Whatever the bitching and moaning about over FM and Microsoft’s “People Ready” campaign, I think it’s as meaningless. If you can prove that Arrington never uses a Microsoft Operating system, or any of the Office products fine, expose him as a fraud. Otherwise like it or not (and I see that you don’t like it) he is “People Ready”, which is of course absolutely meaningless.

I think the biggest mistake in this circle is you people seem to think it’s as important as the New York Times.

It isn’t.

[Steve S]

Why Fred should be kept out of it? Fred doesn't consider himself a journalist of *any* kind.

New media marketing is still silly when it mirrors old media advertorials. Other people have good grips, even if you take journalistic creditability out of the question.

At the end of the day,

Nick wins, Microsoft wins, Battelle covers himself quite well and all of the bloggers he represents are hung out to dry.

Welcome to "As The Blogosphere Turns".

Thanks again Fred for engaging in this debate.

[Bruce]

Kevin,,

If the vast majority of a sites revenue comes from google adsense, they own you and I don't believe you can be objective about them.

Look at the mess Ebay is in because Google is trying to own them.

[Scott Dalferes]

Fred:

I have been a long time reader of your blog. I SWEAR that you stated, in an earlier post, that you would never read valleywag again. I think it had to do with a malicious post on their part. Am i correct?

[scott Dalferes]

Here is your past comment on Valleywag:
what made you change? are you an investor now?

Valleywag

Is it just me or does anyone else think that Valleywag is over the top?

I am really not interested in the private lives of people when they leave work.

Maybe others are, but I find it really distateful.

It's out of my feed reader as of now.

[fewquid]

Late to the party... Unless _I've_ misunderstood, I think most folks don't get what's happened here.

Fred did NOT promote a product or a company directly in his blog. What he and the others did was use two words that the ad-placing system would then use to add a specific banner ad to the page. It wasn't even a whole topic. It was TWO WORDS.

The bloggers were not even paid for the words themselves, but they do see revenue from having those matched ads on their blog. How is this different from accepting banner ads in general?

There's no endorsement here. This isn't even at the level of old media product placement.

If you're watching an interesting TV show and a Microsoft ad pops up during a commercial break, do you attack the host of the show? Of course not. But rest assured that commercial was put there based on the content of the show.

Advertising is designed to be sneaky. It's built on finding you and trying to sell you something.

Seriously people, get a grip. This is a personal blog and Fred can do what he wants with it. And if you think this is a sneaky and underhanded new media thing, you have NO IDEA what goes on in old media.

[ted]

If you're watching an interesting TV show and a Microsoft ad pops up during a commercial break, do you attack the host of the show?

If the host of the show is in the ad, I might! Actually, I wouldn't attack anyone for anything, but it might change my view of the host of the show if the show was billed as something personal and authentic.

[Paul Robinson]

About the guy who doesn't want people commenting on his words; it's his right to have it that way if he wants to. But it may be that the problems of comment spam are too much and he doesn't want the hassles. I had a big problem with spammers posting comments on my blog; at one point I had to disable them altogether in order to staunch the flow of hundreds of spam clogging up my blog. What bugged me the most was that it was complete garbage; they weren't even spamming for pay sites or something that someone could make money off of, that would make sense, no, they were posting spam links that did not work. I then switched it to require approval. I am considering putting a captcha program in so that I don't even have to do that. I'd love to have (serious) comments about what I say, even if I disagree with them; it would mean someone is reading my words. But I hate having to be a garbage collector.

--
Paul Robinson — My Blog