<![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views - Gawker Comments]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views - Gawker Comments]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> The website staff only had their Christmas party two nights ago. Probably because there are some sort of discounts for those too cheap to throw a timely Christmas party.

phukmags

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> They've lost their damn minds...right now on their homepage they're streaming Dennis Hopper's Blue Velvet character saying, "Don't you fucking look at me," over and over.

ragepotato

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> Hey, don't search engines use "bots, robots and spiders"? I guess Google and Yahoo better stay the hell out too!

Idiots.

fergthecat

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> I used to work for McGraw Hill, so this does not surprise me. Nothing they do really surprises me. This is the same benevolent corporation that reprimanded people for not showing up to a morning management meeting on 9/11/01, and again two days later for leaving after a bomb threat was called in to Rockefeller Center. D'OH!!

Stephen Bailey

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> I just read this post and the comments and can't remember a word of them.

EnviousJuno

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> I bought a copy last week and the guy selling it said "hey, if you find something interesting in this, don't you dare tell anyone else".

Which I didn't, 'cos I haven't. But I wouldn't. And you shouldn't.

VirusWithShoes

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> @plunk: Oh, shit, I think you're right. Although I'm pretty sure BusinessWeek has its own version. And the WSJ does an annual "recruiters' survey", so maybe BW is the Starz of school rankings.

fiveinchtaint

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> Reverse psychology as marketing; honestly, when was the last time anyone felt like linking to a Business Week story? Anyone? Anyone?

raincoaster

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> major identity crisis-

mediahor

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> Well, after you've 'deep linked' with Jezebel.com, none of those business rags hold much allure anyway.

Flashman

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> @fiveinchtaint:
US News & World report pimps those... what does BusinessWeek do, again?


plunk

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> @Nick Douglas: I'm pretty sure their school rankings are the only thing that keeps them in business.

fiveinchtaint

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> @Landor: I've lost possession of a possessive.

Bos'un's Mate

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> The business model isn't the only retarded thing at BusinessWeek.

Nick Douglas

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> Also? Advertisers. They hate them.

rod townsend

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> Remember how wildly successful the boycott Gawker '08 pageview campaign's was? [www.sitemeter.com]

Bos'un's Mate

]]> <![CDATA['BusinessWeek' Doesn't Want Your Stinking Page Views]]> It's kind of like the 2.2 million page views the well-linked Tom Cruise video got, vs. the 2-3,000 page views the average Gawker post gets?

Lysergic Asset

]]>