I’ll be very blunt: A system where top media executives and owners explicitly acknowledge their preference for money over a quality product is a manipulator’s dream. For example, one of the most effective ways to get positive online coverage is to dangle the promise of tweeting out or promoting the article after the blogger writes it. If a company has 200,000 Twitter followers, a blogger will consciously decide to pull his punches so the company will send its fan base to the blog. Call this an indirect bribe.
It can also get a lot more direct. Because I am both an online ad buyer and a publicist, I am able to effectively buy coverage on many sites. On the same day a blogger might be emailing me about a rumor he or she heard, it’s very likely that their publisher may also email to ask if I want to increase the size of my ad buy. Or, more often than not, I only get one email—because the publisher and the writer are the same person. The second my ads start appearing on their sites, blogs become very receptive to the stories I “pitch” them.
Believe it or not, you can actually pay to send traffic to articles via services like StumbleUpon, as a way of making sure the piece hits the “Most Popular” lists (which bloggers then wrongly interpret as a sign of having written a hit). However primitive these tactics are, they produce a consistent and reliable result that has never disappointed me.
The speculation frenzy
Bloggers have to churn out dozens of posts a day. A recent lawsuit filed against Reuters revealed that bloggers were required to write more than eight posts a day, and clock as much as 20 hours a week of unpaid overtime to do it. Bloggers have repeatedly told me that their daily quotas hang over their heads and influence almost every publishing decision they make.
Their editors have made it this way. GigaOm founder Om Malik brags that he’s written more than 11,000 posts and 2 million words in the last decade. When even the boss is churning out three posts a day, you know that the pressure is real.
As a result, no topic is off limits, no source too sketchy, no story too speculative if it will result in an extra post. Veteran bloggers John Biggs and Charlie White put it well in their book Blogger Bootcamp, when they reminded aspiring bloggers that there is “no topic too mundane that you can’t pull a post out of it.”
People like me have incredible luck getting coverage just by sending fake, anonymous “tips” to bloggers about the things we want them to write about. No one has the time, and few have the interest, to verify before publishing. Michael Arrington, who parlayed dubious scoops on his blog TechCrunch into a $25 million acquisition by AOL, said it himself: “Getting it right is expensive, getting it first is cheap.” You can’t tell me it’s not easy to manipulate someone so transparent about his self-interest.
Once, during a very public lawsuit, I introduced a narrative into the media (that bloggers had refused to pick up and research when I tried to sell them on it) by composing a fake internal memo, supposedly leaked by an employee of one of the companies in the suit, and sending it to bunch of blogs. The same bloggers who were uninterested in the facts when I informed them directly, gladly put up posts about it that screamed “EXCLUSIVE!” and “LEAKED!”
The poet Hesiod once wrote that rumor and gossip are a “light weight to lift up, but heavy to carry and hard to put down.” Speculation and iteration for blogs is much the same. Publishers and marketers are addicted to it, and it’s this addiction that can leveraged and is exploited every day.
Distribution defines content

This is an interesting, clear, and concise warning to all of journalism. The question is 1.) will it be heeded 2.) will Mr. Holiday put his money where his mouth is and try to do better himself.
#1 Posted by Janet Dean, CJR on Thu 19 Jul 2012 at 04:02 PM
Ah; so apparently print journalism is in the crapper because of those naughty, yellowpress blogs. Nothing to do with the point that print media long since gave up accuracy for sensationalism themselves? Which is the chicken and which the egg? As for sensationalism driving views, that's likely true. And yet, at least a few people read sources for information and not just affirmation or topless models found in headless bars. A consistently accurate and trustworthy site gets my views (as few as they are) every day. The Sun or the Daily Mail or Huffpo only gets my views by virtue of a link from a site I trust.
#2 Posted by JohnR, CJR on Thu 19 Jul 2012 at 04:27 PM
Uhh, isn't CJR part of the problem here? Why give Holliday column space about himself? Didn't you just get p'wned?
Why not an interview, or a Chittum column about him, instead?
#3 Posted by SocraticGadfly, CJR on Thu 19 Jul 2012 at 09:41 PM
Kind of ironic to write a blog post about...I mean, he clearly makes good points - our media system needs a change. But he says right here it's his job to exploit blogs - so is he taking his own advice, or continuing to take advantage?
#4 Posted by Eric, CJR on Thu 19 Jul 2012 at 11:25 PM
Agree with Eric - while the points Holiday makes in this post are valid - has he really come clean? Not sure if I am sold on his goal of reform.
#5 Posted by JBux, CJR on Fri 20 Jul 2012 at 12:48 AM
After getting my google reader and RSS feeds filled with articles and blog posts about or by Ryan Holiday today....right on the relase of his book....gives me the hint that, yeah, this guy knows what he's doing.
I agree with previous posters - it will be very interesting to see what Holiday's next move will be after this book. Will we see another Tucker Max media stunt soon again? Or will we see a dramatic change in online journalism?
#6 Posted by Lionel D, CJR on Fri 20 Jul 2012 at 02:49 AM
Until we consider the sort of work Holiday does as 'litter' in a more literal sense of the word, we are unlikely to see things change. Driving readers and consumers away from thinking in page-clicks is a baby step forward, one already thriving in the zeitgeist these days. Its not a stretch to say many are revolted by what they see and experience in the news these days and have turned off entirely.
#7 Posted by Pia Sawhney, CJR on Tue 24 Jul 2012 at 11:34 AM