Is Free Content Always Good Content?
February 18, 2009
The business model of websites and blogs suggest that if they can get XX amount of traffic to a blog, then they can essentially charge advertiser’s XX amount of dollars to showcase their product or service on said blog. This works well of course for the business that is enjoying the traffic and the advertising dollars. It also works quite well for the company who advertise their product or service and have the opportunity to convince readers to buy from them. But what about the reader: does he benefit?
When you visit a popular or engaging website, or you click on one of your favorites in your menu, you are looking for good, quality information that’s going to help you in your a.) personal life, b.) business life, c.) in finances, or d.) in relationships. Most web-users are looking for information that will either inform or enhance. And, most of that information is readily available all over the web, for free, instantaneously and in massive quantities. But as a reader, how can you be sure that what you’re getting is good information and not some rehashed, regurgitated stuff that can be found most anywhere on the WWW?
In the online world, the word free is good and desirable. Especially given the economy that we are currently experiencing, businesses want as much as they can get for their money. This includes consumers too and no area is exempt. But in an attempt to find bargains, are we settling for and compromising on quality and value? Are we relegated to take what we can get and get out?
There are few websites who actually charge for information that can essentially be found anywhere on the internet with some time and a little digging/clicking. These websites who charge for information are appalling to those who think information should be free and without reservation. But let’s consider this…
Would you pay for content that, let’s say is readily accessible, but that is of higher quality, confirmed facts, real interviews and has limited access? In other words, would you pay for exclusive content that would be available to you if you paid for it? Writers and journalists make their living off of providing information that is of value, much of what I mentioned a few paragraphs up. A writer is only as good as the content they write, therefore the value of their intellectual material is relevant and dependent upon their audience and the demand for the information that they can provide. Question: What makes you want to pay for content?
Personally, I’d gladly pay for content under certain conditions:
1.) The content was not all over the internet. It was/is exclusive and only a limited number of people have access to it. If it news in nature, then there must some higher quality reporting and/or interviews to make it plausible.
2.) The price was fair. I don’t think it’s wise to overcharge, but by the same token, quality costs. So while a news subscription site may cost $20 a month, a few news articles sent to my inbox a couple of times a week need not be $50.
3.) I must see and enjoy the value of the content. How annoying is it to pay for something and then not be able to use it? The content must enrich my life and be applicable in more than one way.
Under what circumstances, if any, would you pay for content online? Would you buy content that was available anywhere else, free or fee? Can you see any inherent value in paying for content of any price? What would be your limit?
Free is good…sometimes. As consumers and as business owners, there must be some take-away value in the service that we’re a part of. What ends up failing is when no one can “see” what they’re getting and cannot maximize its use. When customers realize that what they’re getting is high-quality and of exceptional value, surely they will pay. Everyone wants free, but everyone wants the most for their money. Finding the happy medium is the seeking point. Beyond that, free is not good. It is simply a word that has no meaning. This is when free can be a farce.
Provide value and quality and perhaps you can charge whatever you’d like. Perhaps.
It’s Bankruptcy Number 3 for Trump Entertainment
February 18, 2009
Just four years ago in 2005, Trump Entertainment emerged from its second Chapter 11 filing, and today, the company, along with nine of its affiliates, went down that path for a third time. Certainly, the recession played a significant role in the fate of Trump Entertainment, which operates three casinos and hotels in New Jersey. The company is quick to point out that the Chapter 11 filing will cause no changes in daily operations or the company’s philosophy.
The Chapter 11 filing did not come as a surprise to financial experts, and it certainly won’t hurt Donald Trump who vocally disagreed with the Chapter 11 filing and stated he would resign from the company’s board if it filed for bankruptcy. Looks like he’s moving onto bigger and better things, because according to an article on Reuters, Trump claimed that Trump Entertainment, “represents less than 1 percent of his net worth and that ‘my investment in it is worthless to me now.’” Strong words from the anti-brand champion who vacated the role of CEO of Trump Entertainment after the 2005 bankruptcy problems. Read more
What to do when you’ve Googled a candidate?
February 17, 2009
Thursday Bram offers us some tips on what to do when you’ve Googled someone’s name. We’ve all done it; but what do you do with the results?
If you run an online search on a job applicant, you can find pages and pages of information. For some names, search engines like Google can return millions of results. Interpreting all of that information — and ensuring that it’s truly relevant to a candidate — can take a little work.
Reading Social Networking Profiles
It’s common to find at least one social networking website in the results of a search for a particular name. Depending on the site, you may need a membership to view a profile or you may need to be ‘friends’ with an individual to look at their results. In other cases, you may be able to access a person’s full profile immediately. If you can access a profile, you can find a wealth of information: links to personal websites as well as accounts on other networking sites, details about past employment (sometimes even links to supervisors) and perhaps even updates written by the job candidate.
Reading through such information can be a lengthy process, especially if a candidate has maintained a blog or online journal for a long period of time. You can use Google or another search engine’s advanced search panel to search a website for particular keywords — if, for instance, you want to know about a candidate’s relationship with a former employer, you can search his or her blog for mentions of that company.
Interpreting Other Results
Results can range far beyond social networking profiles: if a prospective employee has been mentioned in a newspaper article or maintains a website, you’re likely to see such information in the results for his or her name. You can find products an applicant has endorsed and awards he or she has won. Not all of this information is relevant beyond proving a resume true or false, but it can help to build a clearer picture of a particular candidate — and help you make a decision on whether such an individual would be a good fit for a particular job.
Finding the Right John Smith
When you research a potential employee with an unusual name, it’s relatively easy to determine which search results are pertinent. On social networking sites, you can quickly compare education or work histories. On personal sites, it’s just a matter of looking for a reference to a particular employer.
But when you’re considering an applicant with a common name, you may run into a few more problems. No one wants to hold a job candidate responsible for the actions of someone else — even if they share a name — but it can be difficult to find an indicator that you’ve got the wrong John Smith. You can narrow down the search results by including a middle name, a location or a company in your search. You can also use other information to narrow down your hunt: running a search on a candidate’s email address can provide relevant information, as can searching a previous employer’s website for mentions of that employee’s name.
So: when you’ve got your search results, there is often more to be done to ensure you’ve got to the bottom of your candidate’s story …
Thanks, Thursday!
Sustainability Legislation : The Future of Sustainability Assurance
February 16, 2009
Gordon Brown’s love of bondage is well known to all UK voters. He used to boast in Parliament how he’d snuggle up to the dominatrix Prudence and do whatever she asked, so long as she’d eliminate boom and bust.
Now Prudence has been kissed goodbye, her siren whispers left behind as conveniently as any thought of limiting public debt in line with domestic GDP.
It’s a salutary lesson in being so cock-sure of yourself that you forget that life has a remarkable way of turning out differently to how you envisage.
So I thought I’d do a little self examination. There have been several posts on this blog which have concluded along the lines of “business really has to pull its finger out otherwise governments will legislate”.
But would legislation be such a bad thing? Read more
Details, Details
February 16, 2009
I’ve been looking at a lot of sites lately, and have come across several items that don’t need a whole post, and don’t fit anywhere else either. So thought I’d round up a few examples of small things that can make a big difference.
Message: Job-seekers Welcome
Starbucks hangs out the Welcome sign by putting a Careers link in the exact middle of its About page. The prominent placement indicates that jobs/people are central to the company.
QuikTrip highlights the Jobs tab on its top menu with a red circle and the note ‘Excellent.’ This double-duty detail not only makes Jobs seem important—it also delivers a one-word message that sets up positive expectations.
Message: We’re Serious
Qualcomm offers a substantive three-minute video in which the CEO talks about the importance of employees in the company’s success. The presentation signals visitors that filling jobs at Qualcomm is not just an agenda item for HR—it’s a top-down priority.
Message: We’re on Your Side
Another nice Qualcomm touch is introducing the visitor to some recruiters. Every recruiter profile includes a photo, plus interview tips and the recruiter’s own insights about the company. The effect is not only a feeling of personal relationship, but also an impression that Qualcomm wants job-seekers to succeed. (One criticism: This nifty feature is buried behind an Employee Profiles link. I think it deserves a spot on the top page!)
Boston Consulting Group takes the on-your-side message even further with an Interview Prep section that is extremely cool. In fact, it’s so cool I’ll talk more about it in a future post. Preview: BCG has come up with a simulation that really works. But even if this prep feature were just a few bullet points or an ordinary Q&A, it would still send a strong signal of support to the job-seeker.
Message: Let’s Connect
NetApp puts a contact invitation prominently at the top of each page on the Careers site. While ‘call right now’ is not a feasible strategy for every company–someone has to be at the other end of the phone!–an invitation of some kind (search jobs, send resume, download fact sheet, etc.) gives visitors the opportunity to make an active connection with the company.
Reminder
Details are important. If the major elements—core message, look-and-feel, content items—of a site are strong, the minor elements can add a valuable extra dimension. And sometimes it’s the little things that make the visitor feel important, or distinguish your site from a competitor’s, or help synch the Careers message with the company’s brand focus. So take a look at your site and see if there’s room for improvement at the detail level.
Get our updates
 |