I think you are forgetting that I am in open warfare with FM and am actively looking for a replacement.

Oh, I thought you all had everything worked out.

Webbalert will need to link to stories that build her audience. If she does that, the money will come in. There is nothing to be gained by linking only to one set of blogs, for any reason.

I agree that if she was smart, she would link to as many sites as possible. Eventually linking to the same set of FM blogs (Neil said there were 11) will get boring for the viewer. But I disagree about nothing to gain.

Let's look forward a year. She is massively big in the tech news video market. Millions of daily viewers. If she links to all FM blogs, you don't think there is something to be gained there? Sure there is. Let's say that JoeTech was a FM blogger and on the "good list" with Webb. She continually links to JoeTech. JoeTech now has an incremental 1 million visitors a month which equates to an additional 2 million page views. Those pageviews are monetized by FM. JoeTech stands to gain and so does FM.

FM emailed me before the launch and requested that I mention them in the post. I didn't mention them because I don't see how it is relevant. FM sells their ads. Big deal.

Why isn't it relevant? I know you like the show (see below) but isn't an infomercial (her show) for FM blogs important to note?

I like Webbalert. Hell, I'd like to own Webbalert. And yes I enjoy seeing links to TechCrunch even though the traffic it sends is minimal. I'm doing nothing more than supporting the ecosystem and giving my honest opinion.

Traffic today is minimal, but if the statement she makes on her site about traffic-sharing plans are true, then the traffic won't always be minimal. She clearly says she will send FM blogs traffic and expects the FM blogger to link back to her.

Can you help me understand why you think this is such a great show? She stands there and reads yesterday's news. That's it. Her facial expressions, head bobs and in my apt stance are really a bit much from my perspective. As you note, she is knowledgeable about the industry. You noted yesterday, "and enough technical knowledge to do a fairly deep dive into the subjects she’s discussing." It's a 4 minute show, is there enough time to do a deep dive on anything? Can you give me an example of which story on day1/2 were a deep dive? I don't get why after 2 episodes you want to buy it. I hope you can help me understand what I am obviously not seeing regarding the show itself.

Please don't suggest that there is some evil motive.

I am not suggesting anything Mike. I am merely presenting facts that seem to indicate that this FM TV show is created for a sole purpose. And the discussion (as I noted) is not really about the FM blogger to the show, it's really about the show to the FM blogger. And I have said that FM is doing innovative things in the space, which is great. They just need to make sure viewers understand what the show is and what it isn't.

1) Morgan Webb, Michael Arrington, Richard MacManus, John Battelle, and Neil Chase (whoever he is) are a deeply coordinated, tight-lipped pack of liars,

or

2) You’re wrong.

Since self-immolation makes for great theatre, I do hope you’ll disgrace yourself further by continuing your efforts to drag so many names through the mud – and please do add more to the list! But your friends would perhaps advise you to direct your zeal toward more fertile investigative targets – like blowing the lid off of that whole lunar landing hoax.

Simon H

I think you are forgetting that I am in open warfare with FM and am actively looking for a replacement.

Webbalert will need to link to stories that build her audience. If she does that, the money will come in. There is nothing to be gained by linking only to one set of blogs, for any reason.

FM emailed me before the launch and requested that I mention them in the post. I didn’t mention them because I don’t see how it is relevant. FM sells their ads. Big deal.

I like Webbalert. Hell, I’d like to own Webbalert. And yes I enjoy seeing links to TechCrunch even though the traffic it sends is minimal. I’m doing nothing more than supporting the ecosystem and giving my honest opinion. Please don’t suggest that there is some evil motive.

Can you disclose at the top of this post that all double underlined links are in fact ads.

Thanks!

I love Mike “People Ready” Arrington getting compensated for his posts, but I’d recommend he and FM be as intellectually honest about their model as Ted Murphy is with PPP.

You hit the nail on the head with your quote:
“More links from FM sites = more traffic to Webb. More traffic to Webb = more impressions for FM to sell. More links back to FM sites = more ads to sell on those FM sites.”

You could add the last step:
“more ads to sell on those FM sites = more money in FM blogger pockets — therefore, more Webb PPP posts from FM bloggers = more money in FM blogger pockets”

I love it!

Let me try to explain my point from another angle which seemed to hit me while asleep.

FM has launched a "product" called WebbAlert. I think we all agree now that this is a FM product and not a standalone tv show. FM authors then post about the FM product. FM authors have a financial/fiduciary relationship with FM. Shouldn't there be a disclosure that "This new FM show is created/managed by the company who provides the banner advertising/revenue for this site."

I like Morgan Webb. I like WebbAlert. What more is there to discuss? I don’t pay attention to the links, I don’t hunt down and investigate the information. I just watch the five or so minute podcast, then move on to reality. Why does anyone care THIS much?

But please, for the enjoyment of others and myself, continue with the feeding frenzy, while the rest of us watch Morgan and other FM leaders succeed.