Comments on: Blogonomics, Maria Popova edition http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: traducator romana daneza http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-53415 Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:54:07 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-53415 “Those I called desired to take hold of a property and put these individuals available without any subsequent intending according to risk tolerance and / or the things i asked to utilize any property more than a long time,Half inch she states that. “These were being top quality counselors exactly who just didn’t view the everyday life intending costs associated with the serious obstacles of growing aged the united states. With its model, these would not be certain that a funds would certainly be as durable after i could need the idea in order to.

]]>
By: ThomasNEPA http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-49466 Sun, 16 Mar 2014 07:18:51 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-49466 Both sides have some valid points. Bottom line is, outside all the noise, is that’s it’s a wonderful little website that she clearly works very hard on. So who cares…

]]>
By: QCIC http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-45899 Mon, 18 Feb 2013 19:36:20 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-45899 Brainx-
drajchel-

This isn’t Nightline. This is a blog where the author is free to write about what he wants. IN this particular case he wants to write about the ugly juxtaposition of claiming you need donations to support your ad-free website when the website is sort of not ad-free.

Also personally as someone who works on the financial side of things and does a lot of time working with timesheets and time allocation plans and billable hours and whatnot. There is a zero % chance she is being honest about how much time she spends on this unless she is counting every hour of reading she does as “work for the site” which is kind of disingenuous she she strongly implies that she would be doing the reading regardless.

The idea that she is working on the blog 17 or 20 or 31 hours a day (depending on which estimates of hers you use) is frankly laughable. Does she never do anything that isn’t blog related? No dates? No going to a concert? I find that hard to believe.

]]>
By: drajchel http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-45890 Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:02:13 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-45890 This whole article reads strangely to me. First of all, unless Popova is benefiting from public funds or actively ripping people off, this doesn’t really qualify as news. The copyright question does, and I don’t see why that isn’t pursued. As it is, it’s just one person having a problem with her making money at what she does.

Since BrainPickings is not a 501(c)3, it’s not bound by the standards of charity. Even so, the affiliate links are not a scandalous deal. Affiliate linking isn’t even that big of a deal in the case of known 501(c)3 organizations that are explicitly not allowed to advertise. TheCurrent, one of the Minnesota Public Radio stations, routinely places links for purchase of songs on its website – this is not banned under any advertising law. It’s allowed because it does not have an explicit call to action (also how underwriting announcements are distinguished from ads on public radio.) Amazon linking to products spoken about is also very much part of how the public radio site proceeds online – and they do all this while honoring specific laws that do not allow them to advertise. They can make products available for purchase, they just can’t tell you to buy them.

Popova does much the same thing on Brain Pickings, and as a private entity she is not bound by these laws. Brain Pickings offers a thought-provoking blog with really high quality content. It also draws attention to high-quality content. It is not funded by taxpayers, but by its own readers. The readers are getting what they pay for – and what they’re getting is really good stuff. If you read the blog, you’ll see that its audience isn’t going to consist of the naive and silly. BrainPickings is written by a critical thinker for a critical thinker.

So … what’s the problem here with how she’s making her money? Is it just that she’s making money and supporting herself? The money she has isn’t part of the public trust – it’s private donations from private citizens. Now, if the government paid for it, then I’d see the point.

]]>
By: BrainX http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-45887 Sun, 17 Feb 2013 07:33:22 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-45887 Is this a real story? I’m still trying to understand why it is anyone’s business how much someone makes doing their job. If she has a viable business model, then more power to her. If I were approached by bloggers that attempted to hector me into revealing my finances I don’t think I would respond nearly as elegantly as Ms. Popova has responded.

I don’t subscribe to the site but I have visited and have been turned on to books she has curated. The copyright question is valid, but I imagine authors benefit from the excerpts as teasers for the Amazon purchases.

Brainpickings is a bright spot on the web, occupying a unique space, in my opinion. Why not just celebrate that…?

]]>
By: CWhoa http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-45878 Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:01:34 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-45878 There’s a big difference in the editorial process between affiliate links and sponsored links. Sponsored links are advertisers who approach you and say ‘link to us from your blog, using these words, and we’ll pay you x’. Affiliate links are something you make yourself, if you’re writing about a book that your readers may buy, you find it on Amazon and create a link that will track the sales and send you a kickback if your readers buy it.

Could that encourage her to link more to products available on Amazon? Yes. Is that the same as a banner ad or sponsored link? No.

]]>
By: zzzsophia http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-45877 Fri, 15 Feb 2013 16:26:37 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-45877 Why doesn’t anyone talk about the copyright violations on brainpickings? She posts entire pages of books that are under copyright, but gives no indication that she has permission to do so. It’s laughable that she’s involved in writing a “curator’s code” of honor.

]]>
By: nandop http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-45875 Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:04:31 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-45875 To claim that the affiliate links are “more subversive” than the 55K Xerox paid to Salisbury to write is just ignorance of journalism basics. Popova doesn’t accept money from Amazon to write anything about anyone, and it certainly isn’t fifty five thousand dollars for an article. Advertising’s money setting up the journalism agenda is a whole different thing and it’s way worse than anything said here.

That said, Popova should update the text on her site to “ad-free (but with affiliate links)” and end this playground for critiques. She does a brilliant work curating and blogging and it earns the money – be it from links or donations.

]]>
By: dsquared http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-45874 Fri, 15 Feb 2013 06:49:00 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-45874 actually this is now bugging me a little bit, as I have a constitutional dislike of long and flowery how-could-you-impugn-my-pure-motives spiels. Juxtaposing a quote:

“And here’s the thing – I do it not to “build an audience” or “generate revenue” or any of that, but because it gives me enormous joy and stimulation. It makes me excited to wake up and fulfilled to go to bed.”

with a fact

“On top of that, as recently as a couple of months ago, Popova was found to be behind skeevy SEO sites like curesleepapnea.com, gastricbypassrisk.com, and liposuctionrisksinfo.com.”

]]>
By: y2kurtus http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/13/blogonomics-maria-popova-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-45870 Fri, 15 Feb 2013 01:47:12 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=20538#comment-45870 “for the first time in my life I’m not perpetually broke, to peg me as a member of the 1% – “outed” as one – is not only absolutely ludicrous but also quite hurtful.”

We’ve come so far that being in the top 1% is now a hurtful insult…

…this is going to end in tears comrades.

]]>