Addendum is a publication for thoughtful disagreement. We examine business writing, challenge weak assumptions, surface missing context and extend arguments that deserve a second look.
Featured addendum
Search Platforms
In response to Google Search Central
Useful content and sound SEO remain sensible advice, but the announcement offers publishers little clarity about attribution, traffic loss, or control over AI use.
Latest
AI Search
Responding to Search Engine Land
The findings show how 343 marketers describe and buy a category, but budget allocation and terminology preferences do not establish business impact.
Marketing Automation
Responding to IBM Think
IBM's automation loop is efficient at reallocating toward measurable winners, but speed amplifies proxy errors, feedback loops, and unobserved customer costs.
Marketing Operations
Responding to EY
EY presents continuous marketing as an operating-model upgrade, but permanent optimization can erase the pauses needed for consent, learning, and accountability.
How Addendum works
Every piece should make the reader better informed than the original article alone. Disagreement is useful only when it introduces evidence, context, reasoning or a more complete frame.
Explain what the original article actually argues before criticizing it.
Focus on a claim, assumption, omission, framing choice or limitation that can be examined clearly.
An Addendum should extend understanding, not simply score points against another writer.
Why “Addendum”?
We are interested in arguments that are almost right, incomplete in revealing ways, persuasive for the wrong reasons, or simply missing a perspective worth preserving.
