It’s always a thrill to meet folks for the first time who you’ve talked to for years online. It’s doubly a thrill to to do so for a good reason. I’m nervous as hell – I’m not one for large groups of people, but this is worth it. Hopefully bridges will be built that help ideas come to life. Here’s to a good day tomorrow.
Category Archives: Communications, Connection, Internet, Web, Media
This isn’t about the Post, it’s about WashingtonPost.com!
In a link driven world, where attention equals influence, *any* attention is good attention for someone who is a pundit and in the media. Hear me out now…
WashingtonPost.com is aware of the growing controversy over “Red America” – the blog for a part (the majority?) of Americans. If WashingtonPost.com had integrity, they would realize that they didn’t just hire one half of a Crossfire-like team (do they even realize this? if so where’s the other side WaPo?), they hired a political operative and someone who appears to have had a bad plagiarism habit a while back: Salon, Salon, Scott Rosenberg, Atrios, Atrios, Atrios, Albert.
Alex Koppelman calls this affair in a dragonfire piece The Post’s “Embarrassment”. It may well be. But it doesn’t matter. WashingtonPost.com probably already *has* taken its lumps from the Washington Post newsroom regarding this – but WashingtonPost.com is independent of the Washington Post! It has its own management and editorial team. Its audience is national, not local. Its goals and methods to reach that audience are different.
For confirmation, look at this email from the Washington Post disowning any responsibility:
From: Deborah C Howell HowellDC@washpost.com
Date: March 23, 2006 9:44:05 PM EST
To: xxxxx
Subject: Re: DomenechThe Washington Post has not hired him. The website has. The two are under totally different management. He will not be working for the newspaper. If you want to complain to the right person, try executive.editor@wpni.com.
Deborah
I think WashingtonPost.com is smarter then everyone is giving them credit for. They took a calculated risk that has generated buzz and interest in their service. From folks they want linking to it. Link bait that has caught its prey. They will “cave” sooner or later and hire a hard left blogger to ‘balance’ Red America. But the influence gain is already done.
Thousands of influential conservative bloggers, plus a heaping of critical liberal bloggers have posted links pointing to Red America. On the web, such activity boosts you in Google and in services like Technorati. That boost equals influence. WaPo.com has probably already gotten a nice bump in hits but the big effect will be the additional Google-juice gained by the time the controversy dies down.
Fuck all about integrity. It’s about hits and Google visibility.
If I’m right, while I am disappointed in WashingtonPost.com – they are helping to further coarsen the dialog in this country (can’t blame them really – is *anyone* trying to get both sides to talk at that level?) – I can’t help but be impressed with their knowledge of the web, of Google, and the blogosphere. And yeah – that’s cold blooded.
Then again, I could be wrong. This is just my opinion.
Full feeds versus partial feeds
Lots of folks out there take a hard line when it comes to publishing either full feeds (the entire contents of each post being published in RSS/Atom) or partial feeds.
Scoble, for example, is famous for declaring he won’t subscribe to anyone’s partial feed.
Shelley and Rafe have posted thoughtful takes on this, from either side of the fence.
My take? Well I publish a full feed. But for the longest time I didn’t. It hasn’t made a difference as far as my readership is concerned one way, or another, because this is such a personal space for me.
‘There is more than one way to do it’ should not only be the motto of Perl, but the motto of the web. There is room for both approaches – and many more. We’ve mostly gotten each other speaking the same language (hey I know that’s arguable), but to argue that there is only ‘one true way’ to publish the sentences misses the beauty of the web.
“Nobody is going to read me just for the very occasional update”
Well I don’t know about that Seth. I follow you for your occasional updates because you speak about things I find interesting and are a unique voice. You have knowledge, experience, and a point of view to share.
According to Bloglines you have 208 subscribers. That’s a large community if you ask me. But it’s all a matter of perspective. paradox1x has just 28. But I’m okay with that. It’s an honor that even a few find me interesting enough to do so in this crazy world. And sometimes we even talk 🙂
This case was my last big “open” civil-liberties task. I too often think I’m going to get my big break, and be vaulted to netgeek rockstardom (or at least some level above street performer). But that’s a delusion. It won’t happen unless either I strike it rich (so I can buy the necessary attention), or get a prestigious policy position (so the institution directs attention to me) – both of which, contrary to some myth, are relatively difficult and improbable. Otherwise, I’m going to be slogging in obscurity forever.
Now that this case is over, I think yet another reason for me to keep a blog is gone. I thought there might be something to “citizen journalism” coverage. But again, I think any objective assessment of the results would have to be negative. Nobody is going to read me just for the very occasional update. And as I keep asking, what’s so great about being an unpaid freelancer?
Quote viewer in AJAX…
I switched the implementation of my quote viewer from Flash to Javascript last night for fun and education. If you view source, it’s there for you to find in gory detail, but here it goes for the lazy…
In the header of this page you will find tag that loads the script that enables the quote viewer:
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript" src="/widgets/quoteview/quoteview.js"></script>
At the top of the script you will notice two variables, one sets the number of seconds I want this quote to auto-refresh (set to -1 to disable) and the the next indicates where to find the XML document that contains the quotes I want to display.
Methods in the script will load a random quote and refresh a div element on the page:
<div id="quoteview"></div>
To kick it off, I call a method from the script:
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript" src="/widgets/quoteview/quoteview.js">quoteViewXmlRequest();</script>
And that’s it 🙂 I’m a server-side developer by trade so if you care to take a look at this and critique, it could be helpful.
I don’t care about the Oscars, but now YOU do – think!
Jon Stewart hosting the Oscars has helped draw the attention of many, many bloggers. Lots are trying to cash in on the hype by publishing prediction lists of winners – an old cheap writing trick. Admittedly, I’m curious, so for once I will tune in for a few minutes, but nothing more. If something interesting happens, I will hear about it from my online community of friends and I will download it via Bittorrent. Even with all the new buzz this year, I’m sure the Oscars remain the self-congratulatory circle-jerk they always were. ‘Nuff-said, right? Well no. This opens a door to connect some dots…
Publishing a list is one type of attention drawing tactic, being snarky is another…
These days you could rename Memeorandum to Snarksforall, with one blogger trying to top another for the most vacuous post.
So true! Performancing has a handy guide to these techniques: 10 Killer Post Ideas:
…Here are ten proven post formulas to get your creative juices, and your traffic, flowing.
…1. How to…2. Lists…3. Campaign…4. Interview…5. Review…6. Case study…7. Research results…8. What’s new, trends…9. Attack!…10. Ask the audience…
There are other linkbait guides out there for you, go ahead and search if so inclined. Howard Stern was ahead of his time man. Way ahead of his time.
Then again, you can have the best writing or service in the world, if no one knows about it, you’re shit outta luck. You need to know how to get the word out. You need to know who has influence and who doesn’t.
Publishing 2.0: Who Are the New Media Gatekeepers?:
Who decides what�s worthy of your attention � a Web 2.0 application, a newspaper columnist, a talk show host, an editorial staff, an influential blogger, a community of thousands, a community of millions?
Answer for today: bloggers!
Jeremy Zawodny: How to give Oral Sex to Bloggers in Return for PR Favors:
..there’s nothing like a few excited bloggers to kick off a good viral marketing campaign, right?! Who cares if your product is lame. Just get some bloggers to talk about it!
But which ones? Well it’s Technorati to the rescue…
Guy Kawasakli: How to Suck Up to a Blogger:
…Nowadays buzz begets ink. Journalists no longer anticipate or create buzz–rather, they react to it: “Everyone is buzzing about FaceBook. There must be something to this, so I had better write a story about it.” This role reversal has fried people’s minds.
The latest development is that blogs beget buzz. Blogs have changed everything because they represent a cheap, effective podium for creating buzz on a massive scale. Technorati provides an easy way to identify the A-listers, so all you have to do is attract the most influential bloggers.
…Sucking up is not an event–it’s a process.
Don Dodge: The new way to launch your product or company:
It doesn’t cost anything to publicize your new product or service. Simply engage a couple of the “A-List” bloggers (Michael Arrington, Robert Scoble, Dave Winer, Om Malik, Steve Gillmor, Cory Doctorow, Richard MacManus, Stowe Boyd, and others) by sending them a link to your new product or service. Tell them what problem it solves and why it is cool. When they blog, people listen. When their stories hit Tech Memeorandum, Digg, TailRank, and other services the story explodes across thousands of blogs within hours.
You see, if you don’t have buzz, you don’t have reach. You don’t have reach, no one will know you exist without one hell of a hard slog – no matter how good you are.
NYMag: Blogs to Riches: The Haves and Have-Nots of the Blogging Boom:
…By all appearances, the blog boom is the most democratized revolution in media ever. Starting a blog is ridiculously cheap; indeed, blogging software and hosting can be had for free online. There are also easy-to-use ad services that, for a small fee, will place advertisements from major corporations on blogs, then mail the blogger his profits. Blogging, therefore, should be the purest meritocracy there is.
…In theory, sure. But if you talk to many of today�s bloggers, they�ll complain that the game seems fixed. They�ve targeted one of the more lucrative niches�gossip or politics or gadgets (or sex, of course)�yet they cannot reach anywhere close to the size of the existing big blogs. It�s as if there were an A-list of a few extremely lucky, well-trafficked blogs�then hordes of people stuck on the B-list or C-list, also-rans who can�t figure out why their audiences stay so comparatively puny no matter how hard they work. �It just seems like it�s a big in-party,� one blogger complained to me. (Indeed, a couple of pranksters last spring started a joke site called Blogebrity and posted actual lists of the blogs they figured were A-, B-, and C-level famous.)
That�s a lot of inequality for a supposedly democratic medium.
It’s because the web resembles the wishes, desires, and motives of humanity. And humanity, while striving for something greater, is grounded in behaviors inscribed in our hearts, in our minds, in our genes.
Clay Shirky: Power Laws, Weblogs, and Inequality:
…In systems where many people are free to choose between many options, a small subset of the whole will get a disproportionate amount of traffic (or attention, or income), even if no members of the system actively work towards such an outcome. This has nothing to do with moral weakness, selling out, or any other psychological explanation. The very act of choosing, spread widely enough and freely enough, creates a power law distribution.
…inbound link data is just an example: power law distributions are ubiquitous. Yahoo Groups mailing lists ranked by subscribers is a power law distribution. (Figure #2) LiveJournal users ranked by friends is a power law. (Figure #3) Jason Kottke has graphed the power law distribution of Technorati link data. The traffic to this article will be a power law, with a tiny percentage of the sites sending most of the traffic. If you run a website with more than a couple dozen pages, pick any time period where the traffic amounted to at least 1000 page views, and you will find that both the page views themselves and the traffic from the referring sites will follow power laws.
…any tendency towards agreement in diverse and free systems, however small and for whatever reason, can create power law distributions.
Because it arises naturally, changing this distribution would mean forcing hundreds of thousands of bloggers to link to certain blogs and to de-link others, which would require both global oversight and the application of force. Reversing the star system would mean destroying the village in order to save it.
Given the ubiquity of power law distributions, asking whether there is inequality in the weblog world (or indeed almost any social system) is the wrong question, since the answer will always be yes. The question to ask is “Is the inequality fair?”
So, lets get this straight shall we? The new way of doing things looks remarkably like the old way. The names and methods have have changed, but that’s pretty much it. At least Technorati lets me see who those with influence are. I wonder when that will go behind a pay wall?
Some A-listers seem to want to keep this knowledge obscured while selling an ideal that doesn’t exist. It’s a very sellable ideal. In a way, these few folks exhibit a form of long tail denial. Kent Newsome connects the dots nicely here: Bloglogic and the Litmus Test for Link Love:
…making traffic and links your focus is not the most effective way to build a blog. Most of the people who have been at the table when we’ve talked about it seem to agree with that.
But just because traffic and links aren’t the focus doesn’t mean they aren’t legitimate goals. To tell someone that traffic and links don’t matter at all is a little like a rich guy telling a poor guy not to be so concerned about money. I don’t obsess about money, but making some is certainly one of my goals when I head out the door each weekday morning.
The key is to have many goals, but a narrow focus.
…Here’s the only question you have to answer to determine whether traffic is one of your blogging goals: would you blog happily for an extended time if no one ever read your blog? No Comments, no clicks, no links. Just a dark corner of cyberspace where your blog sits idle and completely unnoticed
It’s just marketing.
Indeed.
For my part, I’m going to keep doing it the way I always have – by trying to put out the best service I possibly can, and be a good person. That service attempts to use its influence to expose those who should be heard to a wider audience. I don’t have the time, nor inclination, to play suck up. I guess that’s my loss.
Update: I check Technorati fairly regularly to see who is linking here and to my surprise, Memeorandum picked me up. I was indeed there for a few seconds, as you can see from this archived page, but whatever algorithm Memeorandum uses has replaced me, with someone who ranks higher.
Update: Whups. Incorrect. It moved my link reference to someone else. I’m still there. It’s fascinating to watch it move links and references every few minutes to help present a picture of the thread. Okay.. I’m breaking my Lent promise…walk away… walk away…
Still a few hours left…
to nominate finalists for Philly Future’s next Featured Blog poll. The poll should appear on the site by noon today. Until then, anyone of PF’s 450 (and counting) members can nominate a favorite local blog (or second (or third, or fourth,…) an existing nomination). Click here for more info.
Copied from Howard 🙂
Learning
While I haven’t talked about this here or at PF, it will be – at the very least – educational. Thank you Scott for opening the discussion.
Going to be quiet the next few days
Have a lot of work to do – the Philly Future hosting situation needs to be resolved right away – work has been intense – big things happening personally – and the local journalism work group I’m helping to organize is coming along.
Some thoughts:
Since November 1st, I’ve read or sent 1551 emails related to Philly Future. And folks wonder why I don’t post more 🙂
Garret, Bill, and Dave have posted their “Four Things”.
Bill’s RawSugar will be paying maintainers of its top twenty user bookmark pages between $25 and $500 per month.
And last, but not least, well wishes to Zoe.
“A Growing Web of Watchers Builds a Surveillance Society”
NYTimes: A Growing Web of Watchers Builds a Surveillance Society:
It is strangely fitting that President Bush’s no-warrant wiretapping came to light during the season of holiday gift buying, much of which took place online.
As Washington huffed and puffed over a new erosion of privacy, untold millions of us clicked just as fast as our little clickers could click through Google ads and Amazon checkout pages, unwittingly updating our “cookie” ID badges at every new screen. We bought our loved ones cellphones with built-in Global Positioning System and flocked to family gatherings in cars loaded with OnStar and EZ Pass. We paid for mostly everything with credit and debit cards. Out of convenience, we embraced technologies meant to track our every move.
There are important distinctions, of course, between government prying and the emerging web of consumer surveillance. But they share a digital universe that facilitates and rewards watching. Spam, spyware and identity theft are only a taste of how exposed we have all willingly become as we enjoy the benefits of the networked world.
If the American public seems a bit confused about the raging debate of security versus civil liberties – Bush/Cheney versus the A.C.L.U. – it may be because the debate itself has been outpaced by technology. In our post-9/11, protowireless world, democracies and free markets are increasingly saturated with prying eyes from governments, corporations and neighbors. For better and worse, free societies are fast entering the world of total surveillance.