DISQUS

louisgray.com: louisgray.com: Does Anybody Care About Non-Blog Commenting Anymore?

  • Duncan Riley · 1 year ago
    No, we still care very much. Social Median is trying to be fair, although 1100 characters may be a bit liberal on the extract side, but I credit them for not carte blanche reposting content and delivering traffic back to the source, unlike the bottom dwellers at Favorit. shyftr.com is down at the moment so I cant see what they're doing at the moment, but the rule hasn't changed in 6 months: if you're reposting content in full that isn't yours and building community around that content you are low life scum who has no place in Web 2.0 (and that's the polite version). 2 years ago we called these people sploggers, nothing has really changed except some pretty 2.0 sugar coating.

    That we're not talking about it much is more representaitve of the fact that some of these services just haven't gone all that well. Nothing like a dose of bad karma to fix things :-)
  • Dave Stanley · 1 year ago
    Unfortunately, we're down because we're migrating a bunch of data and re-writing our api. Once that's completed we'll be back up. This is what we're not doing. We're not showing full content on standalone pages anymore. In the reader, we show the feed as it is published (just as any other reader displays feed content). On standalone item pages we have a very abbreviated snippet of content (50 words). In the activity stream, we just provide the title of the story. And if you have a blog and want to pull the activity, comments included, back to your blog via an embeddable widget, you can do so. And the title of the post always links back to the source (in the reader, in the activity stream, on standalone pages).
  • Edwin Khodabakchian · 1 year ago
    Hi Duncan: do you put ads in your RSS feeds? If not, is there a specific reason behind it?
  • Louis Gray · 1 year ago
    Dave's comments are right. Shyftr did a great job responding quickly to the issues this Spring. They were never ill-intended, and it's unfortunate they got labeled the way they did. I've also been disappointed with Favorit, as I had really high expectations for them and they seem to have completely underdelivered.
  • Edwin Khodabakchian · 1 year ago
    Good questions. Do you know if SocialMedian is searchable by Google?

    I think that two changes (one very simple and one more complex) that would go a long way in term of helping solve this problem:

    A) extend RSS and ATOM to encode information about if the entities embedded in the RSS feed can be: 1) displayed partially, 2) display in full, 3) display in full and made searchable and 4) display in full, made searchable and made commentable.

    B) help people who create great content to monetize it when it is embedded in an RSS feed. An increasing number of RSS feeds include advertisement. This is the first step. Some kind of very simple to define and execute micro-payment mechanism like: we allow display in full for $X per CPM, etc..

    The key here is something that is encoded well enough that it can be automated. Here is an example of why: feedly, with less than 200,000 users aggregates 800,000 feeds. Manually finding and reaching out to all the owners of the feeds is practically impossible.
  • centernetworks · 1 year ago
  • Louis Gray · 1 year ago
    Allen, there's certainly a measurement of effort between sharing an
    item in Google Reader or liking it in FriendFeed versus making a
    comment, or linking to it in your own blog post. I don't know that I
    would blame "early adopters" period, but we do tend to find ways to
    consume more information quickly, and if it means using shortcuts,
    then that happens.

    As for the laziness "ruining what was something beautiful", that's of
    course subjective, in terms of what's beautiful, and what's changed.
    Change will always happen, and the most successful constantly adjust.
  • centernetworks · 1 year ago
    ok here's my comment from up there ^^^ which someone i either erased or there's a bug...

    Let's be very clear here Louis - early adopters are screwing early adopter blogs - period. Clicking share on google reader is not like leaving a comment on the source. Clicking like on ff or retweeting on twitter is not the same as leaving a comment on the source. I will have more on this soon as I think that lazyness has slowly ruined what was something beautiful
  • Jeremy Chone · 1 year ago
    Very interesting post and relevant for one of my side project and my personal blog. Here are few thoughts on the subject:

    1) As a [very small] blogger, I actually mind less about content (full or not) being displayed on other sites than having my comments fragmented on the Internet. This is probably because I use my blog mostly to share my experience and thoughts on my domain expertise (not trying to any make money or drive traffic up –while I would not mind-). So, in short, I prefer "content stealing" than "comments stealing." I am a big fan of FriendFeed.com but kind of disappointed that they do not sync comments back.

    2) Another aspect under talked about is the legal implication of image re-formatting. For example, SocialMedian.com seems to create thumbnail images for the blog entries that contain images. However, these images might have some legal restrictions attached to it (e.g., images bought on iStockPhoto.com by the Blog’s author)

    3) I know this opinion might not be popular, however should we consider that any content published via publically accessible RSS be Attribution-Share-Alike content? If a content source does not want their content to be under this implicit license, then, they should not publish it via a publically accessible RSS feed. For example, many “non-techy” web sources (i.e., WebMD) are usually conservative about the information they deliver through their RSS channels (you just get the teaser)

    4) Also, when I am reading on this topic I find myself surprised by people making a distinction between Google Reader, Google News, and the content aggregators that are putting ads around the aggregated content. My current take is that they both are business driven, one via a direct monetization model and the other via a brand and service monetization model.

    We are moving towards a more revenue centric era and we should get used that some services will have to monetize earlier than later. We will probably see more “hulus” than “youtubes” in the coming years.
  • AramZS · 1 year ago
    All my content is Creative Commons share alike. This is the way things are going, it is reality. There are two solutions. Bring the comments back in, as this blog does with FF. The other is to be active on the services which share your blog. People read and like articles and posts not because of what format they are in but because of what is in them and who wrote them.

    Yes, sorry, you will have to work harder to engage your readers. Yes, sorry, site hits will be harder and harder to get. But you know what else? It also means that for the first time we are going to be seeing an internet where what someone wrote matters, not where they wrote it. If I have to put a little more effort out there to connect with the community, then so be it. (Not that I have much of a community at the moment :P ).

    The end result is what is causing all this "blogs are dead" bull. The physical webpage format is no longer a viable one for small people who want to make a living off blogging. It sucks, I know. But blogging is still going strong, it's just that not all the activity is going on the blog. Time to find a new way to advertise and a new way to make money for those bloggers who are looking to make a living off it (just look at Gawker's serious consolidation). If you want to keep the traffic going to your site, it means a lot more work. However, for the little guys (those of us doing it for the love), this may be a change for the better.
  • matthew hunt · 1 year ago
    You made some great points.
  • geoff · 1 year ago
    Socialmedian should just a % of the original post not a defined number of chars. MessageDance does that type of logic when you create a blog entry via email to your blog and then 25%, 50% or 100% shows in MessageDance.
  • Louis Gray · 1 year ago
    Geoff, send me an e-mail on MessageDance if you can. Looking forward to learning more.
  • robdiana · 1 year ago
    I think part of the reason is due to sites like socialmedian and FriendFeed promoting the conversations. Most people don't complain when they see the amount of conversation they can get on SM or FF, as well as the little bit of traffic they both drive. However, I am obviously a bit of an evangelist for distributed conversations :)
  • socialmedian · 1 year ago
    Hi everyone. We created socialmedian's "fair use" policy about 6 months ago with 3 goals in mind:
    1. Have a clear and consistent policy for all content on the site
    2. Have that policy be publisher friendly
    3. Have that policy be socialmedian user friendly.

    We designed our policy with some of the leading copywrite lawyers in the world.

    We know it is not perfect but it is a good start and we have tweaked it slightly as we have learned and gathered user and publisher feedback and we will continue to do so.

    Thanks!

    -jason
  • Matt Shaulis · 1 year ago
    1100 characters seems well outside what one would qualify as fair use. I'd be interested to know a world class IP attorney that would agree with you on this. Any "leading copywrite[sic] lawyers" would err on the side of caution... so I'm not exactly sure I believe you. (Either that, or your lawyers pulled one over on you as far as being "leading lawyers in the world".)
  • Louis Gray · 1 year ago
    Matt, from what I've seen, Jason is trustworthy and I don't think it would behoove him to not get guidance and say he did. As we trusted your intentions through the frustrations this Spring, I'd ask that you trust him here as well. What this post was intended to do was to open the discussion rather than point fingers. So... I guess I'm saying "stand down". :-)
  • socialmedian · 1 year ago
    It's a murky area. Still working on what the right mix is here. What do you think would be more appropriate "fair use" ?
  • Matt Shaulis · 1 year ago
    Murky area for bloggers, app developers, and users ... yes. But having heard from the horses mouths exactly what IP lawyers think about this very subject I can say with utmost confidence that their opinions are anything but murky. I think we can all admit (and going from the words of people like Tony Hung back in the spring) that 1100 characters is a bit much.

    Something Shyftr did not do when we got pulled out on the carpet on this is claim that we were following a "fair use" policy of some kind. We were simply syndicating the data as it was provided in the feed. Our original intention was to be sure to not tamper with the content in any way. Knowing that many publishers chose to advertise in their feed, it felt wrong to us to truncate that content even a little for fear it would appear as though we were trying to usurp a publishers ad (something we would never ever want to do).

    When we were presented with the other side of the coin it became clear to us that we needed to change our policies and we did so quickly and we moved on. I would be remiss to advise you on what an appropriate fair use policy would be for Social Median... I can only share my opinions and my scars and hope that you will find yourself capable of quickly addressing the concerns of the people who work so hard to give the blogosphere all of it's wonderful content. I've always kept the bloggers at the forefront of my concern because I love reading blogs and only ever wanted to make that a more communal experience for everyone... I could never express to the community enough how much it hurts to have so many bloggers hate me now because they think I was out to "steal" from them or otherwise undercut them somehow... was just never our intent. :-\
  • socialmedian · 1 year ago
    Hey Matt. Thanks for the note. We have developed a fair use policy in consultation with our lawyers from the beginning. As noted, we did so in a way that was intended to thread the needle between publishers and general users of the site. Yeah, we probably pushed the limits a bit with 1100 characters but that was on purpose. We thought of publishing our fair use policy on the site from day 1 but decided instead to just maintain a policy internally at first and learn from it. I'm happy now that the policy is getting some attention externally so we can learn even more. Our attorneys advised us that the key is to have a policy that is consistent and which respects the rights of content creators. We feel good that we have done that.
  • Write_It_Right · 1 year ago
    So you have leading "copywrite" lawyers? Do they spellcheck for you as well?
  • Marc Vermut · 1 year ago
    In a moment of timely synchronicity, Seth Godin blogged today on "The number one secret of the great blogs." (http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/11...) Wait. For. It.

    "Every one of them leads a tribe."

    Of course, that is a partial plug for his book, but the underlying point is that bloggers should be specific about who they are writing for/about/to and the leading voices in that conversation become virtual kitchen tables around which people gather (a la louisgray.com). I think that there will be both social curating sites that have general audiences but that niche/focused content sites will still manage to maintain audiences (why Techcrunch still has vibrant commenting, even though Arrington send out post links across the social media distribution network).

    The last question that remains is how content creators will be rewarded for their work if it is diffusely spread and revenue doesn't always flow back to the source. Well, I don't think they will earn money on everything they write, but this isn't dissimilar to the issues that musicians face with recorded music. Bloggers should look at their entire ecosphere of earnings potential and figure out where they will be able to monetize their "value" not solely their "content."
  • Eric Berlin · 1 year ago
    Hey Louis, as you know I've been pretty consistent on this issue even though we disagree. My view is that a reasonable excerpt from the source publisher is fine on a social media platform, but that should be reserved to something more along the lines of 150-300 characters, and certainly not 1100. The key is to provide as much value to publishers as to the social media platform's user base, and to shortchange publishers by not affording an appropriate "tease" back to the source content breaks down that value proposition.
  • Louis Gray · 1 year ago
    Eric, I'm glad you care (as does Duncan and as does Allen) and that you've been consistent on it. I thought it was worth revisiting after 6 or so months had gone by, and given the continued growth of sites like socialmedian and others. I don't know that we'll ever see a perfect standard, but it sure would help if more of these comment systems offered two-way flow.
  • Ori · 1 year ago
    Hi there, very interesting post. We have decided at commentino (a new comment aggregator, I'm a co-founder there) to limit the "Article summary" feature to 200 chars + we dot allow comments on out site in order not to break the discussion on the original blog. I guess that the secret is in finding the right balance between valuable aggregation and keeping the author's rights.

    my comments at http://www.commentino.com/orim
  • steveballmer · 1 year ago
    NO!
  • Noah David Simon · 1 year ago
    lol
  • Jim Caruso · 1 year ago
    Great observation, since I've started using socialmedian and similar sites. Owning the content and comments is a big issue for any writer or publisher.
  • Louis Gray · 1 year ago
    Owning the content and comments is a big issue for many authors, but
    not every author. What you're seeing is a metamorphosis between the
    old way of having siloed content and the new way of knowing the data
    can flow anywhere. The tricky part is knowing where it's going and
    determining whether to participate.
  • matthew hunt · 1 year ago
    this reminds me of the scraping issues that craigslist and other sites similar battled about for some time in the past. remember the issues around listpic and other mashups of craigslist, why some were banned and others allowed. why is google allowed to harvest and scrape info and post on their search engine and yet other people are not to do the same thing...? it's a tough call. i think we should all just keep playing nice and building off each others content and ideas, etc. I am really interested in seeing how all this will play out...