mmasnick

We have total editorial independence. They get their logos on the top on the right, and the rightto list resources in the righthand bar. We have total editorial independence on the content of the actual blog posts, and have said that repeatedly. They get to see the posts, same as everyone else does. The only thing that Sun and Intel employees get is that when they comment on posts, their comments are highlighted. But that's it.

Who said anything about ignoring your readers and the choices they make. I said the exact opposite.

And, come on, don't put up strawmen. Just because you're not lobbying to change the laws doesn't change the comparison which was apt: rather than admitting you need to fix your business model, you blamed your users for the choices they made. It's obnoxious, and you guys -- of all the sites out there -- should know that better than anyone.

No. You seem to be confused. The content of our posts and the work we do remains editorially totally independent. These aren't "hybrid" deals. These are deals where we continue to produce our content as is -- with no changes or no requirements and no say from the companies who are sponsoring. That's on purpose -- and we're quite upfront about that to the companies we work with. Why would we risk our reputation by pulling punches, when it's our honest and forthright opinions that make the site what it is.

"Ad blocking isn't killing any sites. We didn't really say it was either."

Did I miss something or did Ken specifically say: "Ad Blocking is devastating to the sites you love" That seems to be the same thing, no?

And when you say "the result of not being able to rehire people who were laid off last year specifically because our ad inventory is being hammered by ad blockers."

You're still missing the point. You're blaming your readers who chose to use adblock rather than focusing on ways to build a better business model.

Come on, you guys know this. You've covered the RIAA/MPAA doing the same exact thing over and over again. Don't blame your users and the choices they make. Focus on providing more value.

You're right. When many people don't consider those sorts of projects ads then we're doing our job right. Good ads shouldn't be considered ads, but they should be good content.

And, yes, we do have conventional ads on the site -- and I'm guessing you're not a regular Techdirt reader (which is totally cool, by the way), but we've discussed this. Having conventional ads is a way to get companies to talk to us about the other offerings that we do. They basically act as lead generation for us because so many companies only think traditionally, they contact us about advertising, and we try to steer them towards other, smarter, programs. But we still let ads go through, even if we tell them that they won't be particularly effective. If people still want to give us money for no good reason, that's their mistake. But we are careful not to take intrusive ads.

And, our ad revenue is less than 15% of the site's revenue (during Q4 it goes higher). So, no, the conventional ads are a waste, and I expect them to die out over time. But, for now, they're a great way to get companies to pay us to become leads for more creative solutions.

As the guy who wrote the post linked to above, I should note that in the post itself I describe multiple examples of how to come up with creative and compelling concepts that worked great. I agree that it may be more difficult, but if you read the site, we do explain the "how" regularly...

<i>All his copyright cases have either been dismissed, or else he lost.</i>

This is not true. Lessig recently had a huge victory with the Golan case...