
NOT.
It will just hurt more later!
A AdAge article informs us that the big media groups engaged in lobbying Google to the positioning of their contents is artificially privileged in the search results. They claim that sources "professional" should be recognized that most ... blogs for example!
An excerpt particularly "Neolithic"
"You Should not Have a System," one happy executive Said, "Where are Those Who Essentially parasites off the true content of Producers Benefit disproportionately."
Who are these media groups? Including: BusinessWeek, ESPN, Hearst, Meredith, The New York Times, Time Inc.. and The Wall Street Journal.
is still completely stunned to see that some "traditional" media will not support it so vehemently instead of adapting. Why not simply develop tactics SEO, blogs, make connections to the external site open to the community and interact with it, give free access to its archives, etc.. ... It does is not magic nor black nor white ... Google's algorithm is not "Transparent" but the ways to improve its position, they, are. And do everything it would take less energy than their lobbying efforts. I
vogue between dismay and anger at this kind of behavior ... I think we just want to shout "Adapt or Die! If one is nicer one wants to say "Let it go!
Fortunately they are not all the media who agree:
"It's the plaintive cry of People Who Have Lost Their monopoly Trying to scrounge a little of it back," Said Michael Wolff, Vanity Fair columnist and founder of Newser, Which aggregates and links news from around the web. "Sometimes it's true that you'd rather get what The New York Times has to say about something rather than a host of bloggers. But more interestingly it's not always true. And it is in fact less and less true."
Ceci étant dit, si vous n'avez pas entendu le podcast de l'émission de Christiane Charette du 27 mars dernier sur la crise à Radio-Canada, ça vaut la peine... question de voir que nous avons nos propres petits dinosaures nostalgiques au Québec.
0 comments:
Post a Comment