CNET Is Bleeding Traffic

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

1. RobertF
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 1:13 pm

   I’m not at all surprised as I stopped visiting CNET long ago. Their interface is way too cluttered and I got tired of being bombarded by advertisements and “sponsored links” when all I wanted was information about products and topics of interest.

2. Patricia
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 1:20 pm

   Interesting. I go there when I need a review, but it’s become a little cumbersome with the way it’s laid out to where I do admit I’d ditch them for something easier. I think it’s that they put sponsor links before the links I need - it’s a hassle. I do love their download site - all my trailware comes from it. I’m surprised to hear with ZDNet - their blogs are really popular with a lot of the tech companies I know.

   On a side note, all I can ever think about with CNET was the article I read about the obscene amount of money they were paying one of their execs back during the boom - she wasn’t CEO, it was like the VP of Marketing or something (the article was about layoffs, if memory serves). Nuts!

3. Todd
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 1:45 pm

   If “Video killed the radio star” then “Blogs killed C|Net”.

   I am surprised it took this long.

4. Mark Thomson
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 1:53 pm

   I wonder if the stats for Webshots are down partly due to the redesign. I haven’t played with it much (before or after the redesign) but the interface does seem way more efficient than it used to be and would therefore generate less pageviews.

   I’m also not sure how much Ajax they are using, but this could also account for a huge decrease in page views. Worth looking into if someone were curious.

5. Tarry Singh
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 2:09 pm

   I agree with Todd there. Citizen Journalism is the next wave. And you know something you can buy firms and companies, you just can’t buy REAL opinions. If CNET needs to survive this massive decline they need to spread out their wings and get on to the basics.
   PS: I had Webshots pro account for a year and all I did was download all the high res pics for my laptop once in a couple of weeks.

6. umair
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 2:16 pm

   so tech crunch is eating traffic of cnet

7. Damon
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 2:18 pm

   While CNET proper seems to be hitting a rough spell, their entertainment devision seems to be growing strong. Over the past year, sites like TV.com have surged and their has growth amongsth GameSpot.com, MP3.com and Metacritic.com. Gamefaqs.com continues to do well, and they do have other smaller properites in that group.

   CNET is also on the cutting edge of technology, with growing use of AJAX and other technologies which have cut into the numbers, so those rankings may be a bit out of line. That being said, it does seem like they have lost their core with CNET.com and have lost all momentum with webshots.com.

8. Faisal
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 2:22 pm

   I use to visit News.com every day to see what is hot in the dot com , now TechCrunch and other blogs took that spot in my browser.

9. Patricia
   

   October 13th, 2006 at 2:25 pm

   I have to disagree - citizen journalism is A wave, but it’s not the “next” because it’s been going on for a long time. traditional media is adapting - my anticipation is that there’ll be a mix between the two - user driven and professional content.

10. Kipp Cummins
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 2:26 pm

    I agree with Todd and Tarry.

    I stopped reading CNET a long time ago after they did their last few re-designs. I go to DigitalTrends.com and either PCMag or PCWorld for my CE news.

11. Faisal
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 2:29 pm

    One more thing to add , they own very interesting domain names like : chat.com , help.com , mp3.com , news.com , shopping.com , etc.

    Too shame they are not capitalizing on all of that.

12. Andy
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 2:38 pm

    CNET is great brand. they’ve held leadership position in their respective market space for a long time until the last few years when blogs and other small more niched focused technology web sites started to take away their market share… blogging is the trend and their main competitor. apparently CNET hasn’t reacted fast enough to the blog attack.

    it’ll be interesting to see how CNET deals with the pressure.

13. Ted
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 2:42 pm

    CNET should’ve bought Weblogsinc. when it was available for $25m. They would’ve overpaid just as AOL did, but at the same time they would’ve had a platform from which to launch hundreds of niche blogs. Now they’re playing catchup and losing mass traffic to blogs and upstarts.

14. Erik
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 2:53 pm

    I like Cnet.com
    I go there for reviews. The main advantage they have over other sites is the amount of video reviews they have. It just brings more context to a device when you see a Cnet editor handling a device. They need to drop the portal mentality and become more open as a site. I hope they sick around.

15. dave
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 3:10 pm

    Maybe its because cnet is not compatible with firefox… the layout is all screwed up.

16. lemon obrien
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 3:29 pm

    cNet is boring…filled with advertising; and well, they don’t really go after and find cool news to report about. cnet has to be a leader in the tech news world; otherwise, its just…well…cnet.

    if you guys want a good story; click my name…totally new technology. does cnet get they have to find good stories?

17. Johnkimble
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 3:33 pm

    That is too bad. Cnet used to be such a great source for technology related information. Everything from reviews, previews, pictures of future products and even their little TV show endeavor. I visit every now and then, but as stated above, the social networking and other available sites DO take a LOT away from Cnet. Add in the amount of ads, sponsored links and cluttered interface and you have exactly what is happening to them now. I mean, why visit a site with ads when you can visit others without?

    Just my opinion.

18. David
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 3:42 pm

    um look at this site - it has ads - and I’m still here (so are you). good content and good advertising go together (think tv). CNET set standards for the industry and leads by example. yeah maybe if you read enough blogs you might find some good data, photos and opinions about a product, but CNET’s editorial is reliable and everything tech that I’ve bought has been a result of using CNET as one of my sources and I’ll continue that in the future.

19. Eric Barnes
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 3:42 pm

    Let’s hope new CEO Neil Ashe can get things turned around.

20. Mari
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 3:42 pm

    On the other hand, as somebody commented, CNET has done amazing things with its brand. The content is syndicated in a ton of places, replacing wire tech stories from the likes of the AP and Reuters. Not to mention CNET on TV. Every time I walk into Costco I see CNET television playing on the big-screen TVs.

21. Patricia
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 3:44 pm

    ^ that’s probably through a deal with them, actually, but still.

22. Michael Melone
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 3:48 pm

    Hmmmm . . . Doesn’t seem to be bleeding to me.

    http://www.alexa.com/data/deta.....et.com#top

23. Ron
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 4:08 pm

    Again with the Comscore. Why, Michael, and I would really like an answer here, do you continue to quote Comscore, when it’s known to be inaccurate, and when it depends on spyware to gather data?

    Wait, I know: it’s because outrageous, unexpected claims make for better headlines, and because several of your sponsors are in direct competition with CNET.

    Comscore, forsooth. Alexa is good enough for every reputable news source, let’s just stick with them, shall we?

24. David B.
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 4:37 pm

    Well, let me just say that I still visit CNET.com regularly and find their site very informative. I can’t believe that their traffic is declining. I just hope that the traffic decline doesn’t affect their content and excellent articles.

25. Patricia
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 4:42 pm

    I don’t know about Alexa - doesn’t the end user have to have the tool bar to track it? I can’t seem to figure it out - ZDNet (ironically) did an article about how Alexa wasn’t as good of a source as people think.

    Maybe somebody should get into the analytics business. It seems Alexa has little competition beyond the big guns.

26. BO
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 4:52 pm

    so what’s with techcrunch and their 1-2 posts a day lately? Shouldn’t you be putting in some time and get your post counts up, say 6-7 a day? You make all this money from sponsors (I see that you added a 7th banner) yet you can’t write a decent review or two.

    2c

27. Vik
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 4:52 pm

    CNET lost a lot of points in my book after I discovered that many of their writers were stealing/borrowing, whatever you wanna call it, stories from other tech blogs.

28. n00dles
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 4:54 pm

    “CNET seems to be making efforts to make their sites for relevant to its audience”

    Everytime I read an article on CNET news that includes a statement like ‘Servers are powerful machines, designed to run businesses’ or words to that effect, I feel insulted. Do they really think the kind of person reading their website doesn’t know what a server is?

29. Tim
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 4:54 pm

    Vik…..can you point out some sources there? I find that very hard to believe….CNET references other blogs quite often…and always sourced when they do.

30. Vik
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 4:56 pm

    Ron, no one forced you to come to this blog. So stop hating.

    I enjoy this blog and I’m sure there are copious other members who enjoy it as well. If you think Mike’s posts rely on inaccurate data or are biased, then just leave!

31. Vik
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 5:00 pm

    Tim:

    Here is just one example: http://www.kottke.org/remainder/05/08/9298.html

    I heard similar complaints from Jason Calacanis, CEO of Weblogsinc, Inc.

32. Kal
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 5:26 pm

    I know that Alexa’s rankings aren’t perfect, but…
    Go to Alexa.com and look at the “2yr” or “Max” traffic rankings for CNET. You’ll see that there’s an incredible and unnatural spike at the end of 2005. The slow, steady decline CNET is now experiencing is a result of traffic falling back to its natural level.

33. Tim
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 5:31 pm

    Vik…..If you look at the original story…

    http://news.com.com/2100-1007_3-5843402.html

    you can see this coming up in the comments and a response directly to it from the stories author…

    I find it hard to believe that commentary on Google piling together tools (even a year ago) that may approximate an online OS couldn’t have been thought about by multiple people within the industry…

    I do appreciate the source though…..we’ll call it a difference of opinion

34. Rajesh
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 5:33 pm

    I think Comscore and Jeffries Report are good sources to rely upon. I think Mike is right in pointing out that there are too many content sources (especially blogs) out there better than CNET and without the clutter.

35. Ryan
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 5:34 pm

    Kal:
    It is more likely that the spike is due to reclassifying the way their domains fall (now news and download are more closely associated with the CNET.com domain)….and traffic is very seasonal…so it doesn’t suprise me to much to see it fall as the year progresses…if this holiday season doesn’t reach or surpass last…then I think that there is concern in that graph

36. Berte
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 6:03 pm

    I’m right on with RobertF…they’ve just tried to add way to much junk to their site. I truly enjoy http://www.download.com , but other than that, there is just way to much on their site.

    Berte
    http://www.theeip.com

37. Mark
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 6:12 pm

    I’m not at all surprised - the last time I visited a CNet related site, ZDNet actually, I was affronted by so much advertising and in-browser pop-ups you literally couldn’t see the content hiding on the page. I only stayed long enough to snap a screen shot and close the browser window in disgust.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/e.....268916164/

38. Eric Baker
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 6:38 pm

    CNet is useless.

39. Phil
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 6:44 pm

    I like cnet myself. The ads don’t seem to be a bother, but then again I am not a newbie IE user. I use flash block and a script blocker with firefox and don’t get bothered.

40. Ian Bell
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 7:24 pm

    Interesting post. I think the common misconception is that pageviews are directly related to revenue, and as Cnet has pointed out, that is not true.

    Cnet has redesigned their site, moved things around and re-categorized their reviews this year. It will take time for users to adjust and their Page Ranks and ratings to transfer over.

    A little investigation on your part would have revealed that Cnet’s reviews are now one page, instead of 4-5. So naturally their pageviews have diminished there, for example.

    Remember it’s about the quality of the traffic, not the quantity of pageviews. So maybe Cnet trimmed a little fat, optimized their site and improved their ad click-through-rate. That would account for the increase in revenue.

41. georgy quarters
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 7:49 pm

    Hello…

42. georgy quarters
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 10:11 pm

    Hello?

43. M
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 10:15 pm

    “Scandal”, not “Scandle”… spel-czek often?

44. Joseph Hunkins
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 11:22 pm

    Is CNET the tech canary in the coal mine? Will we see a move from big news sites to niche blogs? Makes sense to me. Sites like….Techcrunch or Searchblog are where I turn before CNET because I know you (Mike) and Battelle are staying up later than most of the CNET reporters and you have better connections.
    I assume Webshots is getting killed by Flickr?

45. mike
    

    October 13th, 2006 at 11:49 pm

    We use CNet often and like the site.. Great interface and many value added services.. Wish them the best.. Mike From http://www.VideoKarma.com

46. Tzvika
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 1:41 am

    Michael, did you actualy look at the graph you linked to? Because if you will, you’ll see that since the beginning of 2006, CNET’s traffic has been constantly, and rather sharply, declining.

47. TanNg
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 5:17 am

    CNET is boring now, they spend too much time to criticize Microsoft. As normal IT user I want to know how Windows, Office can help me work more effectively, and live more easy. Security is importan, but one story per day about how FireFox has less security hole than IE is too annoying.

48. Dhiram
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 5:30 am

    Blame the blogs for this another reason is the ad bombardment and heavy design.

49. Jon
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 5:36 am

    CNet should be bought by Yahoo! They share much in content philosophy, and CNet has “tech cred” where Yahoo is missing it in their new tech portal.

    Yahoo… are you listening? Save CNet and integrate it into Yahoo’s web editorial portal play.

50. K Harvey
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 6:15 am

    “A closer look at Comscore data for CNET shows September 2006 traffic for all CNET properties at 616 million page views, v. 1.37 billion page views in September 2005. Individual properties like Webshots went from 971 million monthly page views to just 213 million. ZDNET fell from 12 million to 8 million page views. CNET reviews went from 31 million page views to 24 million. The list goes on…”
    My question is what has Techcrunchs media metrix/comscore traffic done over the same time period? When I look Techcrunch up in comscore it doesn’t show up on the radar even…

51. Miula
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 6:55 am

    CNEt’s value is getting lower and lower. They need to find a new business model before everything is over.

    –
    Business Talk
    http://blog.yam.com/miula/

52. Jeremy Zawodny
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 7:51 am

    I know that I don’t link to CNet because they don’t link to “us” directly. They run everything thru a search sucking redirect servers that make it harder to track. So I figure that if they’re not willing to spread the love, I shouldn’t be either.

    Let them rot.

53. Nik Cubrilovic
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 8:11 am

    “A little investigation on your part would have revealed that Cnet’s reviews are now one page, instead of 4-5″

    Good point, and they need to do more of that. In some parts across all of Cnet’s sites they make you click and click and click to get information that could easily fit on a single page. It comes across as an attempt to get more pageviews while making the user experience miserable. I am thinking about comments on ZDNet blogs as an example of this.

54. TDavid
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 8:14 am

    “They run everything thru a search sucking redirect servers that make it harder to track.”

    Not everything, Jeremy. They link to the their blog 100 list directly with no redirects.

55. Patricia
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 10:41 am

    I’m not a newbie to anything tech - I still don’t like having to weed through Cnet’s ads to get the results i want - though Business 2. 0 and many other magazines do the same, for the record.

    I don’t care for Alexa for a few reasons. This is pulled from one of the many articles about the problems with it:

    Alexa is widely tooted as a must use tool by many marketing gurus. The problems with Alexa are:

    Alexa does not get much direct traffic and has a limited reach with it’s toolbar

    a small change in site visitors can represent a huge change in Alexa rating

    Alexa is biased toward webmaster traffic

    many times new webmasters are only tracking themselves visiting their own site

    Why do many marketing hucksters heavily promote Alexa? Usually one of the following reasons:

    ignorance

    if you install the Alexa toolbar and then watch your own Alexa rating quickly rise as you surf your own site it is easy for me to tell you that you are learning quickly and seeing great results, thus it is easy to sell my customers results as being some of the best on the market

    if many people who visit my site about marketing install the Alexa toolbar then my Alexa rating would go exceptionally high

    the marketers may associate their own rise in success with their increasing Alexa ranking although it happens to be more of a coincidence than a direct correlation

    I think to me it sounds like it’s one of the more well known sources but that there’s enough to believe it’s not the best source. I hear a lot of marketing people refer to it - I don’t know - that’s never been a source I’ve trusted for technology input.

56. Sramana Mitra
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 11:14 am

    Well, it looks to me that this article makes the case for CNet to go out and buy a bunch of blogs (like TechCrunch, for example?)

    Sramana

57. sean
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 11:22 am

    Hey mike,
    How much confidence can we place in the comscore numbers? I’m recalling del.icio.us and recent facebook comscore controversies.

58. Sherbeam
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 1:30 pm

    Unfortunate to hear that CNET has been losing traction, but not surprising. I used to turn to CNET almost religiously; especially for reviews and how-to’s. At some point, it seemed that reviews and other content began petering out.

    I agree with those who point to citizen journalism having to some degree supplanting CNET.

    It wasn’t until I heard of the relaunch of TechRepublic that I starting turning to them again…I hadn’t even noticed that I had left. Maybe this will help draw others back as well.

59. Marcel
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 8:23 pm

    techrepublic was also relaunched

60. Jitendra
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 10:26 pm

    I still visit CNET every so often…It seems like they do are no longer fresh and relevant…Also they really need to redesign the site as its way to complex and cluttered.

61. Andy
    

    October 14th, 2006 at 11:27 pm

    CNET would be a good acquisition for Google. Google currently does not offer price comparison, technology product reviews, or downloading service. CNET would make a good complimentary site to Google’s dominating search engine. Yahoo Tech is gaining traction in the space… CNET needs to do some serious competitive analysis and respond quickly… just a thought.

62. Oskar Syahbana
    

    October 15th, 2006 at 1:34 am

    Mike, it would be better if you cite where you got your facts rather than just credit it as “recent data”

63. James Harriot
    

    October 15th, 2006 at 5:33 am

    I wonder if the traffic is starting to go to social shopping and tech sites like crowdstorm. The difference is that you then have 1000’s of people contributing comments, reviews, and videos, as opposed to a small selection of editors.

64. James Harriot
    

    October 15th, 2006 at 5:34 am

    got the link wrong again! crowdstorm

65. Patrick
    

    October 15th, 2006 at 7:22 am

    That’s great news for you Michael!

    I can see the headlines: TechCrunch squashes Cnet !

    keep up the good work!

66. mike
    

    October 15th, 2006 at 4:56 pm

    This article is suspicious.. comming from an up and comming blogger.

    CNET’s job is not running a rumor mill like these blogs. Blogs are ‘cool’ and have some interesting information, but they do not have any real journalistic or product review credential. I noticed that CNET has consolidated their traffic to single pages, so that there is less clicking around which made it seem like there were more hits in the past.. In fact we dont really know how many hits cnet really generates from using Comscore… look at the Alexa rating for example…. Cnet is doing well, in fact traffic has been higher than ever in 2006 than any other year…

    OK>. so Im dorking out on these web traffic facts. Look man.. I read your blog, but it is just hype media, that is all I read it for… you have no real credibility in comparison to CNET… you dont do any product reviews. Blogs like these just write about ‘cool’ little technologies and latest widgets and news… But its not actually helpful.. you don’t describe how something actually works, you do not have videos displaying the products. Sorry, but it seems arrogant for a little blog like this to start harping on a company like CNET that many have depended on for years to get much information from..

    I happen to like CNET because they carry the torch of the original dot com spirit in the sense that they never got bought out, they still somehow pull it off. So little blogs like this should respect that. Engadget used to downplay CNET as sell outs… well look who got bought out by AOL.. respect… you suckers.. l will still visit your blog.

67. TM
    

    October 16th, 2006 at 8:42 am

    It will be interesting to see how CNET handles their acquisitions (and brand) in the coming year. Recent acquisitions (like UrbanBaby, May ‘06) show they are attempting to stop the bleeding traffic through buying up niche communities. They are smart to look for traffic outside of the tech-centered world through recent acquisitions, because brands like UrbanBaby are solid and their readers are very loyal. Time will tell if they will be able to let their acquired brands continue to grow independently without watering down their new brands.

    The stock option scandal is a little unsettling, but I’m a big CNET fan and think they’ll come through in great shape. They gave us http://www.DrMOZ.com a great review last year so I may slanted:
    http://news.com.com/2061-10801.....tml?tag=tb

68. Ted
    

    October 16th, 2006 at 11:23 am

    “But rapidly declining page views point to a less than exciting future for the company.”

    This comment shows a poor understanding of how real companies measure their business. Pageviews are important for advertising inventory, but the metric that matters in the long run is UNIQUE USERS.

    “And recent data suggests that CNET’s overall traffic isn’t just flat”

    I would argue that unique users is a better measure of “traffic” than pageviews.

69. Sophie
    

    October 16th, 2006 at 3:06 pm

    Your comments on CNET’s issues make me feel like a site like Blabbit (http://www.blabbit.com) will definitely have a chance to get the people looking for recommendations by their peers in a way that’s easy and uncluttered. Thanks!

70. Tom
    

    October 16th, 2006 at 4:46 pm

    Nielsen Unique audience numbers for CNET.com past 12 months

    5116 - Sept 06
    7264 - Aug 06
    5027 - July 06
    6286 - June 06
    5537 - May 06
    5380 - April 06
    5635 - March 06
    5378 - Feb 06
    6078 - Jan 06
    6355 - Dec 05
    6315 - Nov 05
    6047 - Oct 05
    5925 - Sep 05

71. Brian
    

    October 17th, 2006 at 2:07 pm

    CNET has lost traffic to tech blogs, but I think it is a different kind of user.

    I go to tech crunch when I want to read about the developing Web 2.0 properties, and I visit tech blogs to see what is the new and cool electronics. I love tech crunch and tech blogs, but I also like CNET.

    I have not thoroughly researched or bought a product after I found it on TechCrunch, certainly not within the domain of TechCrunch/Gear. I don’t generally buy whatever is the newest product because 6 months later it will be 1/4 as expensive, 4x faster, and have better customer service. Obviously this is not always true (Nintendo Wii is going to be so hot!) but I think it is a good model.

    CNET is where I go to research and buy the products I want. They have tons of reviews with in-depth videos, and it is all laid out pretty easily. I agree with some of the layout issues, but I checked out CNET today when i was writing this response, and it looks like they just made a big re-design. they also just added a tech blog - crave - looks interesting.

    People may say CNET is the past because it is not a social aggregator. As i believe was noted in a recent WSJ article, I think the future is a mix between editorial reviews and community created aggregated scores. I think CNET is creating that, and they have the background and inventory to create and sustain it. They just need to focus on the User Interface to create the best and easy experience.

72. Elizabeth
    

    October 17th, 2006 at 2:49 pm

    In re: Jeremy Zawodny: “Let them rot.”

    Wow, that’s a rather hostile approach to a company that employs thousands of individuals. I would like to think that different types of tech journalist all have something to bring to the table, and that the diversity keeps tech media honest. I’d hate to see it go the way of traditional media, with everyone spouting the same crap.