http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/ ...watching the intersection of the Web and media Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:07:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-11258 Pay for traffic: Incentive or distortion? - - mathewingram.com/media Tue, 01 Jan 2008 22:53:20 +0000 http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-11258 [...] paying its writers on the same basis, i.e. a salary combined with a bonus based on traffic (I wrote a post about it at the time). And there have been other occasions as well, including when Business 2.0 magazine [...] […] paying its writers on the same basis, i.e. a salary combined with a bonus based on traffic (I wrote a post about it at the time). And there have been other occasions as well, including when Business 2.0 magazine […]

]]> http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-11257 Pay for traffic: Incentive or distortion? - - mathewingram.com/work Tue, 01 Jan 2008 22:49:23 +0000 http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-11257 [...] paying its writers on the same basis, i.e. a salary combined with a bonus based on traffic (I wrote a post about it at the time). And there have been other occasions as well, including when Business 2.0 magazine [...] […] paying its writers on the same basis, i.e. a salary combined with a bonus based on traffic (I wrote a post about it at the time). And there have been other occasions as well, including when Business 2.0 magazine […]

]]> http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-553 Will pay-for-click save online journalism? » PopMatters | Blogs | Crazed by the Music Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:45:06 +0000 http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-553 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Matthew Ingram, the Globe and Mail technical writer, has a good article on his website: Should I Be Paid Based on Trafffic.  Here he talks about the recent incentive program where some publications are paying writers a bonus if their columns get more web traffic.  “Newspapers already promote writers who draw a large readership,” he reasons but he also worries about “pandering for page views” (writing sensationalized articles just to get more readers) and if that will dictate what kind of writing we see on the web.  It’s a good issue to ponder.  Hopefully, editors will be vigilent about this system as it gets used (and abused) in the future.  In the meantime, if you see some unusally over-the-top articles at your favorite publication, you’ll know one reason why that’s happening.  Of course, all of us at PopMatters would never approve of such practices and splash SEX and items about WILD GIRLS or CELEBRITY GOSSIP or anything like that (editor, please note my web traffic spike, which will no doubt start now...). [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> […] Matthew Ingram, the Globe and Mail technical writer, has a good article on his website: Should I Be Paid Based on Trafffic.  Here he talks about the recent incentive program where some publications are paying writers a bonus if their columns get more web traffic.  “Newspapers already promote writers who draw a large readership,” he reasons but he also worries about “pandering for page views” (writing sensationalized articles just to get more readers) and if that will dictate what kind of writing we see on the web.  It’s a good issue to ponder.  Hopefully, editors will be vigilent about this system as it gets used (and abused) in the future.  In the meantime, if you see some unusally over-the-top articles at your favorite publication, you’ll know one reason why that’s happening.  Of course, all of us at PopMatters would never approve of such practices and splash SEX and items about WILD GIRLS or CELEBRITY GOSSIP or anything like that (editor, please note my web traffic spike, which will no doubt start now…). […]

]]> http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-500 Virtual Economics: Accurate measurement is apparently less ethical than guesswork Thu, 25 Jan 2007 03:18:23 +0000 http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-500 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Much heat over the last couple of days about ZDNet's policy (amongst others) of remunerating bloggers based on the page impressions their work generates. Steve Rubel finds the practice "raises an eyebrow"; Nick Carr characteristically points out that it's being going on for months.Months? Centuries! Certainly since newspaper owners have paid writers to write for their publications. Jeff Jarvis rightly says that "we are all...influenced by our traffic"; Mathew Ingram that "newspapers already promote writers who draw a large readership". A handful of newspaper columnists draw rock-star salaries. Many more are paid what their editors think they are worth. This assessment involves intuition, personal preference and the inexact science of market research, some combination of which tells their editors that they draw the readers to justify those numbers. I am honestly mystified that people can effectively claim (HuffPo) this sort of unsubstantiated editorial guesswork is ethical but accurate measurement of a writer's draw is not. The claim seems...too far from disinterested to be itself considered wholly ethical. Editors are paid considerable sums to make subjective judgement calls from which writers expect to benefit. Journalists protesting against changing that rather murky relationship to a fair, impartial and transparent measurement of quantifiable appeal strikes me as more than a little suspect.  [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> […] Much heat over the last couple of days about ZDNet’s policy (amongst others) of remunerating bloggers based on the page impressions their work generates. Steve Rubel finds the practice "raises an eyebrow"; Nick Carr characteristically points out that it’s being going on for months.Months? Centuries! Certainly since newspaper owners have paid writers to write for their publications. Jeff Jarvis rightly says that "we are all…influenced by our traffic"; Mathew Ingram that "newspapers already promote writers who draw a large readership". A handful of newspaper columnists draw rock-star salaries. Many more are paid what their editors think they are worth. This assessment involves intuition, personal preference and the inexact science of market research, some combination of which tells their editors that they draw the readers to justify those numbers. I am honestly mystified that people can effectively claim (HuffPo) this sort of unsubstantiated editorial guesswork is ethical but accurate measurement of a writer’s draw is not. The claim seems…too far from disinterested to be itself considered wholly ethical. Editors are paid considerable sums to make subjective judgement calls from which writers expect to benefit. Journalists protesting against changing that rather murky relationship to a fair, impartial and transparent measurement of quantifiable appeal strikes me as more than a little suspect.  […]

]]> http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-407 mathewingram.com/media » Should all journalists be bloggers? Fri, 19 Jan 2007 04:56:20 +0000 http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-407 [...] Should I be paid based on traffic? [...] […] Should I be paid based on traffic? […]

]]> http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-400 Media News Thu, 18 Jan 2007 17:13:22 +0000 http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-400 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Internet Pushes Concept of 'Free' Content (IHT) After spending millions of dollars over the past decade fighting the free exchange of their products over the Internet, some media companies are now yielding. The best way to get something in return, they are deciding, may be to accept that consumers want to play but few seem to want to pay. If enough of them join the game, there can still be a payback. MathewIngram.com: How should professional journalists be compensated for online work, and will paying them (even in part) based on the amount of traffic they get distort how they write or the topics they choose? [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> […] Internet Pushes Concept of ‘Free’ Content (IHT) After spending millions of dollars over the past decade fighting the free exchange of their products over the Internet, some media companies are now yielding. The best way to get something in return, they are deciding, may be to accept that consumers want to play but few seem to want to pay. If enough of them join the game, there can still be a payback. MathewIngram.com: How should professional journalists be compensated for online work, and will paying them (even in part) based on the amount of traffic they get distort how they write or the topics they choose? […]

]]> http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-375 Martin Stabe » links for 2007-01-17 Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:27:55 +0000 http://mathewingram.com/media/2007/01/16/should-i-be-paid-based-on-traffic/#comment-375 [...] Mathew Ingram: Should I be paid based on traffic? ZDNet and Business 2.0 are paying their journalists bonuses based on the traffic they generate on their blogs. Is this really as ethically dubious as some commentators have suggested? (tags: journalism blogging ethics zdnet business2.0) [...] […] Mathew Ingram: Should I be paid based on traffic? ZDNet and Business 2.0 are paying their journalists bonuses based on the traffic they generate on their blogs. Is this really as ethically dubious as some commentators have suggested? (tags: journalism blogging ethics zdnet business2.0) […]

]]>