Two respected and well-established bloggers recently weighed in on Pajamas Media. Kim du Toit, a must read for gun buffs, was kind, yet critical in some regards:
In the first case, the PJM founders said that they were not going to compete with Blogads. Sorry, but that’s total and utter bullshit ...
I also think that PJM were dishonest in the way they treated their would-be contributors. Once again, it seems that when the Big Dogs realized just how much their share of ad revenues was going to be diluted by the inclusion of so many other bloggers, they made a unilateral decision to cut back on the numbers. What they did may have been understandable, or even legal.
But it wasn’t gentlemanly.
To be fair to du Toit and PJM, you should read his whole piece before passing judgment on his opinion.
Tim Worstall takes a somewhat broader view, discussing old and new media with some depth, making it clear he's more interested in offering critical advice and not simply criticism.
... I was at least in the first iteration of said gang and Roger was telling at least one person that I still was the week before the launch. So my 2 cents worth.
The answer lies in that word "syndication". From what I see now the PJM guys are taking this to mean syndicating bloggers and blogs to bloggers and other online readers. Which while it might be both fun and could even, given sufficient traffic, be profitable, isn’t what I thought they were first talking about when the subject was raised.
Rather, I think they should be syndicating blogs and bloggers to the mainstream media.
That last bit interests me as I've already been offered between 1k and 2k in writing contracts for what one might term MSM content based upon my blog writing. They can put whatever ads around it they wish, personally I prefer to remain a writer as opposed to an advert - as my empty side bars would indicate. Ad free, I can say mostly what I want here - my only real responsibilities being to my readers and myself as regards my blogging.
Frankly, the PJM blog roll mostly bores me as it appears some of the more outspoken and unpredictable affiliated blogs I enjoy are good enough to carry their ads, but perhaps not to make their front page. Ah, to be young and irresponsible when we want to be - and on point when appropriate. That's the freedom of blogging for me and I think it short-sighted for some blogs to not realize that, with corporate ads, comes corporate guidance.
And speaking of on point, I especially liked this in an email from Tim:
This "Blogs v the MSM" isn't actually that at all. It's "those currently working as journalists against those who can do the job as well. Or better."
And a business that exploits that should do well.
Maybe one day a blogger could even replace her. ; )
I enjoy your posts re PJM even if nobody else seems to. From the day I read Kenton Kelly's story I immediately wished abject failure on PJM and everything it stands for. Post onward!
Posted by: jkatl | Sunday, December 04, 2005 at 06:23 AM
I enjoy them too, Dan. Even though I don't comment on everything you write about PJM, I do read it. I'm curious about something. Am I the only person that wonders why the PJM site shows a bathrobe above their name, instead of pajamas?
Posted by: MarlboroGal | Sunday, December 04, 2005 at 05:30 PM
Am I the only person that wonders why the PJM site shows a bathrobe above their name, instead of pajamas?
Far from it, MG - it's been pointed out in many criticisms around the net. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
Posted by: Dan | Sunday, December 04, 2005 at 05:33 PM