The Evolution of Man & Media [Sweet Infographic]

[Update: And it was so bad that Demand Media removed it from YouTube after I highlighted it, proving my point]

So remarkably bad, that I had to share it! :D

I don't know who Demand(ed) that Media, but could I please get my minute and six seconds back?

With 50,000+ views, that 1 video has wasted over a month of human life, so far. How many man-years are wasted watching such garbage? And yet they are just getting started! Demand Media's goal is to create a million pieces of "content" each month.

What do Youtube users think of that "content"?

Hmm....not impressed. If Google hates cloaking and machine generated content then why is trash that is handmade seen as being any better?

Does Google realize what they are funding? Do they even care if the web turns into a pile of junk? What will come of it?

Published: January 2, 2010 by Aaron Wall in publishing & media


January 4, 2010 - 12:49pm

When I clicked on Play... this is what I get:

"This video has been removed by the user."

Ha... The Internet is scared of two guys:

Aaron Wall and Google (in that order ;-) ).

Does Google realize what they are funding

They won't as long as it makes them money :-)

Demand Media's goal is to create a million pieces of "content" each month.

That speaks for itself – after a couple of months even the topics they choose will be trash. Heck they may even have to hire at least 100 guys who will just choose those one million topic(s) for them on which they will make these garbage videos.

Can't believe or understand why they are doing this?

January 4, 2010 - 4:14pm

Pretty funny they took the video down...of course, that can only be seen as an admission of guilt (that they realized how useless the content was).

And you are right about them competing with themselves ... each additional piece of content means that they are competing further with themselves (and Aol and Wikihow and ezinearticles and hubspot and squidoo and associatedcontent and etc etc etc) for a smaller and smaller piece of the pie (at least on a per page basis). And this doesn't even account for what happens to their business model when book publishers start publishing content online and such.

Rob Woods
January 8, 2010 - 9:05pm

Has Google actually become so arrogant that they believe that people will continue to use their sites if they allow them to be polluted by crap content like this? They may be the biggest right now...but an awful lot of market leaders have been knocked off their pedestals by treating their customers like crap, or in this case like idiots. Wake up Google! There's still plenty of time for you to go the way of the dodo...the fact that you've been the market leader for what, all of 6 or 7 whole years, means exactly jack squat if you continue focusing on trying to own every piece of information on the web rather than actually trying to improve the information you help provide.

January 9, 2010 - 4:10am

Great point Rob. They help control the type of ecosystem they want to support. And that determines what kind of content people create.

Money blindly chases yield (without any concern for side effects / externalities). If Google sets the bar low then so will many publishers. And if crap gets scaled it only makes it that much harder for the higher end publishers to exist WITHIN the search ecosystem.

Some will fold / go bankrupt, while others put a big piece of their business outside of the reach of search.

Add new comment

(If you're a human, don't change the following field)
Your first name.
(If you're a human, don't change the following field)
Your first name.
(If you're a human, don't change the following field)
Your first name.