I’m really excited about this one folks. We (My company and I) are launching our first new site of the new year on Monday, March 12th.

I can’t give away too much info right now, but I will say that this new site will be a New Media Community centered around a forum, along with some other cool user interaction and productivity features.

For the first few days the site will be in ALPHA mode where there’ll only be about a half dozen users testing out the software.

Then, probably on Friday, March 16th we’ll go into Invite-Only BETA mode until the first week in April. During that phase, you’ll be able to see a limited version of the main page, unless you’re one of the chosen few who has an invitation

After that, it’ll be fully public and free to join.

A few days ago I found a story on Techcrunch that showed a screenshot of how WalMart’s new online video store was borked for anyone using the Firefox browser. There was much speculation in the comments over there and from other bloggers that it was a design flaw, but now we get the real story, straight from the horse’s mouth.

The screenshot to the right is what loads up when I use Firefox to access the site now. There are also reports today from other bloggers that people trying to access WalMart’s site using Mac and Apple computers are getting a similar message…

I’m using Windows XP on both my computers and only open the IE browser out of necessity, like when accessing a Microsoft site to download OS updates or patches, etc. But it’s out of necessity.

For a company to shut out a percentage of it’s customers who like to choose what brand of computer or software they use is just idiotic.

It was only this morning I was looking at the flyers I got with my Sunday paper. I’m looking for a new TV. Not a cheap one, but one that will end up costing about $1500 with taxes and delivery. There were a couple nice ones in the WalMart flyer… but I think I’ll buy it elsewhere, like from a more forward-looking company with a site that does not exclude me as a customer.

I have choices. I like choices, and that’s what I choose to do.

Will WalMart go under because decide not to buy my TV there? Nope. My $1500 means nothing to them in the grand scheme of things.

Click Here to get Firefox for free from Mozilla.

Walmart, Firefox, Microsoft, Internet Explorer

Just hitting the Digg.com front page is a story about a new Slashdot feature called Firehose, and it appears to have a voting system similar to Digg.

That interface looks really juicy, and no, I don’t think it’s a Digg clone. It may have similar features but knowing the Slashdot developers, they’re not the type of geeks to do ripoffs.

Can’t wait til they open it up to the public.

Slashdot Firehose, Digg, Digg Clone, /.

I admit it - I don’t own a video camera. I have a web cam which is built into my laptop and I have a cheap digital camera that records about 90 seconds of crappy quality video.

I’m seriously considering this video blogging thing now. I kind of like the idea of doing it and there are so many possibilities it’s mindblowing.

So I think I’m going to pick up a mid quality video camera, tripod, some lights, etc. Nothing fancy or expensive, but something a lot better than the web cam I currently have.

I know, there are infinite combinations of gear I could go for. That’s the hardest part.

I’ll keep you all posted as to what I decide to do.

BTW, to any of the amature video bloggers or youtube’y people out there who may be reading this - what gear do you all use?

Please reply in the comments if you have time (and feel free to link to your sites or some of your vids so I can see what you have on the go). Thanks.

I predicted this over 2 years ago but neglected to write it down.

With the emergence of all the blog networks, acquisitions, content partnerships and venture capitalists, etc. rapidly moving into the blogging space, we’re seeing polarization.

Independent bloggers, the people who built the blogosphere in the first place, are having a harder time growing a blog readership than ever before. As soon as someone’s voice gets loud enough, the bigger players cock their heads and take notice. That individual voice is then added to a “content channel” as part of a bigger network.

I guess one could equate it to the A-Listers of a few years ago, but that was more about polarizing readership, not the writers themselves.

Now I’m not necessarily saying this is a bad thing, but it depends on how you look at.

For me and my tiny group of sites, I’ve always believed in providing individual bloggers with the platform and the support so they can develop and showcase their own blogging voices. In my mind that’s ideal.

But then the larger network appeal is just too tempting and my blogs become a jumping off point to something perceived as better. Their voice is then absorbed, not showcased.

If that’s what bloggers want, who am I to argue? Plus, I absolutely love it when people tell me I provided an opportunity for them to go on to bigger and better things. But it gets kind of lonely when you watch people get out of your 6 year old Toyota and hop into that Porsche, where you never hear their voices again over all the engine noise and glitz.

But I digress.

I’ve tried my best to stay out of the PayPerPost spin cycle. To be honest with you I think both sides of the argument are being fought from self serving standpoints.

On one hand you have PPP who operates as a link broker where advertisers sign up because they want their links and reviews in the editorial content on blogs. Bloggers then sign up and chose to write about the advertisers whose products or services suit their blogs the best, and they get paid a few bucks for the links and brief commentary.

On the other hand, there’s no requirement for bloggers to disclose that what they have just written has been paid for by said advertisers. Therein lies the problem and the cause of the ranting from other bloggers, A Listers and mainstream media.

My viewpoints:

1. If someone wants to make money from their blogs, they have every right to.

2. If, during the moneymaking process, that blogger destroys their credibility through non-disclosure, that’s their own problem.

3. If other bloggers don’t like how the money is being made by other bloggers, they have the right to voice their opinions.

4. You’ll never see a PayPerPost opp on any of my blogs because it’s not my thing. I won’t do a sponsored post, in an editorial format, for any less than $500 because I know the true value of posts on blogs. And if and when I do write a sponsored post, it will follow the disclosure format of how Rafat Ali does it on PaidContent.org (Example Sponsored Post @ PaidContent.org)

5. I don’t think PPP or their bloggers are evil, the devil, or destroying the integrity of the blogosphere as a whole.

6. I DO think bloggers are grossly undervaluing their content with $10 paid posts though, and always will. The benefits for advertisers is huge from all areas, especially SEO.

Now, here’s the problem I have with the PPP bashing.

Strike 1:

100% of the bashers are simply not as intelligent as they would like you to believe. For one, if they are THAT passionate about saving the blogosphere and trying to elevate the level of journalistic integrity, they wouldn’t be spreading their tail, puffing out their chests and crowing about it every day. Those people are supposed to be the top online blogging, business and publicity experts, yet through their nonstop bile belching they’ve elevated PPP to the point where mass media and business leaders are taking notice. PPP just recently recieved $3,000,000 in funding. That’s how popular their model has become as a result of all the A List crowing.

Strike 2:

PayPerPost pays out around $2 - $20 to bloggers, with the average coming in around the $8 mark. They’re supposedly the cancer of the blogosphere because those paid posts will be slanted in favor of advertisers, thus giving a false sense of approval of a product or service on the part of the blogger. I can understand that, as I myself would give somewhat less credibility to a post if I knew the blogger had been paid to write it. But…

In the ongoing attempts to bash PPP, major media sources and (pseudo) journalists are contacting PPP bloggers for interviews, lying to them and saying the ensuing article will be objective and then misquoting and twisting that bloggers words to make them look like idiots - all for the purpose of linkbait and to play on the present controversy - so they get more traffic, pageviews and the resulting CPM revenue from THEIR advertisers.

PPP Blogger - writes favorable post for $8 for advertiser.

Journalist/Basher - lies, slams blogger to increase ad revenue.

Who the hell do the bashers think they’re fooling by doing this? Oh wait, 100’s of 1000’s of people who are naive enough to think mainstream media and A Listers have integrity because of who or what they’re perceived to be - ethical.

Strike 3:

Sorry dumbasses, PayPerPost is here to stay now that you’ve made them famous.

Even though I don’t fully agree with the PPP model, my hat gets a tip toward Ted Murphy for seeing the opportunity, letting the bashers have their tantrums, and monetizing all that publicity.

Now Ted, use some of that $3,000,000 clout to stick up for your bloggers like a man and do something substantial for the ones who are getting lied to and slammed by the media. Don’t let your followers take your crap for you without standing up for them. Be a real leader in this fight.

I’m referring to this post on Lynn Terry’s blog and the (oh, I SO want to call her a bitch) author of this Advertising Age article.