-
Website
http://www.louisgray.com/live/ -
Original page
http://blog.louisgray.com/2008/11/does-anybody-care-about-non-blog.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
- 10 Top New Web Services of 2009 (From My Perspective)
- For All the Gloom Around RSS, Readers Continue to Climb in '09
- Growing Grumblings on Tech News Don't Answer Incentives Problems
- Mozzler Filters Your Social Stream for Links, Highlights Media
- iTunes, Sirius Seem Antiquated After Spotify iPhone Trial
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 :-)
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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. :-\
"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."
my comments at http://www.commentino.com/orim
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.