Question from a buyer: "Websites don't seem to be breaking the norms for innovation in the space, which is scary since DSPs are going to be the way to buy banners. So why is it that all new media ideas are actually rich-media executions in standard banners?"

I don't own a coffee maker, and I drink too much coffee. Not surprisingly, I have bonded with the people who work at the Dunkin' Donuts around the block from my apartment. This group of employees has been together for a while now, and they are very good at what they are paid to do: take orders, serve orders and efficiently collect revenue to keep the line moving. But that doesn't mean there are never any lines. So when I walked in this morning and the line was unusually backed up to the door, I took notice of how the …

Every night around the world, Google ruins countless dinner parties.Humans are competitive beings. They are biologically engineered to argue, and through argument, reach the most effective conclusion. Google has stolen our right to ignorantly argue in a misguided effort to "organize the world's information." Every argument is now a Google search away from being finished.

With the Demand Media IPO on deck, the industry is asked again to revisit assumptions about media economics. Will low quality content drive out high? Will crowd sourcing content prevent high quality, professionally produced content from achieving future financial success? As a magazine guy who left the New York Times Company to be deeply involved with founding About.com, iVillage, Beliefnet.com and Mediabistro, I'd have to say no. Quality, actual expertise, and genuine human connections will rise to the top. But I'm not the only one who sees fast-buck media as a short-term starburst.

"News you can use" is no more. In case you haven't heard, U.S. News & World Report, the former weekly magazine that rode this tagline into media departments with flair and confidence after Mort Zuckerman purchased it in 1984, has suspended its magazine business except for a few planned one-offs throughout the year. The company will rely solely on its Web site to drive revenue moving forward. Its press release read like a suicide note.

I am embarrassed and angry about the rich-media industry (but mostly just angry). For the last five years, rich-media vendors have been using Adobe Flash, and more recently HTML5, to irritate, frustrate, disrupt, distract, annoy, and torment the general public. Using invasive rich media ads to capture a consumer's attention is like trying to save a man dying of thirst by drowning him in water.

The debate rages: Does providing content free on the Internet reduce demand for that same brand's print readership? Should publishers protect their brands or their revenue streams by closing their online content behind pay walls?

Question from a seller of digital advertising: I've been selling advertising with my company for a few years now. But at some point my boss made a sales call to a buyer (and closed a deal, BTW), but now that person refuses to see anyone from our company again. It's an important account for us and I just can't let it go away forever. Any suggestions?

Have you seen the Facebook movie or read the book it was based on? If you look hard enough and read between the lines, you can indict media buyers for being completely clueless. Can you imagine the media buy that could have been negotiated with Facebook if just one buyer was paying attention in 2004?