Why Content Publishers shouldn't host weblogs...

Posted February 23, 2003 11:29 AM.

This is a post about why mainstream content publishers shouldn't host weblogs on their sites - and the special circumstances under which they might be able to make it work. Firstly the reasons why they shouldn't do it:

If you have an established and authoritative brand associated with the fact-checked information that you publish, you run the risk of diluting that image by having your logo or URL associated with content published by members of the general public.
This is much less of a problem with discussion forums and community sites than it is with weblogs, because weblogs can use any voice they like (from authoritative to playful) and mostly don't need to allow any means of conversational redress from other users - ie. it's easier to confuse a weblog with the brand's main content.
There is also an associated problem (familiar to anyone hosting user-generated content) with legal liability - it's considerably easier to remove a legally dubious post from a discussion board than it is from a weblog, because webloggers view (with reason) the space as essentially theirs, and immune from intervention from on-high.
There is no reason to assume that being in the position to encourage the take-up of weblogging will mean that you'll keep the ones you want to keep using your service. In fact:
1. The longer someone has been weblogging, and the more invested they are in it, the more likely it is that they're going to want to get a domain name of their own.
2. These same people are also likely to want to use extended functionality at some point and will probably try and move to a dedicated application or provider who can more adequately fulfil their weblogging needs.
3. A dedicated long-term weblogger may not wish to be associated with the brand of your service any more and may choose to leave.
The effect of this is that dedicated, popular and authoritative webloggers will leave your service, leaving behind only new webloggers, and abandoned or 'low-quality' sites.
And the final reason not to host weblogs is that there's no need to do so. If you publish compelling and blog-worthy content on your site then it'll get just as much take-up in webloggia as if you were hosting the weblogs themselves.

Now the special cases - the ways to approach something like this if you're determined to do it:

There's value and utility in the information you can glean out of a database of people's weblog posts. These can help inform editorial decisions and make it possible to spot emerging news / public interest stories. This information (and the multiple ways it can be used within your site) is simply valuable. If you have an established brand, you are more likely to be able to get a decent amount of it.
Probably the best way to implement it after this stage, then, is to use an associated brand and publicise it heavily on your main site. That way you're putting in that element of distance that stops you being quite so heavily associated with what is written, while still reaping the benefits from it...
And to counter natural migration from your service (indeed to capitalise upon it and monetise it) then:
1. Firstly, make it possible for your webloggers not only to leave, but also to come back. People resent being put into a position where they are 'trapped' into using only one personal publishing tool, and may publicise this as a reason not to use the service in the first place.
2. Secondly, give them a clear upgrade path - give them various levels of functionality which they can move between. You can try and monetise this if you wish. If the functionality is good enough, people will pay.
3. Thirdly, use the fact that your running a high-profile publishing business as an opportunity to reward the weblogs you host that you think are particularly good. This is a hell of an incentive to be 'one of the fold'.
4. Fourthly, not only don't try and force people to stay within your design and branding, but make it possible for people to migrate from the branded presence completely. Many webloggers will want (at some point) to purchase a domain name of their own and get more powerful server functionality and access, but many won't know how to approach this kind of stuff. If you can build mechanisms to keep this process as simple and as easy as possible, then you can keep your webloggers happy, keep them using your service, and in the process get a cut on the price of the domain name, charge for the enhanced hosting (or the removal of adverts, if you've used them) and you still have access to the content they're producing.

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.

I'm speaking purely from an editorial, rather than a technical, point of view - but I think one of the special circumstances under which mainstream content publishers *should* host blogs (although I'm much against the idea too) is if they can provide something that others do not - plug a hole in the market, as it were. I think (and here's the biased bit) that the BBC, as a public service corporation, should be expected to do that - see, for instance (and cue even more bias) the BBC's weblog on what's happening in and around disability and the media. Who else is going to do something like that? (oh, http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/weblog/ since you ask) Personally, I'd like to see the Beeb doing more weblogs that cover 'unpopular' and less immediately fashionable areas.

→ Posted by: Vaughan at February 23, 2003 12:02 PM

I think I'm specifically talking about content publishers hosting weblogs for the general public (like Blogspot). I think mainstream publishers using weblogs as a cheap form for journalists to publish niche interest stuff is a really really good idea.

→ Posted by: Tom Coates at February 23, 2003 12:30 PM

I can see no reason whatever that a media organization should host weblogs - at least not for journalistic reasons. You say, "there's value and utility in the information you can glean out of a database of people's weblog posts. These can help inform editorial decisions and make it possible to spot emerging news / public interest stories." - but you can get that simply by encouraging your journalists to keep up with the blogosphere out there. No need to host it yourself.

The only exception would be someone like the BBC who might host weblogs not for journalistic reasons but to fill a gap for public interest reasons. Blogger/Blogspot seems to be doing a pretty good job of that though and thanks to Google they will probably do an even better job in future.

→ Posted by: David Brake at February 24, 2003 9:05 AM

I think it is safe to say that vested interests make such a scheme at least, beneficial. Both the vendor and the client have a vested interest in the initiation of the relationship.
The vendor gets a downstream client to receive the vendor's data and the client gets the opportunity to use weblog tools and the access to the "community". After that the issue becomes managing the relationship. The vendor has the more strenuous position and so must excert more effort to maintain a relationship, and potential upstream revenue.

I would suggest that it is the job of the vendor to actively maintain that relationship. If the vendor chooses not to actively maintain that relationship then they have no business, at least to my understanding, in getting involved in the blog space in the first place.

As Tom points out, the clients' relationship is far more malleable. In fact over time there will be classes of bloggers which must be matched with the appropriate tools sets. If the vendor can maintain such tool sets and incentivize to the needs of the writer then the vendor may maintain his downstream.

As an example, Amazon has quite a vested interest in hosting blogs. One of the most popular topics in the blogosphere is books and music. If Amazon were to present a space for hosting weblogs along with a tool set that fully supports the wealth of data available in Amazon's databases, quick and easy referal linking to books and other products with full access to sales reports, accounting, access to periodic review copies, complete outline support, etc. it stands to reason that the needs of writers and the needs of the merchant will coincide.

Surely now you can come close to what I describe using a combination of interfaces built for google or amazon with what the firms have made available to developers. But if Amazon were to use their own team to build tools upon which writers can ply their trade it could prove to be quite beneficial to both parties.

→ Posted by: filchyboy at February 25, 2003 6:17 AM

Interesting that the BBC seems to be the exception here. I don't see much point in the BBC setting up its own blog tool. But the various recently launched BBC blogs seem useful as a way of refashioning the BBC's content in different ways. Nick Robinson's blog for example is becoming a one stop shop for all things Nick Robinson as he adds audio and video of his reports and interacts directly with people on it. I was also amused when the BBC blog "Will's World" broke the story of David Trimble's attack on the Orange Order - it took 12 hours for this to become a story on the regular BBC News website. So blog formats seem to be adding to the BBC's offer somehow or other.

→ Posted by: Nick Reynolds at April 29, 2006 6:33 PM

I should point out that I definitely don't have any issues with large organisations hosting weblogs for their staff or using them as an editorial voice. Love that. Just hosting them for the general public.

→ Posted by: Tom Coates at April 29, 2006 8:19 PM

Want to add your opinion?