Thursday, March 22nd, 2007
Guardian Changing Media: Democratising content in the user-in-control era
Session Chair: Janice Gibson, assistant editor, the Guardian
Edwin Aoki, chief architect, AOL
Ben Hammersley, multimedia reporter, GuardianUnlimited
Tariq Krim, CEO and founder, Netvibes
Steve Olechowski, cofounder and COO, FeedBurner
Tariq Krim: I used to be a journalist. I used to be in the media space. When the blog came out, I decided to go to the other side. I created NetVibes mostly by accident. I was trying to survive in the age of personal media. He found himself subscribed to 1,000 blogs. He wanted to know how to aggregate all of the content and services he used, not only blogs but also e-mail and eBay.
The real issue is where do we put our attention? If they spend one hour on the internet, where did that one hour come from?
The architecture of the internet has changed with RSS and syndication. Syndication is the first way to reach the user, through the RSS. (My colleague Neil McIntosh responded to the question of why there was such low adoption of RSS by British newspapers last week. I think that RSS is more than reading feeds in purpose-built feedreaders. It is an enabling technology. The real power of RSS is liberating content from websites and their front pages as well as liberating content from platforms. Adoption will be driven by simple tools like NetVibes. Bobbie Johnson, one of the Guardian tech correspondents, said pretty much the same thing in Neil’s comments. Don’t worry Neil, we aren’t ganging up on you.)
Steve Olechowski: FeedBurner manages syndication for publishers all over the world from Reuters, the Daily Mail, the USAToday to bloggers and podcasters around the world. People are consuming content outside of the context where the publisher originally created it. In 2003, RSS was mostly blogs, but in 2006, there are podcasts, blogs, video blogs, retail and e-commerce, online media companies and web services.
Ben Hammersley: It’s my birthday in a couple of weeks and I’m beginning to feel like an old man. I’ll be 31. I’ve been building websites for 15 years. I was on FidoNet, which none of you will remember unless you’re really geeky. He offered to buy someone a beer if they had heard of FidoNet, but
He sees the sames mistakes, the same debates in 1994, 1998, in 2002. They are based around the problem that large corporation and brand managers are fundamentally at odds with their customers. The content that you are producing is very personal to the people who you are creating it for.
You have a create a love affair and then get out of the way.
Over the last 15 years, we’ve seen media companies, record companies actively trying to destroy the love affair their users have with their content. As an example of this, Viacom is suing Google. They think they are suing Google and they are against Sergey, another big corporation. But they are really at war with their users.
They are taking a Valentine’s Day card and burning it in front of the person who gave it to them.
Edwin: Yeah, this is really the same.
Old Media:
- Controlled by a select few
- Out of date by the time it’s printed/broadcast.
New Media:
- Let a thousand flowers bloom
- Or, let a thousand people with typewriters create something
He focused on user generated context, mashups and remix culture.
Tariq: Most media view RSS as as a way to get people to get back to the website, but he said that one liners aren’t getting people back to the websites.
Steve: There is no evidence that putting more content in your feeds is taking traffic away from your users. You certainly aren’t losing audience by publishing feeds. The people reading feeds are different from the people reading your website. Feeds and syndication are a separate medium from websites.
They talked about ads in feeds. What is really working in terms of advertising in feeds, is people engagin in feeds.
Edwin: You bring them back to your site with other services and other levels of participation. Sites that are successful do drive people back to their sites by offering fuller feeds.
Ben: What is micro-chunking? Micro-chunking comes around every 18 months. It is one of those buzzwords that come around that is nothing more than a good excuse to have a conference. As a word, you can ignore it. As a concept, you need to know what it is.
Steve: The difference is that there is a 24 hour publishing cycle not a daily publishing cycle. The old feedback loop was writing a letter to the editor. Now, feedback is instantaneous.
Question from person from Chinwag, RSS is a way to build results through search.
Ben: If Google is indexing your RSS feeds, sack your webmaster. That is a Fisher-Price mistake. Write headlines in a way that works best for Google not best for a way that is elegant. That is a shame because I like puns. All of the other technical issues are down to having competent technical staff.
Technorati Tags: changingmedia, community, Guardian, media 2.0







March 23rd, 2007 at 5:02 am
Hey - don’t worry Kevin. It’s just a file format!
Seriously, I think you’re right that RSS works as an enabling technology, insofar as it is a means to power some very interesting end applications (some not yet invented, I hope).
My point was different, but related… not that newspapers have failed to adopt RSS, but that *readers* aren’t that keen on it. It doesn’t solve problems for normal readers yet. To suggest this is Napster vs RIAA again (if I read your report correctly) would be just crazy…
Maybe with some imagination, someone will come up with something that serves readers’ hunger for true participation, and sites’ hunger for some revenue, but it’s not happening now, and I think more interesting things are happening elsewhere now…
March 23rd, 2007 at 3:09 pm
It is true that RSS liberates content and enables users. Though it not clear how far this can be termed as means and methods “Democratising content” . What about participation. Isn’t it true that RSS facilitates one way traffic?
Another issue I would like to know more about is how does one measure usage of RSS feeds - specially when they are delivered without using Feedburners and others like them. How does the web usage matrix defined around page views and unique visitors work for RSS usage.
March 23rd, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Yes, Neil, I was writing and linking quickly during a session, and I did gloss over the point that while you were commenting on low adoption by British newspapers, your point was about low adoption by British newspaper readers.
There is good solid data in the US about how RSS is being used by web users with services like MyYahoo, Google Reader/Personalised home page and Netvibes (granted one of the most oft quoted studies was funded by Yahoo). That is by far and away the most common form of RSS reading, although I find readers like NetNewsWire more convenient - especially for offline reading. There is a huge gap in the UK for good solid research into net usage. I really wish there was an equivalent in the UK to the Pew Centre that studies net habits in the US. There are good commercial opportunities here, but if the British government or non-profit sector would want to support business and get a grasp of digital literacy, such work would be invaluable.
March 23rd, 2007 at 3:36 pm
Jagdish, I have a WordPress blog that I use for personal use, and I’m very happy how WordPress.com lets me know about feed usage, even down to what service/site is being used. I think more tools like this or the inclusion of RSS measurements in tools or common traffic measurement suites would be a good first step.
RSS can facilitate participation by publishing the comment feeds. I think that services like CoComment and the associated use of RSS can help encourage participation. Again, RSS is an enabling technology, and as Neil points out, I think we’re only beginning to scrape the surface.
Now, as per RSS and democratising content, it liberates content, not necessarily democratises it. Tariq and Steve were really talking more about disintermediating content. The panel didn’t really talk too much about democratising content apart from Ben’s string of spurned lovers/dating analogies.
I personally would have loved to see someone show the lowering of the barriers to entry of content creation and distribution. But this idea of democratising, I’d like someone to define exactly what they mean with that term.