KWPro.net

I saw a little article on CNN regarding 2010's tech fails.  One particular part made me cringe because the author obviously was diluting the value of what's become known as "content farms".  In particular, the author takes aim at Demand Media.

How the author can claim Demand Media is a tech failure in 2010 baffles me.  Actually, it doesn't.  It's a political ploy by CNN to cover up the fact that they have a suffering, ancient business model that's being outclassed by the internet.  The author writes that:

"But cranking out by-the-numbers copy, with profit as the only motive, just junks up the Web for everyone."

As far as I know, Demand Media does very well monetarily, given that they've only been around for a few years.  More than that, I know Demand Media has a fairly good checks and balances system with their Studios.  Quite outstandingly, they've been able to come up with a system that discovers what people want.  Supposedly, just as the people at CNN do in monitoring trends from a few sources (e.g. twitter, google, etc.).  So how is Demand Media's model any different?

I'll tell you how: it's successful and it's a game changer.  Demand Media's model is such a huge game changer, it forced other companies like AOL and Yahoo to look at themselves once again and attempt to re-invent themselves.  More than that, Richard Rosenblatt himself welcomed other people to enter the game, rather than going after these companies, thus demonstrating what a powerful business model Demand Media has come up with.

Obviously, this author is just a pawn placed by the old media of CNN to voice their opinion.  Ironically, the fact that he's writing an opinion piece that offers zero social value is hypocritical in that he too is junking up the web.

But I don't think Demand Media is junking up the web.  Demand Media, to me at least, is kinda like the new Readers Digest.  It's allowing for numerous topics and methods of engagement.  And the articles are not all necessarily junk.  Having worked on the Livestrong.com site, I can tell you first hand, that some very good and informative content is generated.

What that little blurb was simply an envious slight against Demand Media because CNN lacks the ability to come up with an equally good solution.  I mean, isn't the point of those news articles that CNN pumps out simply to generate revenue?  So this author has little credibility with me. Fortunately, on average I refuse to utilize CNN as an authoritative source on news, since they're obviously biased.  The only thing CNN has is just a brand name.  But even then they're slowly besmirching it with their own jealous rage.