Posts Tagged ‘Forbes’
To develop the list, Sherk focused on the number of 1+’s, shares and comments on each page, based on per post averages. He writes, “The list of organizations is not meant to be comprehensive; I chose a cross-section of print, broadcast and Web-only outlets. Most are from the US but there are a handful of international sites too. I omitted location-focused outlets such as local TV stations.”
Surely not definitive or scientific, but still interesting.
Number 1? The New York Times.
Here are where some other outlets ranked on the list:
While some media companies are scratching their heads trying to find ways to become profitable and cut costs, (usually by laying people off), Vice is doing the opposite: enjoying an estimated value of $1 billion (with $100 million in revenue) and looking to expand into China.
A recent Forbes story details the company’s rapid ascend and ambitious moves. What started out as a free magazine based in Montreal has transformed into a global media empire that chronicles hipster and youth culture, is headquartered in Brooklyn and employs 800 people in 34 countries. Interestingly enough, as Forbes suggests, it was web video content — the creative, ahead-of-the-curve type — that helped to set Vice apart from, well, your traditional media companies.
With that kind of foresight, China seems doable, especially with recent investment backing.
However, the big question remains. Will Vice’s somewhat, uh, racy content mesh with Chinese conservatism?
Forbes Media has hired Mike Federle as its new Chief Operating Officer, according to the New York Post. Federle was most recently President of Techonomy Media, and prior to that was a Group Publisher with Bonnier and Publisher of Forbes’ rival Fortune.
According to an internal memo, at Forbes Media, Federle will be responsible for “business development partnerships, new business models and operating departments, including circulation and manufacturing.”
We’re big hip-hop fans here at FishbowlNY, so we greeted the new Forbes list of hip-hop’s top earners with great interest. The list – titled Cash Kings – accounts for earnings from May 2010 to May 2011, and measures the artist’s income from “record sales, digital downloads, films, merchandise sales, endorsements, books and other ventures.”
This year Brooklyn’s own Jay-Z topped the list, bringing in $37 million over the past year. He barely edged out Diddy, another New York native, who earned $35 million even though he’s never made a good song that didn’t include Biggie. Maybe people liked Loon after all. Kanye West rounds out the top three earners, raking in $16 million.
Check out the top 10 after the jump.
Well that didn’t take long. A little over an hour ago FishbowlNY mentioned that Fortune has a piece coming out in August that details the financial failings of Forbes Media. All Things D just got its hands on an internal memo from Steve Forbes regarding the Fortune article, and his reaction can be summed up in three words: “Haters gonna hate.”
Here’s a portion of the note:
Today Fortune magazine published a story on Forbes with the clear intention of disrupting the business of its most formidable competitor.
Fortune was aware that this was highly confidential, private information and of no value to release to the public. Though the intention is to harm our business, it will not adversely impact Forbes because it highlights a very difficult time in the past when all the media industry was going through unprecedented upheaval.
Forbes adds that the company is sending out a public response too. Like we mentioned, we were hoping for a Forbes article about the finances at Fortune, but looks like we’ll have to settle for imagining Mr. Forbes kicking back and brushing his shoulders off.
Lauren Conrad is on quite the tear. She kind of sort of wrote her own book, launched a clothing line, launched a website, and recently edited Lucky’s Tumblr. Now she can add Forbes blogger to that growing resume.
She’s going to be writing for the website over the next few months, and her first column is available today. What does Conrad write about in her debut? Being a “Celebpreneur” of course!
Here’s a sampling of her advice.
Yesterday Forbes announced its World’s Most Powerful Celebrities list, with the number one spot going to Lady Gaga. Now Jeff Bercovici at Forbes compares celebrities’ social media scores to their power rankings, to see who the over- and under-achievers are.
The Twitter overachievers include Lil’ Wayne, Eminem, Eva Longoria, and Steve Carrell.
[T]he overachievers are all rappers, athletes or comedians/comedic actors. No surprise there. Those are all groups who have embraced Twitter, especially, as an environment where they can interact with fans without exposing too much of themselves.
The under-achievers is more scattered, and includes behind-the-scenes guys like Steven Spielberg and James Cameron, and the Hollywood celebrities on the list tend to be A-listers like Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Aniston, and Sandra Bullock. Writes Bercovici: “[Y]ou can sort of understand why women whose privacy is so thoroughly violated by the tabloids every week would pass up the opportunity to give them more fodder.”
Forbes’ World’s Most Powerful Celebrities list was published today, and the number one spot belongs to Lady Gaga. Gaga displaced Oprah at the top slot by earning a ton of money ($90 million for her tour) and pushing her influence with social media.
The Forbes list factors in earnings, social networking savvy and media exposure, so it’s not hard to see why Justin Bieber is third, but the two behind him – U2 and Elton John – are a little more puzzling. Other celebrities that we were surprised to see on the list include Katherine Heigl at 89, Mark Harmon at 98 and Tim McGraw at 61.
All we have to say is that Harmon is lucky people somehow consider NCIS worth their time (spoiler to every single episode: They catch the guy).
Was all that worrying publishers were doing about working with Apple’s subscription system for nothing? Well, maybe. According to Forbes, consumers are giving up the very information that the publishers were worried they weren’t going to get:
As things stand, if you buy a subscription to The New Yorker or Popular Science in the iTunes store, you will get a little dialogue box asking if it’s alright if Apple shares some of your personal information with the publisher. Initially, publishers were worried, reasonably enough, that users would overwhelmingly say no. But they don’t. In fact, about 50 percent opt in.
50 percent is an awfully nice number for publishers, and this is only the beginning. Maybe the marriage between publishing houses and Apple can work after all.
Of course tomorrow there’ll be another story about how this isn’t the case at all, and everything will be chaos once again. But hey, enjoy the good news for now.