A weblog by Tom Coates concerning future media, social software and the web of data
Quote of the month: "This is not a brothel, there are no prostitutes here"
You can explore the archives, read the disclaimer or subscribe to an RSS feed

Mainstream Publishers & Weblogs

Posted August 6, 2002 11:35 AM.

The Situation:
Imagine, if you will, that a prominent web magazine had decided to start hosting Weblogs. Imagine if shortly afterwards another prominent online publisher said they were doing the same. And then imagine if rumours abounded that they weren't going to be the only ones. And then imagine that you had been talking with a representative of a major UK newspaper who revealed to you that - if only for a short while - they too had been thinking of hosting weblogs on their site. What would you think? Would you think 'what a wonderful thing for the medium'?

The Problem:
Well of course it's entirely possible that it would be a wonderful thing for the medium - but it almost certainly wouldn't be a particularly wonderful thing for the publisher! Think about it for a moment - most people who become committed to weblogging eventually choose to set up a site of their own somewhere - sometimes with a domain name of their own - often with a design that's resolutely their own. The logical consequence of this (surely) is that after a while any site that offers free weblogging with little flexibility in design or personalisation will eventually be abandoned by the dedicated. And in their wake nothing a but huge wasteland of tumbleweed blogs and - dare I say it - unreadable sites. How does that reflect well on boston.com? Or Salon?

The Reason:
It doesn't take a genius to gather what is happening in corporate world at the moment - weblogs are 'in' - they've finally stopped being fashionable, and so are suddenly now becoming acceptable to the mainstream. Your executive at BigPublisher.com suddenly thinks that weblogging is the heart of the internet - the web finally fulfilling its promise. And of course they're right... But does understanding the importance of weblogs and weblogging correspond to understanding how an information publisher should relate to weblogs and weblogging? I would say no....

The Solution?
I'm not going to claim to have the definitive answer to how (say) the BBC should interact with the 'revolution in personal publishing' (which is, I might add, the longest bloody revolution ever, I think) - but I have got a couple of suggestions. And they revolve around not trying to usurp the common space that weblogs exist in, but in developing ways of cementing and building upon the interactions between those two very different beasts - mainstream and personal publishers.

  • Provide tools that allow webloggers to hook into your content. At the most trivial, this includes newsfeeds and RSS/RDF feeds. Let people put them on their sites, but also let them play with them - let them develop interesting idiosyncratic ways of looking at the information you create.
  • Look at the meta-tools that exist already for webloggers - Blogdex and Daypop for example. Adapt these tools to provide a different insight into the content you produce. For example: Create a "What the web is reading" page on The Guardian - this page being nothing more or less than Blogdex's recent links thing, but only reflecting Guardian articles. Your visitors get a guide to the best stuff on your site as chosen by the web itself. You get traffic to those articles and demonstrate your respect for the aggregate power and intelligence of the weblogging community as a whole. If you included the 'sources' aspect of Blogdex as well - so that everyone who has commented on an article on the Guardian is automatically linked to from the Guardian's site, then you get a situation where both weblogger, publisher and reader benefit - the weblogger in terms of traffic, the publisher in terms of traffic but more importantly by being able to demonstrate a public, conversational aspect to their sites without any of the cost of development or legal implications. And the reader is directed to the very best content you have to provide as well as to second level commentators who might be able to provide a different perspective...

Conclusion:
So here's my challenge to large online publishers: rather than admiring the medium and trying to reincorporate it into your traditional models, why not respect what makes it different - the sheer volume of people doing it, the sense of link-filtering, the personal comments and ideas that it generates - and work to make the relationship between mainstream and personal publishers a symbiotic one borne of mutual respect for what makes us so different (and yet complementary) to one another?

Addendum:
I don't want people to think I'm talking about Blogspot sites here - which fill a valuable niche in providing cheap or free presences for people who wish to be creative without investing large amounts of cash (but which - fundamentally - can be stripped of advertising, corporate branding and completely personalised).

Comments

Please stay on-topic, informative and polite. I reserve the right to remove comments for whatever vague capricious reasons seem reasonable at the time.

Hooray, a chance to agree with you at last.

But (there will always be a but) I think there are even simpler measures that publishers can take to encourage blogs to link to them.

Like: do NOT use frames

Like: do NOT require registration

Like: DO structure your file-set in a transparent and predictable fashion

etc.

Posted by: Ian at August 6, 2002 6:25 PM

Well said, and I think your solutions are dead-on.

The one wild card in the equation is Salon's announcement that it will eventually charge a fee of $40/year for bloghosting. If there is a huge influx of cash, it's possible that we might see Salon loosen up and do some interesting things with blogs. I think a "what the web is reading" tool would be a natural for Salon, for example, and Userland is already building tools to create a Salon blogging community.

The reality, I'm afraid, is that there won't be very many users eager to pay for the privilege of producing a Salon-branded blog, and that any money brought in will immediately go toward other departments of Salon which are hemorrhaging cash.

Posted by: Bill at August 6, 2002 7:53 PM

I suspect that ultimately the way that (say) the BBC will incorporate weblogs is pretty much the same way that it incorprated good webpages. Hire some of the people involved and get them to bring their audience with them. It's a model that worked in the early days of the web, and before that with any form of creative talent. Standup goes Open Mic->Club booking->Radio->TV, for example

Personal publishing a threat to journalism? No, it's a sandpit (albeit a very highly featured and well connected one) where the good people can choose to sell out or not...

Posted by: TomD at August 7, 2002 8:16 AM

So salon will charge - they have to, they're a business.

BUT, given the huge civic benefit that widespread, simple, cross-platform access to weblogs & community spaces would give the UK, why does the BBC not treat this as a new definition of public service for a networked age?

Posted by: Neil at August 8, 2002 3:06 PM

I guess because they don't need to be involved?

It's kind of wierd, because I know they've got all this anti-competitive stuff in their charter, but there also seems to be an attitude of 'if we don't *need* to be involved in it for it to be a success, and it's more likely we'll cock it up, why should we be?' that seems to be coming out recently. Makes a change from the big-red-rock-eater days...

Posted by: Tom Dolan at August 8, 2002 11:37 PM

I thought buying community sites as a means of increasing your readership was a pointless exercise. It seems weblogs offer little more for the commercial publishers.

Plus aren't weblogs just op-ed pieces mostly, with links thrown in? I can understand their own staff having weblogs on the company's site by why would they buy other weblogs or host them?

Probably just a fad that will pass.

Posted by: Seyed Razavi at August 9, 2002 10:50 AM

I don't think they'll buy online real-estate. They'll just buy people. They know how to do that.

Posted by: Tom Dolan at August 16, 2002 1:53 AM

Want to add your opinion?

© 1999-2007 Tom Coates