In response to the article:
This article is geared towards business people in general, even though it might seem to be aimed at internet business. Written in a collaborative and self-referential style, it seeks to be both an example of, and a commentary on, Internet business culture.
Culture and business, business and culture. They are always intertwined, these two. Since the days of clay tablet making to basket making (presumably to hold the clay tablets) we have woven our culture around the day to day activities that get our jobs done. As an apropos example of the zeitgeist of self-reference, this paragraph will try to explain away its own apparent lack of purpose by reminding us that everything has a purpose, no matter how vague. And even though I am just repeating what so many others have said, neither to inform or persuade, I must clearly state for the record that an attempt was made at redefining the very paradigm that brought about its existence.
Yes, I am reminded of self-reference and meta-knowledge, not the kind you find in books, but the kind you generate in response to a question, the question being, "How do I get visitors to my site?" The recursive nature of self-referencing dialog is attractive and relevant to search engine optimization. In fact, the organization of information in the article seemed to suffer from overuse of the aforementioned self-referencing in combination with high-ranking buzzwords, a tar pit into which such criticism is bound to find itself mired in by its very mention.
The slapdash nature of the text was made clear by the brisk and hurried tone, sprinkled with quotes and links and fears about the changing outlook of mainstream media (MSM) and business culture in general. The world is constantly changing. The trick is being an integral part of the change.