Blog fight!

Blog fight!
: The Denton/Calacanis Gizmodo/Engadget blog fight is picking up steam. Denton yesterday offered a transparent view of what happened. Today, in the comments here, Calacanis pulls a bitchslap in return:

Nick plays down the business of blogs for one reason: to pay people less. Trust me, Nick is not doing blogs just for the fun of it, or because he loves the medium. He is hiring people, putting up tons of google ad words, and spending money on expensive logos for a reason: he wants to make money. If he just wanted to do blogs for fun he would post to his personal blog and not be doing highly targeted, highly- profitable (read: porn and gadget) verticals.

That being said, there is nothing wrong with making this into a business. Who wouldn’t want to work from home blogging and make a living?! Nick is a great businessman and he is going to be very, very successful and I commend him, even if we have different styles.

But the real fight won’t occur at this level (it’s like reporting on a fight to get a new general manager at your TV station… who the hell cares?). The real fight will occur on the products. And Denton is upping the ante there; today, he had Cory Doctorow empty his gadget bag; that kind of original reporting from a lifestyle perspective will make Gizmodo more compelling and readable. Competition is good, eh?

  • http://www.knitwitology.net/knitlog Morgan

    You can already see the polarizing of the sites occuring. Joel Johnson’s posts are already leaning towards the more riske’ (Phalic bike seats and pot vaporizers anyone?) while I suspect Rojas will continue to cover the bleeding edge tech we’ve known – Though I hope he takes the opportunity of this fresh start to add a bit more personal flavor to his reporting.
    The one thing everyone seems to be agreeing on is the true winner of the battle will be the the readers.

  • http://www.jackieblogs.com Jackie D

    I thought Calacanis was very gracious in his comment here. Made me think more of him, certainly.

  • Mike G

    Expensive logos? They certainly look uncommonly good for the generally fashion-impaired blogosphere (though I love your use of Mary Kay pink, Jeff), but somehow I don’t see even those costing Hyatt-type six figures– very low fours, maybe.

  • http://rommwangaguhunga.blogspot.com Ron Mwangaguhunga

    Calacanis is very gracious. The blog wars have heated up, though, and I, for one, am excited by the prospect. The blog wars begun have …

  • http://btherieau.blogspot.com bob

    Taking sides alert!
    I prefer Mr. Rojas’ writing style, with his sly jabs at useless technology but engaging (loving?) treatment of items he finds truly interesting. Of course I’ll continue to read both, but now I’m starting my day with Engadget.
    Okay, go ahead, call me a geek.
    Your pal,
    bob

  • http://www.gapingvoid.com hugh macleod

    Besides the minor inconvenience of losing an editor, I don’t see the big deal. The whole point of Gawker Media is that no one person (besides Nick) is irreplacable.
    Hey, I linked to Fleshbot a couple of weeks ago. Does that make me a pornographer too, Jason?

  • http://www.creative-weblogging.com Torsten Jacobi

    I have to agree with Jason. Weblogs offer a new and mostly very satisfying reading experience. If commercial weblog will have the potential Jason, Nick and I are thinking has to be proven. There is a reason start-up companies are called ventures…
    There is the risky way of establishing a blog brand and sell it later on to an established player Nick is following. More promising in my eyes is to provide substantial revenues from the beginning through affiliates and targeted advertising. We at Creative Weblogging Creative Weblogging have chosen to pursue this way with more than 11 weblogs so far. I guess any brand value comes or does not come naturally. It’s no risk to add revenues from the beginning :-)
    To increase the competition and to offer you another choice between the Engadget and Gizmodo try our new Gadgets Weblog and it will give you another personal perspective.