1. This is the entrepreneurial blog I visited: http://www.matthuggins.com.
This blog is done by Matt Huggins and he uses it to explain, in detail, the website that he has created. It’s sort of a spinoff of www.match.com or www.eharmony.com. It’s a match making site. He explains in his blog when he launched his website, how he has modified it to get better sales and how many people have signed up so far.
The two internet sources that discuss the use of blogging as a form of business promotion are:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_18/b3931001_mz001.htm
and
http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abu/y206/m01/abu0158/s04"
Business Week is a magazine that had an article about how blogs change businesses and goes into detail about why and how blogs change businesses. Auction Bytes is a website that posted an article about how an eBay seller uses his blog as a marketing tool.
2. Other options that entrepreneurs have as far as marketing goes would be advertisements. Whether the ad is in magazines, TV commercials, radio commercials, or even on the side of a bus, ads get their product out to the public. Also being active in the market you’re in. For example, if your selling a type of software, you should appear at software conventions to get the word out about your product. One way a blog is different than ads or participating in conventions is that the reader or viewer gets more of an insight on the company and product. The entrepreneur can also add new updates on the product daily. On Matt Huggin’s blog, he had stats on his website which is also interesting for the viewer. With that being said, I however don’t think blogs are as effective at selling a product as ads and active participation are. I’m not going to online and go searching for a blog about a sweater that I want to buy. I’ll already know where to go online to get it because I saw an ad in a magazine for it or a spokesperson for the company that approached me in the mall was wearing it. Ads and active participation met the consumer’s eye before a blog ever will.
3. This research defiantly supports my original thesis and I would give it a 5 and I don’t want to change it.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Saturday, March 21, 2009
News eZines vs. News Blogs
The news eZine I’m using for this post is www.talkcon.com and the news blog I’m using is www.worldblog.msnbc.msn.com.
These two websites are very different. Talkcon is an eZine and is laid out like one. It has different sections of news that you can click on, like Credit Crisis, Current Events, U.S. Issues, etc. If you click on any of those links, articles come up about the topic you picked. The articles are written as if you were reading a newspaper article. The articles I read weren’t opinionated and didn’t seem like someone was just writing about how they feel about a topic. It was a news article.
WorldBlog has a very different look than Talkcon does. It’s powered by NBC so there is more money for a better website, but this website is a news blog, not a news eZine. On this page there a various articles which can be discussed by viewers. The articles range from China’s Economic Model, to a Taliban Hostage begging for help, to a German school shooting. There are lots of world news topics that can be discussed compared to Talkcon that just had the articles and no discussion took place.
I feel that the WorldBlog was more professional and effective. Just the look of it was more professional. Like I mentioned, it’s powered by NBC which is a very big news company and is very professional. The WorldBlog was also a lot easier to find on the internet. I just typed in ‘world news blog’ into Google and that was the first option whereas finding Talkcon took a lot more searching. I thought Talkcon was easier to read only because it had different sections or topics you could click on and read about and WorldBlog didn’t. On WorldBlog you just had to keep scrolling down to view the different stories.
I think both websites covered the same type of stories, but WorldBlog defiantly had a greater amount of articles to read as compared to Talkcon. I felt that both websites were credible and trustworthy, but if I had to choose one over the other, I would choose WorldBlog because it had much more information and is powered by NBC which is a very credible source.
Before doing this assignment, I would said that I felt that a print newspaper would be more credible than a news blog. After doing this assignment, I felt that the news blog I chose was more credible than the eZine that I chose. In the end, I would choose a print newspaper over both a news blog and a news eZine because I feel that is the most credible source.
I would rate this research as a 4 – somewhat supports my thesis because coming into this I had a negative outlook on news blogs, but WorldBlog changed my outlook somewhat on news blogs. However, I still think print newspapers are the most credible and do not want to change my thesis.
These two websites are very different. Talkcon is an eZine and is laid out like one. It has different sections of news that you can click on, like Credit Crisis, Current Events, U.S. Issues, etc. If you click on any of those links, articles come up about the topic you picked. The articles are written as if you were reading a newspaper article. The articles I read weren’t opinionated and didn’t seem like someone was just writing about how they feel about a topic. It was a news article.
WorldBlog has a very different look than Talkcon does. It’s powered by NBC so there is more money for a better website, but this website is a news blog, not a news eZine. On this page there a various articles which can be discussed by viewers. The articles range from China’s Economic Model, to a Taliban Hostage begging for help, to a German school shooting. There are lots of world news topics that can be discussed compared to Talkcon that just had the articles and no discussion took place.
I feel that the WorldBlog was more professional and effective. Just the look of it was more professional. Like I mentioned, it’s powered by NBC which is a very big news company and is very professional. The WorldBlog was also a lot easier to find on the internet. I just typed in ‘world news blog’ into Google and that was the first option whereas finding Talkcon took a lot more searching. I thought Talkcon was easier to read only because it had different sections or topics you could click on and read about and WorldBlog didn’t. On WorldBlog you just had to keep scrolling down to view the different stories.
I think both websites covered the same type of stories, but WorldBlog defiantly had a greater amount of articles to read as compared to Talkcon. I felt that both websites were credible and trustworthy, but if I had to choose one over the other, I would choose WorldBlog because it had much more information and is powered by NBC which is a very credible source.
Before doing this assignment, I would said that I felt that a print newspaper would be more credible than a news blog. After doing this assignment, I felt that the news blog I chose was more credible than the eZine that I chose. In the end, I would choose a print newspaper over both a news blog and a news eZine because I feel that is the most credible source.
I would rate this research as a 4 – somewhat supports my thesis because coming into this I had a negative outlook on news blogs, but WorldBlog changed my outlook somewhat on news blogs. However, I still think print newspapers are the most credible and do not want to change my thesis.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Newspapers vs. News Blogs
The two websites I chose to compare and contrast are http://www.goodnewsblog.com/ and http://www.latimes.com/. First impressions are key to catching the viewers attention and keeping it. When I first viewed The Good News Blog, I wondered if it really was a news blog. The way the page is laid out isn’t like a regular news site usually is. Their website also looks like they are on a smaller budget than other news websites. You don’t have to a have a lot of money to deliver news to your readers, but it helps with first impressions. When I first viewed The LA Times, I had no doubt that this was a credible source. The website is laid clearly and is very organized. The top stories are at the top of the page, the different sections of the newspaper are to the left of the page, entertainment, quick links, most e-mailed stories, weather and traffic are all located on the right side of the page. There is a ton of information on the home page alone, but it’s not overwhelming to the viewer.
Comparing this clear, organized, reputable news website to The Good News blog is like comparing night and day. The Good News Blog is really only one page that has different links to articles. The Good News Blog only provides information that is “good” because newspapers these days only focus on the “bad” news. Whether the news is “good” or “bad”, it’s still news, and the people still need to hear it. I do give credit to The Good News Blog for having a massive amount of “heartwarming” news stories. Although I would choose The LA Times over The Good News Blog any day, it would be nice to have a couple of these “good” stories make the front of the LA Times instead of all the stories being scandals, murder, etc.
After reading various articles on both of these websites, my hunch of The LA Times being a more credible news source was correct. The Good News Blog is family owned and is relatively small as compared to The LA Times that is a huge newspaper and has tons of writers working for them. Major newspapers have standards and requirements all of their articles have to meet which guarantees quality news whereas blogs don’t have to meet any requirements. Who knows if the stories they are writing are accurate. With that being said, I don’t feel that blogging particularly supports the type of journalism that digital print media produces. Some blogs may reputable, but most aren’t.
To convince me that a news blog is credible, I would have to see sources of where they got their information. I would also look up the information being given on the news blog on a reputable newspaper site to see if the information is the same. If it’s exactly the same, with the same questions answered, etc. then the blog is just copying other news sources and putting their own spin on it. However, if I see that the news blog and the newspaper have different interviews with different people or went to different locations to find out information, I would believe that the news blog was a credible source, and I would read it.
I feel that any big, well known newspaper is credible whether it’s online or in print. Like I said above, newspapers have to meet requirements and have restrictions on what they write in their articles. They have credible sources and have a “clean” record of having credible sources since they began the newspaper. I feel the newspapers are more credible than news blogs.
The research that I did for this module did not change my original thesis. I would rate this research a 5, strongly supports my thesis.
Comparing this clear, organized, reputable news website to The Good News blog is like comparing night and day. The Good News Blog is really only one page that has different links to articles. The Good News Blog only provides information that is “good” because newspapers these days only focus on the “bad” news. Whether the news is “good” or “bad”, it’s still news, and the people still need to hear it. I do give credit to The Good News Blog for having a massive amount of “heartwarming” news stories. Although I would choose The LA Times over The Good News Blog any day, it would be nice to have a couple of these “good” stories make the front of the LA Times instead of all the stories being scandals, murder, etc.
After reading various articles on both of these websites, my hunch of The LA Times being a more credible news source was correct. The Good News Blog is family owned and is relatively small as compared to The LA Times that is a huge newspaper and has tons of writers working for them. Major newspapers have standards and requirements all of their articles have to meet which guarantees quality news whereas blogs don’t have to meet any requirements. Who knows if the stories they are writing are accurate. With that being said, I don’t feel that blogging particularly supports the type of journalism that digital print media produces. Some blogs may reputable, but most aren’t.
To convince me that a news blog is credible, I would have to see sources of where they got their information. I would also look up the information being given on the news blog on a reputable newspaper site to see if the information is the same. If it’s exactly the same, with the same questions answered, etc. then the blog is just copying other news sources and putting their own spin on it. However, if I see that the news blog and the newspaper have different interviews with different people or went to different locations to find out information, I would believe that the news blog was a credible source, and I would read it.
I feel that any big, well known newspaper is credible whether it’s online or in print. Like I said above, newspapers have to meet requirements and have restrictions on what they write in their articles. They have credible sources and have a “clean” record of having credible sources since they began the newspaper. I feel the newspapers are more credible than news blogs.
The research that I did for this module did not change my original thesis. I would rate this research a 5, strongly supports my thesis.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Blogging has NOT Significantly Impacted Print Journalism
Hi everyone! My name is Karissa Dunn and I'm 20 years old. This semester will make it 2 years that I've attended COC and I'm almost ready to transfer to a Cal State. I decided to take this class because I want to become a journalist and what better way to see if I like journalism than by taking this introductory course.
I have to say that I got a little frustrated when I initially started my research. At first, when I read the thesis statement, I immediately thought "Of course blogging has significantly impacted the print journalism industry". The younger generations do everything online, including myself. We shop online, we chat online, we can even order pizza online now. Thinking that, I thought that blogging just had to have had an impact on the print journalism industry, but when I started to look for credible websites that supported that idea, no websites came up, only blogs about blogging being credible came up. After about an hour of searching and reading bloggers opinions on blogging, I realized that my initial thought was wrong, and blogging is not a credible source.
The print industry has strict guidelines that all of their journalists have to follow. The journalists must go out in the field and research their topic, interview people, and dedicate hours of research time before they can even start writing their article. Some bloggers on the other hand, don't do any research at all and believe that their opinion is correct and don't provide credible sources to back it up. Their blog is strictly their outlook on the topic, and defiantly not a credible source. On the other hand, there are some bloggers that do use credible sources and cite them in their blogs, but they are few and far between, and the print industry defiantly wins them over as far as credible articles go.
It dawned on me that blogging isn't credible when I read this blog a woman wrote about how mad she was that people say blogging isn't credible. (http://blogcritics.org/archives/2008/12/23/084330.php) At first she is somewhat convincing, but then she says "Local newspapers only print so many copies. How many hits does Yahoo have? Google News? CNN? They are all online." She bases her whole blog about these main sites, Google, Yahoo, CNN, etc. These sites are not blogs! They are credible new sources. Her whole article is completely irrelevant because she tries to say that Yahoo, Google and CNN are blogs.
In conclusion, I am defiantly against the statement: Blogging has significantly impacted the print journalism industry, because of what I just mentioned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
