So what is it we are unleashing here? And how will the upheaval be received? Web site redesigns and corporate rebranding efforts are always a bit of a crapshoot. You can invest money in a new logo, a new Web platform, and new consultants, but you can’t guarantee that that ethereal brand transformation will necessarily take hold in the minds of your audience. Indeed, even if your company succeeds in redefining your brand, you might alienate your old loyal audience in the attempt to win yourself a new one.
On the other hand, if the “old” audience isn’t doing you any good, then you might not have much to lose anyway. One can argue that, given the state of the online news industry, upheaval is good, and the time for Hail Mary passes is upon us. But it has to be someone’s job to ask the nagging question, how should we define success? A site can be deemed successful if it attracts enough page views to sell enough ads to stick around to die another day. Or we could define success in journalistic terms alone; in that case, quantity will never trump quality.
Thanks for the thoughtful take on our early days with the new blog platform. It's going to catalyze a lot of changes at Forbes. I think you underestimate the ability of our writers to mix up the tone and pace of their posts, mixing up news and the off-the-cuff. The conversations that fly around the office or over cubicle walls are often worth putting down into a blog post in between phone calls to report facts. And since when was Forbes ever staid in tone or approach?
#1 Posted by bruce upbin, CJR on Fri 6 Aug 2010 at 09:53 PM
Thanks for the thoughtful take on our early days with the new blog platform. It's going to catalyze a lot of changes at Forbes. I think you underestimate the ability of our writers to mix up the tone and pace of their posts, mixing up news and the off-the-cuff. The conversations that fly around the office or over cubicle walls are often worth putting down into a blog post in between phone calls to report facts. And since when was Forbes ever staid in tone or approach?
#2 Posted by bruce upbin, CJR on Fri 6 Aug 2010 at 09:53 PM
I see potential here but I definitely want more of a gatekeeper. There are already some contributors who are, um... conflicted to say the least and perhaps worse. The staff will be fine, of course and its natural for writers to build a personal brand (it's something that's been missing from most business magazines for a long time -- why has Forbes never had its own Tom Wolfe or Michael Lewis?) but opening up the forum to the entire world, especially to an investment community where everybody had a product or political point of view to sell (usually both), is a big mistake.
Look at Glenn Beck's problems with Goldline... There you have a for profit company selling overvalued gold coins to people based on the premise that Obama will ruin the economy and destroy the American dollar. It's a silly argument and an obvious attempt to take advantage of a specific audience. What will happen when these people use Forbes' blog network to run the same scam (but for free, at least they have to pay Fox for ad space when they prey on his audience).
#3 Posted by Mike M., CJR on Sun 8 Aug 2010 at 07:27 PM
A well written and informative article even for the common person like myself, thanks.
#4 Posted by Jun, CJR on Tue 30 Nov 2010 at 03:52 PM
Very well said. Hope all the information I learned from this web review will be useful for me someday.
#5 Posted by kim sanders, CJR on Tue 30 Nov 2010 at 07:52 PM
An article “worlds-most-powerful people, 2011” by Forbes Staff When it says that the Pope is one of the most powerful people that is a joke. Most catholic countries like Poland, Mexico, Spain, Ireland, and other don't listen to the Pope. What you hear from other news the world is becoming less and less Catholic. Vatican has less money and can't support itself from. I am catholic and I know most catholic give almost give no money to the Catholic Church. Plus, Most Catholic don't listen the Pope. Just because you see a lot people in world youth day does not mean that we listen 100% to the Pope. Have you ever heard about a country obeying the Pope or when you hear him or make comment on subject about doctrine does the world changes? No, He may be leader for many Catholic but does not mean they listen to him. This article is a joke. It’s treasure belongs to people’s stats like Egyptian artifacts belong to its people. What is the point of this article by putting the Pope as most powerful could it be anti-Catholic statement or bigotry. May this reporter or Forbes Staff is trying to promote his agenda and politics to the world? This is not news it is an agenda.
#6 Posted by David Garcia, CJR on Wed 2 Nov 2011 at 04:11 PM