-
jbenton Notably: they are including premium Google Analytics in that number which is, just by itself, a six figure sum.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood 0
-
jbenton There's an interesting conversation to be had on what people talk about when they talk about infrastructure: it usually isn't just server costs. Things like caching, technology partnerships, analytics, video hosting etc... all come in to this...Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood +4 🙂
-
jbenton I obviously don't know the current situation but one of the big pieces of focus while I was at Salon was sliming server costs, so I'm betting a big chunk of that cost doesn't live there, but with the technology partnerships (especially the ad tech ones) that leadership added on.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +3 🙂
-
jbenton But it is also worth noting some back-end hosting requirements were abnormally large compared to Salon's traffic/org size, specifically immense historical database of old articles that often still got activated by linkbacks b/c early Salon remained such a ref point for the webPermalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +2 🙂
-
jbenton But there are some that get abnormally large compared to org size that come from specific choices. Video, for example, could be a huge cost in there because monetizing it means having some hand in hosting it.On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +1 🙂
-
jbenton If they are willing to let the control go, say pushing some viewers to YouTube and moving to a less reliable and scaled down host for video, that could realize itself in a lot of savings very quickly. *looks pointedly at Salon's latest video pages*Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +3 🙂
-
jbenton I'm sure it doesn't help that some video providers... lack accuracy... in their reporting, and leadership at media orgs can be ill incentivized to dig in because doing so would make pretty numbers go down.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood -4 🙁