What is the source of that statement?

Via: http://joshuatopolsky.com/post/123817628197/hello-again

"Let this sink in a bit: we launched two completely new (award-winning, beautiful, inventive) websites and founded our first regional site (hi Europe!); hit new traffic records (like surpassing the WSJ for the first time); become the leader in business digital video (we grew audiences nearly 350% YoY); nearly doubled our social traffic (all time highs in every metric, a 358% increase in Facebook traffic YoY); PLUS we saw double digit revenue growth in digital.

But more important than revenue or numbers, the editorial work I had a chance to be a part of was some of the strongest and most interesting stuff anyone anywhere has been doing. Things like Paul Ford’s outrageously great What is Code, data viz storytelling like This Is How Fast America Changes Its Mind and our 2015 Weed Index, or our 80’s-drenched oral history of junk bond kings, a feature about mutant big game hunting in South Africa, the tale of a sad drill in Seattle, or, you know, this insane Paul Krugman thing. To say nothing of the killer photo essays we did for Pursuits, or the fantastic new video our team has been creating. The list goes on and on. We’ve been making a lot of cool shit."

Just because you are getting more clicks, doesn't mean the quality has improved.

Clearly Bloomberg (the man) cares more about netting a specific audience than just increasing 'engagement' or clicks on the site.

I certainly enjoyed what Topolsky did, but it's understandable that Bloomberg might be concerned about how the changes effected the publications brand/perception.

off the deep end is the perfect way to put this.

Same, I loved their articles like Big Bertha or the big code breakdown.

I was also a big reader of The Verge when he was on it. Lately the quality of articles has really dipped. I hope the same doesn't happen when he leaves Bloomberg.

I think the audience is the big thing. Michael Bloomberg is the audience. If he didn't like it, then most of their readers wouldn't either.

It is exciting to wonder where he will go next.

I don't like how every time Bloomberg comes up on DN someone makes a comment about how they've "gone off the deep end" or something along those lines.

It's a shame that their designers are really innovating in digital and for the most part the DN community doesn't seem to support it because it doesn't fall under the "safe" visual language that seems to get upvoted the most here.

I think you're onto something when bringing up metrics/goals. In the end, for a site like that, numbers are king. You can generate all the buzz in the world with great design, but great design alone isn't enough. You need great content... and as much as it pains me to know this... there are a lot of times where what we consider amazing design doesn't really resonate with the audience they need it to. Some time, it simply doesn't pay the bills.

I think as a whole, this is tough pain-point for the online news industry. You need ad revenue, you need active users, and you need great content... and a lot of times each of those things demands vey unique - and often opposing - solutions.

Quoting from the article:

Mr. Topolsky, a founder of the tech and culture website The Verge, oversaw the recent redesign of Bloomberg’s business website.

You joke, but Topolsky actually was/is a musician. He and his brother Eric Emm, who is one half of the band Tanlines, ran a moderately successful production company in the mid 2000's.