January 31, 2005
Blog Editor Foxy-Boxing
Be warned, anyone who works in media or anyone who knows anyone who works in media or anyone who knows anyone who consumes media. Apparently, a line in the sand has been drawn between blogs that cover NY media - a line in the sand, people! Or at least that's what an article in the NY Times City section suggests. The facts: In one snarky corner, there's Gawker with snarky publisher Nick Denton and snarky editor Jessica Coen, and in the other corner, there's Mediabistro, with less-snarky founder Laurel Touby and new uber-snarky editor Elizabeth Spiers (formerly of snarkcorp Gawker- still with us?) who is co-authoring the Mediabistro media gossip blog, FishBowlNY - add some quotes about competition, snarketition, rivalries, bitch-smacking, and Tara Reid's boobies (we made two of those up!). It's like Million Dollar Baby, except without the million dollars, and with more snark, and um, what were we talking about?
Now for the best part: buried at the end of the article is the real reason why the Mediabistro blog was created. Touby says, "They pick on me all the time. After this, they won't want to give us any more press at all." Ha! Gothamist predicts that 10 new Gawker interns will be hired/picked up from the Port Authority to vet possible mistakes in Mediabistro coverage. The ensuing rivalry will spin out of control until "Snarkoff in the Hizzouse" is held on the roof of SoHo House in late June. But don't take our word for it - we've asked uber-NYC blogcritics Felix Salmon and Standard Deviance's Ellen Correia to weigh in with their opinions after the jump:
A) Felix Salmon:
OK. First, two numbers for you.Gawker pageviews in October 2003, when Elizabeth Spiers stopped editing Gawker and started working for New York Magazine: 474,000.
Gawker pageviews in January 2005: 5.2 million.The name Elizabeth Spiers "inspires awe" only for people with long memories, by internet standards. Gawker is one of the strongest brands in the blogosphere, and the vast majority of the credit for that belongs to Nick Denton. MediaBistro, on the other hand, while it also has a strong brand identity, is only now starting its first proper blogs, with their own domain names and (one devoutly hopes) full RSS feeds. There's no doubt that Spiers "gets" blogs, but there's also no doubt that Laurel Touby is coming late to this particular game. Spiers is going to have a lot on her hands: aside from staying on top of the standard MB content and TVNewser.com, she's going to be co-editing FishbowlNY, and editor-in-chief of (take a deep breath now): Galleycat, Unbeige, FishbowlLA, FishbowlDC, and MBToolbox. Even Jason Calacanis, to my knowledge, has never tried to launch six different blogs in one day. That said, Spiers has well-known and highly experienced bloggers on board, including Nathalie Chicha and Claire Zulkey: they shouldn't need much babysitting, and, especially in the case of TVNewser's Brian Stelter, bring their own built-in readership to MediaBistro.
Prediction: The readership of the new MB blogs will grow even faster than Gawker's did. But I will also happily buy Elizabeth Spiers a lunch at Lever House if she can get either 5.2 million pageviews or 1.1 million unique visitors from her blogs, in aggregate, in any month of 2005.
B) Ellen Correia of Standard Deviance:
The warning shots of this particular blog battle were fired back in October when Laurel Touby, Mediabistro's founder, told the New York Sun, "You just don't hear about Gawker as much. The buzz is not as high as it used to be. I was forced to read it before. Now, not so much." While Gawker's current blog slaves, Jessica Coen and Matt Haber, are as funny as a cat accidentally thrown in the dryer (sorry Thompson!), the brain behind Gawker is its proprietor, Nick Denton. Nick's success with the blogs is due to his business smarts, sense of humor, and amazing PR skills. While Elizabeth Spiers is new to the blog-father(mother) game, her background qualifies her for the job: She knows the funny, she has experience in business (her pre-Gawker job was in finance), and she likely learned a thing or two from her old boss. So, has the student become the teacher? Some signs point to yes.The incident the article cites where Elizabeth told aspiring writers that Mediabistro does not pay for freelance sounds eerily similar to Nick's claim that Gawker Media's limited ad revenue forces him to pay his writers in rubles. Both of them are likely lying through their teeth but by lowering expectations they are able to hire talented writers for a steal. Also, prior to every new Gawker blog launch an article profiling Nick's genius appears in the New York Times. Yesterday's article was the equivalent for Elizabeth.
However, there are some critical lessons Elizabeth may not have learned. 1) Management Doesn't Blog. Nick's a funny guy and could likely write Gawker himself, but then how would he find the time for lunches at Soho House and AIM recruitment of new writers? And another: 2) Don't Launch 6 Blogs At Once. Weblogs Inc. has followed the launch-a-million-blogs-at-once strategy and has ended up with a few moderately-successful blogs and dozens of crappy-designed crappy-named blogs (TUAW?? Seriously?).
So in the final analysis, I'm going to have to put my money on Gawker. Although I'm thrilled to see Elizabeth's return to blogging (none of this semi-annual posting b.s.), I think it's going to be very difficult for her to write a Gawker-caliber blog and run the entire Mediabistro show. But if in 9 months FishBowlNY is matching Gawker's current page views, I'll take Nick out to dinner because, let's face it, he'll need the moral support.
Thank you, Felix and Ellen, for your insights. More from low culture and Whatevs. And is it a conincidence that the NY Times' other blog story (bigger, with more pictures, in the more widely circulated Styles sections) was about baby blogs?




Great write-up, but what's with the post's author being the sorta anonymous "Gothamist"? C'mon Jake, fess up ... we know you wrote it. Bovs.
It was a collaborative effort; we've joined forces under "Gothamist" before.
Ellen:
A few points:
1) As I stated on the mb bulletin board (several times, but everyone conveniently ignored it), almost all of the content on mb is paid for. Most of it, in fact, is created in-house by my deputy editor, our two contributing editors, or myself. Also, I don't know you, so I can't be *too* offended by this, but "lying through my teeth?" What evidence is that accusation based on, exactly?
2) I have a co-blogger for the New York blog. I'm obligated to do, max, 2 posts a day. Not exactly a killer workload. And re: launching them all at once: given that only one person has tried it (Jason) and that Nick recently launched (successfully) 3 at once, I'd hardly say there's a precedent for failure. Is there a material difference between three and six? Maybe. I guess we'll see.
It's all very throw-it-against-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks. And sure, it may all come slithering down in a pathetic little blob. Again, time will tell.
my role in this should be made clear: i added sixteen instances of the word "snark" to the original copy- i'm not sure it was enough.
Hi Elizabeth,
I hope you're not too offended by the "lying through your teeth". Most of what I write is meant to be humorous and not to be taken too seriously. I recognize that you do compensate for essays with AvantGuild memberships. What I meant to point out (and maybe I wasn't clear) was that on the boards you said that MB was not a media conglomerate and could not afford to pay its writers $1/word. This is similar to Nick's assertion that Gawker does not make much money and thus cannot pay their writers that much. Clearly I have not seen the finances of either of the companies, but I was suggesting that maybe you both could pay more. That you don't is fine - your original argument that there's plenty supply to fit the demand works for me. And Nick's writers happily take the low salaries for the exposure - that's fine too. I am just questioning the "We don't have enough money" argument.
On the second point, perhaps you're right: there's not a precedent for this sort of thing and maybe two posts/day won't be that taxing. But given you won't be posting very much it's possible that Fishbowl won't be a Gawker-caliber blog. It may not be updated with the same frequency as Gawker and it may not be as funny. But who knows, your co-blogger could be a hilarious blogging machine. We'll have to see.
Of course I'm just a pajama-wearing blogger. Jake, why don't you ask Thompson what he thinks?
thompson suggests that snark might be a little bit 2004- he thinks that duck and green peas catfood is the new new. he also pointed out to me that fishbowlny doesn't link to gothamist, which i thought was a hurtful thing to say.
NEWS FLASH: It Ain't About Page Views
I hate to cause problems by throwing "yellow snow realism" on this little debate. But, it ain't about pageviews.
If it was about "page views", Craig Newmark would be married to Anna Nicole Smith right now (and he would look like Brad Pitt).
The CEO of Montster.com made it clear to everyone some time ago that "what matters" is how many of the people camped out on your website are actually buying stuff on your website. See "I Am The Anti-Craig' http://www.tempcity.com/dramanyc/index.php?showtopic=3142
I seriously doubt Gawker Media makes money from people buying stuff on it websites. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Gawker Media's sole product is access to reporters. The day advertising see (or think) that reporters won't write something about them when they advertise on a Gawker Media blog, Gawker Media's revenue stream will disappear.
When all is said and done, most people don't care. EVen the people who used to care, don't care. At this point a "snarky" blog of media people gossiping about media people--or even a "non-snarky" one--is trivial at best. It's all mutual masturbation while starring at the other person in a mirror.
Yes, Gawker does get millions of page-views a day. But the quality of the material has gone downhill. And it's basically the online equivalent of "Page 6" or a Cindy Adams column at this point.
Speaking of which, I find it astounding that Nick Denton can be running the blogs he does--which are successful regardless of content issues--and still claim to have "no money" to pay his own staff. Anyone in publishing knows the publisher always cries "low funds" even when the money is being trucked in. But in this case it's a bit crass.
My prediction for the future is some major financial guano hitting the fan at Nick Denton's fiefdom.
In case I have your attention, Elizabeth, two questions:
1. Would it have KILLED you to have designed the Fishbooles with an eye toward something--ANYTHING, really--that didn't reveal intense Gawker-slash-Gothamist-envy?
2. Did you have to bring this pissing contest to Washington?
This is kind of a non-story, mostly to the benefit of MediaBistro. The fact is, Gawker is no longer really a media critique site, but more a place to point out quirky celebrity/media happenings/trends and joke about them. On the other hand, reading FishBowlNY, the first series of posts seem to be rather well formed media critique delivered with only a hint of humor. I didn't think I would, but I like FishbowlNY. For me, Gawker has become something akin to the Enquirer for those who want to pretend they are too high-brow for the actual Enquirer.
p.s. If there is any weakness in MediaBistro's new FishbowlNY site, it's that it is called "fishbowlny.com" which is not a catchy, memorable, easy to brand name. Gawker is nice and simple, and catchy. Looking at all of the MediaBistro blogs, I would say that they have a problem coming up with good names for their blogs. On the other hand, Denton has an absolute 'nack' for coming up with, or finding people to come up with, catchy names.
Knowing how to brand can be just as important as having good content. MediaBistro's blogs may have good content, but if they don't know how to brand and promote, it will be hard to make those blogs popular.
I think instead of trying to build a quicky blog empire, MB should have focused on just a couple of blogs, and let Elizabeth build up a brand at MB 'first' then launch other blogs. I know time is of the essence, and they are trying to catch up, but having 6 weak blogs, is much worse than having two really strong blogs.
>> Don't Launch 6 Blogs At Once. Weblogs Inc. has
>> followed the launch-a-million-blogs-at-once
>> strategy and has ended up with a few
>> moderately-successful blogs and dozens of
>> crappy-designed crappy-named blogs (TUAW??
>> Seriously?).
TUAW has over 25,000 people a day coming to it already. TUAW stands for The Unofficial Apple Weblog, and four letter domains are hard to come by these days... so, I came up with TUAW and I agree it's got some flaws (i.e. how do you say it on the phone, but the site has amazing traffic and it will become the most popular Apple blog this year.
Moderately successful? Really?
Joystiq is the #1 games blog with five times the traffic of the next largest, Kotaku.
Autoblog is the #1 car blog with 3-4x the traffic of the next largest, Jalopnik.
Peter Rojas build Engadget to double the traffic of Gizmodo in just nine months. gizmodo had a like an 18 month google juice lead!
Trust me, getting ahead of Nick who can spike any blog to 100,000 page views a day with a Fleshbot or Gawker link (and he does so every week) is NOT easy. Nick's was the original master of this game and keeping up with him--let alone beating him--is hard, hard work...he's got a lot of cash, great style, a PR machine, and years and years of google juice.
so, if you thinking beating the master in all the blogs in which you are aligned is moderate success what is success??!?!?! What is very successful?!?
We've got a whole stable of blogs with over 1M page views, a bunch with over 500,000, and we have 71 active bloggers in the network now. We have exactly the same traffic overall of Gawker in January--and we don't have a porn blog like Fleshbot as half our traffic!!!
Sure, the ninche blogs are dull to people not into that niche... but as you can see from Gadling and Luxist we are learning about style and getting good domain names. I'm a quick study you know. :-)
The truth is the market for things like Fishbowl and Gawker is tiny... Gawker makes 1/10th or 1/20th the amount as Gizmodo. Following Nick with Gawker is following Nick off a cliff.
Nick does Gawker to have a tool to work the media... he gets to write about the people who write about him--that is brilliant. It's not a business.
Local vertical sites are never going to get big or be big businesses. Trust me, I ran Silicon Alley Reporter which we NY+Internet as opposed to NY+Media and it became a huge local business with $12M in revenue at the peak. If you look at that number however, it was a lot of events and a lot of dotcom money which doesn't exist any more.
Who is going to advertise on Gawker or FishbowlNY? I always do a test when I launch a brand... I look for the analog... and with Fishbowl and Gawker the analogs are Folio Magazine and Spy Magazine. I love(d) both but they both struggled and they both sucked as businesses--and they were national!!!
Perhaps a local blog like MetBlogs or Gothamist can become an OK to nice business, like New York or Chicago magazine are, but when you limit them to local + a vertical you don't have a huge business.
best j
>> Perhaps a local blog like MetBlogs or Gothamist can
>> become an OK to nice business, like New York or
>> Chicago magazine are, but when you limit them to
>> local + a vertical you don't have a huge business.
that sounds pretty good to me. maybe we won't be centimillionaires, but we'll be representing for our home town and producing something we love. i'm not sure why jason always makes that sound like failure.