4 ms·
This is so obvious it hurts. Another thing: why is the NYT for example unable to monetize it's huge traffic? I don't get this. There are people getting rich
by access_denied 18y ago
This is so obvious it hurts. Another thing: why is the NYT for example unable to monetize it's huge traffic? I don't get this. There are people getting rich with a lot less traffic to their sites.
- ensignavenger 18y agoThis is a really good question- I wonder the same thing about Facebook.
- Retric 18y agoPeople don't click on the links. When your looking at NYT or Facebook you are interested in their content when you using Google your looking for something. Put another way, how effective would advertising be when inserted in the middle of a phone conversation?
- ensignavenger 18y agoInserting advertising into a phone conversation would ruin the experience (more so than an ad on a website). But it would probably be noticed! You are probably right to an extent- but a lot of times people are browsing FB to waste time. If they are looking at the profile of some girl they like, and an ad shows up for the new album of one of the bands she likes- could that not potentially be an effective ad? (This could be a friend, who has a birthday coming up, and FB could suggest presents based on your friends preferences). I really think that FB just needs to adapt their ads better. I hope they get it figured out and prove everyone that thinks they aren't worth 15 billion wrong!
- omnivore 18y agoNewspaper people are dinosaurs. Working in a newsroom like is like stepping into a time warp and they just don't understand the evolution of technology. So they're too busy applying the 'old' way of doing things to something that's radically different. So they lose.