And that's why we're rolling out a redesign of the main homepage in a couple of weeks:
http://cl.ly/25071M0m1R2t3Z0F053B
There are a lot of factors at work with the design of any homepage, and that was certainly the case with the current design -- really tight deadline, new CMS, work was contracted out to a design agency, etc.
But our great local business reporting deserved better and I'm happy to say we're getting there.
The classifying was obviously done with an agenda in mind to push this story; take it with a grain of salt. (Don't get me wrong, the page is indeed still content-light and fluff-heavy, but to cite 99.5% is misleading.)
Ideas in this industry never die. They merely turn up later with different names.
There's nothing special about this - pull up any newspaper or online news site and you'll see the same thing.
I'm pretty sure that this is not in disagreement with the author's point.
Alas, it's not such a mystery if you read that as "99.5% profit."
If you just cram a lot of ads into a page you'll increase revenues for a little while, then your readership goes away and then your cpm rates go way down.
If you ensure your site has engaging content and is a pleasurable experience for your readers then you'll be able to make more revenue off of fewer ads. More so if you go the extra mile and ensure your ads are high quality and relevant to the audience (to the degree to where eventually they almost become endorsements and recommendations). Take a look at penny-arcade.com, for example, I can guarantee they make plenty off of those ads and they wouldn't be doing better if they'd simply crammed the screen 99% full with other ads.
It's just as important to cultivate your own brand (which is ultimately what you are selling by way of 3rd party advertising) as it is to hawk other people's brands.
Edit: This is not a troll post. I really don't see anything wrong with that site, but apparently lots of other people do.
