lol no they' ve even linked to not one but three MFAs!!!

It would therefore definitly be worth getting picked up by the guardian, whether for good or bad PR if you could get a link from them ! (Page Rank 8) Although Andy didnt even get a link....

It would have been good if Dan had followed up on some of the references I sent him such as Fantomaster and Earl at Syndik8.

Now almost lunch time in the UK and guess how many times someone has searched for "Andy Beard" and clicked through?

I thought about abusing the shout system on Digg to promote it, but too many friends bug. Will pownce and Twitter the story in a few hours. Maybe I will end up with a link on the page so worth trying to get it some links. 

I'm big believing in blowing your own trumpet, in case anyone hadn't noticed! so I say go for it.

Plus this is collecting sphinns at a pretty good rate, so imagine that'll send a few people Guards way, if it goes popular. 

Awesome Andy! BTW the Tech section of Guardian doesn't send much traffic anyway. I was linked on it a few weeks ago and got only 130 unique visitors.

Traditional media don't send much traffic. I've got live links on Newsweek and the San Francsico Chronicle and they send even less than the Guardian.

But they are really good for bragging and credibility... :)

Did you get the article onto Digg?

The Guardian being a quality broadsheet it isn't really high traffic unless you throw some social media at it. Bragging rights are always useful though I hope I can leverage it a little. 

Andy,

Nah, didn't get it on Digg. The article or another website's version of the article was already frontpaged on Digg by the time Guardian covered the story. Guardian's post was a short two paragraph link post to me and the original source so not worth digging. Did stumble it though, I think. 

Cool they really did link to the MFA sites. I mean, I mean, That's not good they linked to the MFA sites giving them link credibility... (-:

@Andy, push this!!! It is great for public relations. It shows you as an authority!

Good job, Andy. And not at all surprised they didn't even so much as scratch the tip of the proverbial iceberg - condensing even the most detailed two hour conversations to a dumbed down (and, of course, dumbing down) paragraph or two is what most journalists (and their editors - let's not forget those!) mistake for research.

No matter - it does give you tons of bragging rights, so squeeze it for what it's worth! :)

What would you be doing if it was 3am and you had to leave to catch a flight in the morning?

1. Going to bed
2. Packing
3. Already sleeping 5 hours ago
4. Trying to get a story on someone else's website dugg, just in case they finally give a link. 

 If your answer is 4, then you are as sad as me, and can console yourself and digg the story anyway

#4 anytime. That's not "sad", it's a vocation LOL.

While all publicity is good publicity and I'm glad that Andy was chosen in such an article, the article itself is appauling I suspect that the condensing of the 2 calls means that most of what I hope (know) Andy would have wanted to say has been lost instead they tarnish him with the same brush on first impressions certainly it took me two reads and thats one read more then most people would do. The article itself however is as bad a junk as MFA in my opnion it does not bring anything and certainly will leave a non technical user (the sort that might read the guardian) with a completely wrong impression on Internet Marketing and SEO.

Kudos to you Andy you deserve citing (he deserved a link as well!) but I'm just sorry that sloppy journalism has tarnished it. For those thinking I'm overly negative get a loved one to read it ;) and ask them afterwards who andy beard is.

Heh; Journalists. Mostly Clueless. You think the newspapers are bad?  Try working with television people.

Last year, over 8 hours of filming, edited down to a 204-second insert in a programme (have to quote it in seconds; makes it sound waaaay longer, LOL).

Funy thing is they had an innteret advertising special with that weeks media section and at least one of the articles was of MFA quality - badly written and confusing to a newcomer it said that you could buy the number one spot for google.

And the gruniad has a history of not understanding tech that well years ago Jack Scholfield slagged off a product i was thirdline suport for and in fact he hadn't installed dos properly which caused the problem.

Fantomaster and tnash are spot on. The article shows once more the pathetic approach mainstream media has on SEO. How can they link to three MFA sites and ommit a link to Andy. I don't know if it's funny or tragic.

They don't even mention the fact that poor content can be created without the need of underpaid students. It can be generated by machines! Imagine that, nope, it can't be true, it sounds like science fiction. 

Andy congratulations. 4 btw.

Congrats. I didn't get the dead-tree version today but I've seen this picked up a few  places.

I found your digg story and dugg that too - hope you caught your flight ;)