Follow up: Is Google building the Attention Economy? No

When I first covered Sam's post about "Is Google building the Attention Economy?" I chose to ignore the Economy part and focus on the Attention part.

You see, since Google decided to display some usage statistics in their Google Reader and allowed users to share the items they read, they started getting credited for starting to pay attention to 'Attention'.

That's fine with me. Google is big and popular and any little thing they do will typically be seen as more (or less) than what it is. Furthermore, Google has always paid attention to Attention - they just never called it that. Attention is very important.

But just a few hours ago, there was a comment to that original post that made me... upset. Maybe upset is the wrong word. But it definitely floored me.

Anne Currie Jan 30th, 2007 at 8:38 am

Sam,

I think “My Google Attention” is coming and agree it will be a very good thing. What fascinates me about the subject is that the function is only possible because we appear to trust Google so deeply (I wrote about this recently http://www.workingprogram.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=66).

I suspect Google are becoming a “benign dictator”. A benign dictator is your ideal government (or corporation), you trust them enough to give them a free hand with your life - or your data - and in return they have the power and freedom to achieve marvellous, good things.
As you allude, it’s great while it lasts but can it last? Can a commercial benign dictator succeed where a political one never has or will all that power just be too tempting?

Wow Anne... Are you so willing to give up your rights so easily? You are, in effect, saying that you are happy for Google to absorb all your personal data - your digital identity (incidently your digital identity is quickly becoming a large proportion of your overall identity) - and you're going to TRUST them to be completely benevolent about it? Forever?

You want no leverage? None? You don't want any accountability? Ownership? Mobility? Economy? Transparency? Because while I love Google as much as the next person - they are not transparent. And they do not respect your Attention rights.

This brings me to my next point. Economy implies that something (property) has value (in this case your Attention Data and Attention Profile). It also implies that you can transfer your property (and its value). You can sell it and leveraged and do all sorts of fancy things. It also requires multiple participants in an ecosystem.

So to dig deeper into Sam's original question "Is Google Building the Attention Economy?" the answer is no.

Google is not building the Attention Economy. They are using their huge surface area to try to grab as much of your Attention Data as possible to target and sell ads on TV, Radio, Web and Print. They are increasingly becoming an 'Attention Aware Advertising Company'.

But they are by no means showing any signs of allowing you to export and use that data as part of a broader economy.

I'm sorry Anne - but I don't want a dictator running the Internet - not even a "seemingly benign one".

To put this in a broader context... the idea that any institution - including Government - can say 'Trust us, we can handle it and we don't need any oversight' is not only naive, but it's frightening to Orwellian proportions.

A new improved Tangle

Marty and the boys over at Tangler have launched an updated version of their platform. If you have not seen it yet and would like an invite, drop me a note in the comments (include your email address please) and I will see if I can hook you up - I have inside connections ;)

In other Australian Web 2.0 news, Cameron Reilly seems to be Buried Alive at the moment. At least that's the advice his email auto-responder gives me. Do you need help Cam? Do you need food, water and/or ipods? We're here for you my friend.

Media 2.0 Workgroup Launch - Continued

Wow... a lot of people are talking about the workgroup announcement at the moment which is great.

Here's a summary of the posts and reactions for you.


Christopher Kenton - Marketing Rev

"Currently, the working group’s web site provides an aggregated feed of articles and postings from more than a dozen industry voices–a list that is apparently growing rapidly after the buzz from it’s launch today. Given the growing excitement around social media and it’s impact on marketing, this promises to be important listening post for emerging ideas and trends.

Paul Montgomery - TinFinger (my personal favorite)

"Today marks the launch of the Media 2.0 Workgroup, following in the prestigious footsteps of such towering, industry-changing, juggernaut organisations as the Web 2.0 Workgroup. The members of such elite inner circles as as gods to us puny mortals, and through their shared workgroup activities they wield such fearsome collective power that entire countries are laid waste in their paths."

Paul your wit never ceases to amuse ;)

Marshall Kirkpatrick

"Looking for some insightful new voices to read in the blogosphere? Check out the just launched Media 2.0 Workgroup - a very cool aggregation of some smart, engaged bloggers."

Jeneane Sessum - Allied

"So in my new role, I promise you, dear readers and friends and detractors, that I will try to use my power for good, not evil, and that means I will construct my meanderings using the broadest interpretation of what Media 2.0 means. Or doesn't mean.

We came here to tell stories, didn't we? Yes we did! Once upon a time, we were the wedia media pedia, weren't we? Yes, we were! And with the web 2.o pony beaten just shy of the glue factory, I'm looking for new rides, higher slides, longer strides. So let's find some together! Are you with me?"

Stowe Boyd

"I don't agree with Chris that the Web 2.0 meme is "a little worn out", but I do agree with the importance of media 2.0 as an area of inquiry."

It's ok Stowe - you can disagree with me - as long as you concede I was right in the first place :)

Frantic Industries

"As far as the name and the concept go, I must admit that I’ve personally never thought of the Web 2.0 phenomenon outside the boundaries of the Web. [..] Looking at it this way, it’s probably a subset, and not a superset of Web 2.0; however, it’s still an interesting topic to discuss. Social content, social news, and citizen journalism - all themes that are very frequently covered on this blog - are tied both to the traditional media and to the web, so I guess that pushing “Media 2.0″ as a concept does make sense."

I would argue that the Web is only one form/medium of Media. There are others that are far older and more entrenched in our way of lives and others still that are still emerging and evolving. So the goal of Media 2.0 is to broaden the Web 2.0 conversation and put it into context.

Strange Attractor - Suw Charman

"[...] when you think about it. We've already had New Media, but it's clear that New Media isn't keeping up with the incredibly rapid development of the web and Web 2.0. New Media is antiquated, obsolete. Any business that pats itself on the back because they have some sort Head of New Media needs a kick up the butt and a lesson in Media 2.0."

On a personal note
I am a little overwhelmed by the fact that it seems that everyone blogged about the launch credited me as the single handed mastermind. I can honestly say I did not expect, nor do I deserve credit for it all. We are honored to be keeping such prestigious company.

I'd like to publicly thank everyone for getting involved - especially those who really helped get out the word and invite people into the group from the very beginning when it was just a crazy nugget of an idea.

Daniela Barbosa
Ben Metcalfe
Marianne Richmond

Thanks Guys and Gals (got it right this time Daniela).

Guest Post: DIS:Intermediation

Nicholas Givotovsky is one of those people who thinks in such rich, vivid and forward thinking terms that his intellect sometimes frightens you. I have been having conversations on and off with him for 6 months or more and even now I sometimes fear that I only fully grasp some of what he's saying (in a good way!).

That being said... he says it beautifully. So I am proud to include a guest post by him here today. If you feel you have something to say on this blog then please drop me a line.

From Nick (warning - unusually long and eloquent post ahead.)

DIS:Intermediation

Underlying almost everything related to digital media and everything to do with the present and future of our digitally enabled lives is one thing. Us. Whether we are called “users”, “consumers” “viewers” “engaged participants”, “stake holders” or “members”, it all comes back around to us, we who are increasingly both the subject and object of the overall digital media enterprise.

So, as we are playing roles as both consumers and producers of the digital experience in its ever shifting forms, we might consider not only the return on investment, the creative rewards, the competitive advantage, and the professional stature that our digital “children” may reap for us. We might also consider how the media and technology that we shape, shapes others, and in turn, shapes our society as a whole.

Walking in New York City the other day after being stood up for a meeting I’d traveled a hundred miles to attend, I noticed an incredible number of people who really weren’t all there. They were somewhere else – on their phones, into their music, plugged in and dropped out of the world immediately surrounding them in favor of some mediated other place of their own selection. By “engaging” in virtual environments, we abandon at least in part our physical selves in favor of virtual presences that extend our abstract experiences at the cost of our direct participation in the physical world.

Could this have a moral, as well as a commercial consequence? Does our digitally connected self carry from the physical world into the digital the human instinct for cross-boundary empathetic connection, or do we leave in the realm of atoms the part of ourselves that connects to others independent of our self-interested or self-centered criteria? Do our digital tools make us more or less human, or both?

We might ask ourselves, is it always okay to turn off the outside world, even if diminishing it in the process? When I see someone marching down the street elbow cocked outward in self-salute, fully “engaged” in the very audible half of a dialog in which no one but he could have any interest whatsoever, and to which none but he is invited though all in earshot are obligated to attend and I think, is this a digital liberty worth defending?

Surprisingly I think in fact it is. For all the undesired outcomes we can name, the digital revolution is reweaving the social fabric, and if some threads are dropped in the process, we can’t be too surprised, though we might do well to take more care on the “local” costs of our “remote” presence. Just as technologies can have a dehumanizing and alienating potential, so also do they have the potential to rehumanize us, by putting us into contact and dialog with others beyond our immediate circle, by connecting us to knowledge and community beyond our doorstep, and equipping us to empower ourselves and others in thousands of new ways. They are the reality-changing reality of our modern world, but they only take us so far.

While it is the technology that provides the context, it does not create the content or the consequence of the experiences it enables. Ultimately, it is we who do or don’t do the connecting and the empowering, and when we are so engrossed in our mediated, filtered environments that we become so disengaged from others that we will shout over them, walk into them and look at, without seeing them, we become something both more and less than human. So no matter what you are doing “out there”, please hang up the phone, turn off the tunes, and check back in with the rest of us from time to time, good people. There is a here, here, and you are invited, though of course not obligated to attend and help attend to it.

In closing here is modest principle to observe in the creation and use of digital experiences, that of coexistence. We should design and use systems and services in such a way that we ourselves would not object to being in the presence of our creations while engaged in another at least potentially equally engrossing and important activity right nearby, one which requires our full attention and also has outcomes that matter.

And a final note (to the person who missed our meeting because, because, although we were verbally confirmed, the electronic invite he’d subsequently sent hadn’t made it into his electronic calendar); thank you for bringing me down to street level in New York where I learned (again) that real flesh and blood human commitment should trump mediated digital connections, each and every time.

(c) NRG/2007

Announcing the Media 2.0 Workgroup

“The Media 2.0 Workgroup is a group of industry commentators, agitators and innovators who believe that the phenomena of democratic participation will change the face of Media Creation, Distribution and Consumption. Join the conversation...”

Summary: Media 2.0 is a term used to describe the emerging social media industry. Every community needs some help to grow. The long tail has a head, and conversation needs a topic. So in this spirit, we have gathered a group of people who are passionate about the issues of Media 2.0 to help propel and focus the conversation.

The term "Web 2.0" has become a little worn out lately, but it has had an important and dramatic effect on our industry. It has spurred innovation, driven investment and ignited the imagination of the entrepreneurial community.

The Web (2.0 or otherwise), however, is only part of the Media landscape. An important part of course, however Media includes the superset of people, places and things that can co-existing in and around the web to create participation experiences.

Radio, TV, Traditional Media Outlets, News, Entertainment, Movies, Music, Game Consoles etc all have an opportunity to innovate by 'getting social', and each will be impacted by and contribute to the transformative effects of Media 2.0.

There are underlying issues and opportunities however. Issues with fancy names like Aggregation, Attention, Convergence, DRM, Distribution, Engagement, identity, Participation. These issues need discussion across the perceived Media boundaries and traditional disciplines so that we can all achieve real, integrated results.

To put it plainly, the visionaries, tool builders, emerging social media participants, 'old media' vanguard, investors and marketers all need to speak to each other to help create this opportunity together.

We call this broader ecosystem Media 2.0.

Like the Web, Media 2.0 is about shifting the power from the few to the many. We, the participants, are (or should be) the most important parts of the emerging Social Media. We each have a story to tell and connections just waiting to be made.

The challenge, however, is to help the unsocial media understand how to be social. To help advertisers understand the value of an engaged, trusting participant over a passive audience demographic. To help content creators understand that sharing and remixing is more profitable than DRM and to shine a light on the best innovations and ideas emerging from that very long tail.

Every community needs some help to grow. The long tail has a head, and every conversation needs a topic. So in this spirit, we have gathered a group of people who are passionate about the issues of Media 2.0 to help propel and focus the conversation.

These participants are from a cross-section of disciplines and agendas. Some merely comment, criticize and consult, some develop tools, some live the dream and have started their own Media 2.0 empires and some are fighting from the inside of established media to change the face of ‘business as usual’.

Join us, comment, trackback, nominate your favorite voices for the workgroup and drive the conversation forward.

You can find the workgroup page at media2.0workgroup.org

Highlights from my posts about Media 2.0 over the last year:

How did we get here – The Media 2.0 Landscape starting with Radio

Where's the money in Media 2.0 and the Long Tail?

Channel ME - Creating personal media experiences

What does adding Transparency to old media look like? Can the audience handle it?

Time Magazine declares YOU person of the year

Web 3.0 - Are you serious?

The importance of Personal Relevancy in Media 2.0

This whole advertising revenue thing could implode at any second!

Can I ask a stupid question? Is online advertising profitable... for the advertisers? (ok that was two stupid questions).

I have seen a LOT of content about how people can make money from advertising on their blog etc etc. But I have seen very little in the form of case studies or testimonials that the ads work for the advertisers.

Can someone point me to that info?

If we are not satisfying our advertisers then this whole advertising revenue thing could implode at any second.

How to get linked from the A-list

Robert Scoble is a genius. I will say this over and over. If there's one thing he knows how to do is to create a brand of his name as the A-list blogger of the people. His trademark 'Who are you' opening question, his disarming laugh, his simple 'everyman' questions (most of which he knows the answer to I'm sure) and his ability to stem the flow of negativity with brilliant stunts all contribute to his power.

But this post is not just to suck up to Robert - I'd like to ask a question.

His latest post (and stunt) is a thread where he asks the question "Do A-lister bloggers have a responsibility to link to others". In it, he asks that question and then opens the comments for everyone to spam a link to their own stuff.

One of the commenter’s, though, raises a very interesting point.

Krishna Kumar Writes:

The PageRank algorithm is probably one of the key factors in this whole argument about link sharing. While the initial search engines used the “content” of your web site or page, nowadays (because of content spammers) authority (determined by incoming links) matters more.

The problem is that if a newbie or Z-lister has something really important to say or has some great idea, he or she will not get the necessary audience to propagate that idea.

I am not sure how this can be resolved because the commercialization of the Internet along with SEO businesses have changed the rules of the game that unfortunately now negatively affects new ideas.

And yes, a tech-savvy person can get his or her idea spread, but what if the person (non-profit, medical field, etc.) has no clue about Google juice and stuff like that.

I know that back in my Z-list days (I am now on the Y list for those keeping track) it was/is hard to get a post you think is fantastic noticed by hardly anyone. But is that because the A-list is so hard to break into or because the tools for mining the long-tail are so poor?

Does Google Juice matter? Does being on the A-list matter? Whose A-list are we talking about?

I've said it before and I will say it again. Personal Relevance is more important than Popularity.

People who care about what I'm saying should find it - irrespective of how many incoming links I have.

Why? Maybe because I am not as popular as Robert but I still want to be heard. Don't we all? But more importantly because a local school does not need (or want) Robert's audience. They want an audience of locals. And locals should be able to discover that content without knowing what RSS is.

Information Addiction - no seriously hah

Marjolein just pointed me to a post by Kirk Biglione (Kirk.. great name).

He has just published a post called "My Life as an RSS Junkie". I feel sorry for him. 1000 feeds and counting.

He (rightly?) blames Nick Bradbury for his addictions. I too would like to blame Nick - his app is the first I tried and I still use it to this day. It started me on this wonderful journey of RSS reading. Maybe a class action is in order? Just kidding Nick :)

He writes:

Things really started going down hill around the time I discovered FeedDemon. Damn that Nick Bradbury! With FeedDemon I was tracking nearly a thousand feeds a day. I’d focus on the topics I was most interested in by setting up watch lists. At first I thought that FeedDemon was helping me to effectively manage my information addiction. On the contrary, the problem was actually getting worse. I eventually realized that the more blogs I read, the more blogs I subscribed to. Each day I’d add a dozen new feeds to FeedDemon. It was a vicious circle. My feed reading began taking up larger chunks of my day.

At some point I came to my senses and realized that I had a serious problem. I had become overwhelmed by the sheer number of feeds that I’d subscribed to.

I am not sure if Kirk is the right user for Touchstone though. Kirk is the sort of user who needs to know what every post in every feed says. He could use it in conjunction with FeedDemon to get alerts about important posts when he is doing other things... but by the sounds of it he doesn't do other things.

Good luck Kirk - sign up to the mailing list and give Touchstone a try. I'd be fascinated to hear if it helps.

The Secret Life of an Entrepreneur

Life is hard enough for an entrepreneur, let alone a Internet Start-up Founder. I am incredibly fortunate in that I am surrounded by a loving wife, very passionate and focused (and supportive) partner(s) and surrounded by developers who are far more gifted programmers then even I could ever hope to be. Sometimes, these people are the only reason I can go on.

The Touchstone Team has a huge level of faith and determination and a growing level of enthusiasm from the community (even some of our very own "fanbois and girls") which only catalyses our efforts. All-in-all, Touchstone (even right from the beginning) seemes to be slightly blessed.

It is however, not all rosy. It strikes me today as I sit here programming and blogging between episodes of Mythbusters and Grey's Anatomy on my wedding anniversary pondering how I am going to push a few lines out tonight between courses at my step-father's 50th birthday party.

Families (esp extended ones), girlfriends, in-laws and the Tax Department for some reason just dont seem to be very supportive when I whip out my tablet shouting "Eureka! I just solved how to factor views over time over importance!". They also don't seem to appreciate how satisfying it can be solving memory leaks, or understand why slowly transforming into an albino Hunchback of Notre Dame with sever allergy to sunlight and fresh (non recycled) air is an acceptable means to an end!

I guess they just don't understand the 'space', which is weird considering they all happily use MySpace! Im not sure what it is that can make these people so counter-supportive. Maybe they think they're helping or that they are trying to help us see reason, and it's their attempt to protect us from failure.

but it doesnt work that way. As an Internet Start-up Entrepreneur, our brains seem wired differently to other people. Success is not permanent and failure is not fatal, we all understand that. Small sucesses are like a drug, and miss-steps only drive us to go harder still.

Through sheer determination and willpower we will topple mountains! And so it continues....

Sam Sethi discusses "My Google Attention"

In his recent post Sam Sethi discusses Attention Metadata and Google's growing desire to capture (for an unknown purpose?) your Attention Data while engaged with their products and services.

He kindly points out that Touchstone is also working in the field of Attention and predicts that we're going to hear more on the issue in the coming months and years.

Read his article 'Is Google building the Attention Economy"

He ends with:

What we do, where we go, what we say i.e. our attention will be tracked online, if we are to continue using free web services and in exchange the carrot is we will be further rewarded for our time and attention.

So Google you have got my attention but don’t be evil!

I, personally, would like some personal leverage rather than hoping that big companies 'won’t be evil'.

I think that leverage can come in the form of a feature he requests from Google.

If I could then share my attention metadata with other people I trust (whitelist) I could then let them learn about websites or feeds that I have been using. This is a similar idea to Dave Winer’s OPML share service and once again the basis of a discovery engine as opposed to search.

Well Sam we have invented just such a format called APML. Check it out and perhaps ask Google to support it.

As Seth Goldstein says, your attention is very valuable and you should have ownership over it and clear understanding of how it's being used.

As everyone knows, we too (here at Touchstone) can collect your Attention Data. Unlike other vendors, however, we can do it across applications and services to give you a broader, vendor neutral result -- and we let you see/control/keep/share the results.

Widgets in a clock radio!

How cool is this!


I want a Touchstone widget on my clock radio...

Silicon Beach in the AFR

A great little piece by Mark Jones was in the AFR recently. Check it out. Forget Silicon Valley we have Silicon Beach here in Australia!

Well done to all who were mentioned!

How relevant is relevant?

Chris Anderson has a great post called 'The vanishing Point Theory of News'. He posts a great little musing about the relativity of relevance.

"For instance, the news that my daughter got a scraped knee on the playground today means more to me than a car bombing in Kandahar. [...] Am I proud of this? No. But it's true."

He goes on to say:

"There's nothing new about this (it's a truism of the American newsroom that Paris, Texas counts for more than Paris, France), but it bears repeating. The future of media is to stop boring us with news that doesn't relate to our lives. I'll start reading my "local" newspaper again when it covers my block."

I often tell people (in regard to Touchstone) "Put in the name of your kid's school and your favorite golf course" - how much more local can you get.

We can't work out if your daughter got a scraped knee unfortunately - unless the school blogs about it maybe.

New Times Editor focuses on joining the conversation

According to the LATimes website (unbiased reporting on this issue I'm sure) the new editor is helping the paper focus on the internet as the main news distribution platform.

Los Angeles Times Editor James E. O'Shea unveiled a major initiative this morning designed to expand the audience and revenue generated by the newspaper's website, saying the newspaper is in "a fight to recoup threatened revenue that finances our news gathering." [...]

[...] "At this rate, those double-digit profit margins everyone cites will be in single digits and then be gone," O'Shea said, adding later: "If we don't help reverse these revenue trends, we will not be able to cost-effectively provide the news -- the daily bread of democracy. The stakes are high."

I think that's great. No one is quite sure what a newspaper's role in Media 2.0 will be, but online will certainly be the most important part of their business.

Check out the full article for a breakdown of some of the planned changes.

Imagine if they had a way to keep the user coming back for more content by sending them desktop alerts and displacing headlines on a news ticker.

The Internet: One big rolling focus group for TV execs

According to Foxnews.com (your trusted source in news - fair and ballanced, we report you decide) TV execs are using adavanced software to get focus group type data out of the online conversation!

"Using company-designed technology, BrandIntel scans "literally billions of blogs, message boards and forums" using specific key words such as an actor's name or show title, said Coristine, lead analyst for BrandIntel's media division.

(Toronto-based BrandIntel does consumer research for other industries, including automative and hospitality.)

The flood of data is filtered for relevancy and then sorted and ranked to indicate, for instance, how likely someone is to view a program or whether they like or dislike a series premise. It can be cut even finer, according to BrandIntel."

Wow. I wonder what that software is.

Imagine if the average Joe had access to it for their product, industry, brand and interests.

First Look: Touchstone Beta User Interface

I love the new Touchstone Beta + FlickrBabes.com

The best pictures pop-up on your desktop while you play work.

Update: I just realized this is the first public glimpse of the new Beta user interface. But you aint seen nothing yet ;)

Mojo, Magic, That certain something

As we inch closer to Beta it gets easier and easier to start stressing out. "Have we made the right choices?", "Will people understand what we were trying to do?", "Did we achieve what we set out to achieve?", "Will people like it?".

We would, of course, never be susceptible to such self-doubt - because, you know, we're so good.

The real indefinable question to me is how do you communicate the fire inside to people who don't know you from a bar of soap. How do you show them that big vision over there, without overwhelming them.

Maybe you don't. Maybe it somehow comes through in your work and the product speaks for itself.

Tara has a great post about what Mojo. That certain something that makes a product and a company great. It's something you feel in your bones that is beyond words or any single element of design or execution.

She lists some things one could do to tease out their mojo. I think, however, you can't fake Mojo - you either have real passion for what you're doing or you don't.

Here is Tara's list:

1. Have a higher purpose. I know I’ve said this before, but it’s essential to mojo to believe in something beyond your own needs.
   
2. Don’t be a commodity. Commodities don’t have mojo, they compete on price, efficiency and speed. Mojo is terribly inefficient. (I’m planning to write more on commodity vs. craft again soon)
   
3. Work as a team. If your employees aren’t feelin’ it, your customers won’t either. Treat your employees as members of a team. Reward passion.
   
4. Be part of the customer community you are serving. Use your own product, interact, use competitive products, work to further the industry you are in.
   
5. Operate on passion, not ambition. Ambition is great for making barrels of money on undercutting and destroying your competition, climbing to the top of the corporate ladder, etc. It ain’t mojo.
   
6. Give a damn. This is kind of tied to everything else, but people with mojo never have to have “because it’s the better thing to do” explained to them.
   Commit to excellence. Obsess over details. Experience. Be bothered by one customer’s bad experience. Work hard to do better.
   
7. Get slow. Ever notice how people with mojo never seem to be rushed or distressed? They seem reflective, introspective, they take their time. Think slow food, slow marketing, etc.
   
8. Believe in your gut. Stop thinking 100% with your head. Fritz Lang once said, “The mediator between head and hands must be the heart!” We really don’t value it enough in the world of business. I suppose heart isn’t as profitable…but I’m not advocating maximum profitability here…

I do hope that the Touchstone Beta speaks for itself and that our Mojo shines through. If not however, I think I can count on a few friends (you guys and girls reading this) to help clarify things until we sort out the glitches!

Everywhere Messaging - Twitter and others

I just started a Twitter Account.

Why? Read Chris Heuer's post about Everywhere Messaging - it describes my thoughts and experiences perfectly.

Add me as a friend if you like (oh my that sounds so myspace).

Dave Winer - Are you Paying Attention?

Dave Winer just made a post that could not be more perfectly written if I had paid him large sums of money to endorse Touchstone. So... Dave, if you don't mind - I am going to quote this post of yours everywhere...

He says:

[...] Most RSS readers remind the user, all the time, how wrong he or she is. Or inadequate or lazy or behind in their work. [...]

[...] Think about it this way. Suppose you read the paper every day. What if at the top of the paper it told you how many articles from previous issues you hadn't read. Whoa. When you subscribed to the paper did you mean to imply that you would read all the articles?
Emphatically: News is not email. Unlike email, every article is not necessarily something you should read, or even look at. [...]

[...] Let the news flow by you and relax like someone sitting on the bank of a river looking for something interesting as you while away the time. That's how news works, and RSS is, emphatically, for news.

Try this one out. Imagine you're fishing, and there was some nerd on the other side of the river, shouting at you, the number of fish that went by that you didn't catch. How long before you'd want to kill the nerd?? [...]

Well Dave, I have good news for you.

Nowhere on the Touchstone interface do we count how many unread items you have. We do not have any 'mark folder as read' either.

News flows over you via a news ticker and popup alerts (or your own personalized RSS feed, or SMS etc).

In fact, we pride ourselves not by how many items we display but rather (using our clever Attention Profiling Technology) how many items we suppress because it knows the article doesn't rate based on your interests.

The only number our new build will display, in fact, is how many hours we have saved you by NOT showing you the items you wouldn't have cared about in the first place.

Because News is Not Email.

I said it ages ago, and now the man who popularized RSS agrees with me.

I think mainstream users understand the temporariness of news far better than us geeks and they will understand Touchstone far better than a full-screen, email/newsgroups type feed reader.

Techcrunch subscriber stats - This post can wait until Wednesday

We have all seen this post 'A peek inside Techcrunch's 100k' which shows Michael Arrington's meteoric rise from fledgling blog to blogging superstar.

It's old news.

But something struck me as I was looking at our own subscriber history today. We have the same up and down pattern every week that Techcrunch does. And we are nowhere near as cool as them.

The reason is obvious. Most people turn off their work PCs during the weekend causing the subscriber count to drop and most people turn on their feed reader on Wednesday - literally hump day for feed subscribers - when they are bored and feel like catching up.

So what does that mean? It means that feed reading is (at least for a noticeably large group of people) a 'sometimes' activity. It's an activity that we dedicate time to. It's like we go off to read a newspaper - we dedicate a block of time to 'reading the news'. And there are times when we stop reading the news and turn off the PC or the feed reader - or at the very least minimize it away and stop paying attention.

So what about those other times when something happens that we need to know. An event in a new fangled web-based app...

• You have a reminder from Google Calendar - wake up!
• Come and pick up that file in that workspace your working on in sharepoint
• You have a friend request from MySpace
• Your industry just had a major shakeup
• Your employer just filed for bankruptcy
• Your competitor just changed the game on you
• A customer just said something negative about your company
• Your daughter just posted a picture of her new child on Flickr.

These are important "right now" events.

We need a feed reader that can stay 'on' without being 'in the way'. Reading feeds does not need to be like reading a newspaper - it can be a filtered and managed experience so you can stay informed while you're being productive.

That's the dream of Touchstone.

Follow up: 08 Conversations continued...

Marian Richmond has made a fantastic post on the subject of the 08 Campaign Conversation on the new blog Campaign08Blog.com (a must read for political junkies and social media observers).

In the post 'Conversation according to Hillary and Barack' she quotes a number of bloggers (including me) questioning the authenticity of the call for conversation citing a number of (false) actions that are speaking louder than the words.

Here's a quote:

"They are not talking to us in the sense that the words that come out of their mouths are written and produced by third parties. They the candidates are not we the people as it relates to social media conversation… which means that the we, those having the conversations on blogs and other social media, are people talking directly to other people. Personal pronouns, we, they, us, are stand -ins for people."

Read the full post here.

Let's start a conversation for 08

Hillary Clinton launches a White House bid declaring 'I'm In'. Watching her video though (as well as a number of videos from Barack and Edwards - thanks to Scoble), I am struck by something that seems to be a recurring theme.

They seem to be focused on the idea of a 'conversation'. Are they speaking to us? You and me? The participants of the social media? Of course they are. They are announcing things online and trying to use the right lingo.

This is an amazing time to be a part of all this. I would, however, like to highlight a problem.

While they are announcing online and talking about conversations (giving the illusion of transparency) they are not actually being transparent. Each of them have been coy about their bid to run for President right up to the last minute. Hillary, even as of a few days ago, was still playing it cool.

Yes I know that's the way it's been done for years - but that's no excuse. Is this a transparent, online conversation or is it not. Stop being coy. Stop pretending like we don't already know the answer. Stop treating us like fools. We are not dumb.

Maybe it's asking a bit much for all of this to happen immediately. They need to learn how this transparency thing works. Maybe it will improve over time and they will actually open up comments, trackbacks and even make direct responses to the blog-o-sphere (feel free to comment here Senators) and maybe as a result... just maybe... they will begin representing the interest of their citizens more fully.

Until then I guess I will just be happy that they are trying to use the right lingo. That must mean they recognize the power of what is lurking here.

It strikes me that perhaps the latest round of Democratizing Information will once again force political democracy (in name) to be democratic (in form and function).

Maybe, eventually, it will create world peace. Just joking.

Sunday morning snippets

A few snippets for the day - then I am off to spend the day on a boat while Ashley and the team slave away cutting code for the next Touchstone build *evil laugh*.

Revising Press Releases
An Anonymous commenter pointed out for me that my mention of Stowe's post about PR people missing the point on Press Releases left out the other side of the discussion. I didn't know there was another side at the time but Chris Heuer has a post on the issue highlighting Stowe's oversights. I like Chris - he bought me a drink while I was in SF.

Chris' point is that while real conversational engagement with your participants is the ideal, Press Releases are still a necessary way to make (and clearly mark) landmark announcements in clear, concise ways. His point (rightly I believe) is that while purists would argue that a 1st person conversation is better than a fake 3rd person declaration, a Press Release is still an important hold-over for mainstream media to get the complete picture in a bite sized chunk

Stowe argues that declaring anything a 'Press Release' is missing the point. That Press (at least press who treat their readers like eyeballs) should die and that we should all be equal participants in the social media ecosystem. By the way I like Stowe too - he also bought me a drink!

My opinion on the matter is this. I think that anyone who takes the time to invent something, lobby for it and contribute to the community is doing the right thing. That's the definition of social.

The issue, however, is larger than this one point. When considering people's opinions we must take into account their bias and their agenda. My agenda is personalized aggregation. My life and my work is based on the premise that people should find what their looking because of their Attention Profile - a fingerprint that represents their interests.

If hRelease (the reason the issue of a Social Media Press Release is being discussed at all) helps Touchstone identify important headlines for journalists, then so be it. Ideally though, the connection of people with content they find relevant should be a transparent and automated process based on merit rather than any corporate press declarations. That might mean they find negative commentary before they find polished/fake/controlled press releases from a company.

I think both can co-exist though - and the community (and some smart algorithm) will decide which they pay attention to most.

Social Media is Dead
I also pointed to the 'Social Media is No Mo' post by Steve Rubel. Some people didn't realize I was being sarcastic when I 'agreed' with him. Brian Solis commented to point me to this post.

This is amazing... YouTube music production

This was amazing... A girl releases an original song, A drummer adds a drum line and a basis adds a base line. And they don't even know each other.

Follow up: Social Media is dead... or not

Looks like social media is not dead after all - but only just being born.

Stowe Boyd posts about his painful experience with a group of PR people as they talk about how to make 'Social Media Press Releases' - apparently they totally missed the point.

Brian Oberkirch also posts along similar lines talking about the fear felt in PR firms when trying to craft new forms of press releases and start blogs.

He hits the nail on the head:

"Blogs aren’t killing traditional media — attention scarcity and the decay of their business models is. Craigslist and other efficient attention allocators are draining media revenues, not East Chumuckla Joe and his online opinions about the Iraq war. Likewise, social media aren’t a replacement or extension of your traditional marketing tools. The question isn’t whether an online press release format should replace a traditional one. It’s much more gamechanging than that. Given the erosion of the traditional media system and the extension of a much more connected, distributed information ecosystem, how should companies communicate with those who matter to their business?"

Who invented RSS?

Dave Winer says RSS wasn't invented.

He says:

"It wasn't invented. Something else happened, something harder than invention, imho -- an activity that we don't have a word for in the English language."

I wonder what that word could be...

Maybe it evolved. Maybe the universe gifted it to us. Maybe the people at the right time and at the right place knew in their bones that something like it was necessary and decided that making it work was more important than owning it.

I particularly like this paragraph:

"RSS, unlike other XML inventions, has made a difference. If you want to understand what made RSS happen, it's the innovation, evangelism and commitment that was behind it, not the invention, because I said before, and as everyone seems to agree, it wasn't invented. But we lack a good word for the other stuff, so sheez, what's the big deal if they substitute "invention" for all that? I've looked the other way. But to say I was the "self-proclaimed" inventor is just wrong, I just nod my head when others say it, because I'm tired of arguing."

These sorts of things happen (on scale) rarely. But when they do great things happen.

As a result of his post, I also did a little re-reading on the Wikipedia entry for RSS.

Told ya so... Myspace bans widgets

MySpace banned (and then unbanned) all external widgets from its site. Even though they are now unofficially saying the banning was just an error), I think this was a test balloon to gauge public/industry reaction. I hope the reaction was loud and clear and has changed their thinking - but I fear it won’t hold off the inevitable for long.

Sorry to say it, but I told ya so.

As I've said before, mySpace is not Web 2.0 - it is a more flexible social network. It's SixDegrees.com re-invented with some very clever marketing/tactics in a time where ads can now pay the bills and costs are low.

Social Media is Dead!

Steve Rubel from Persuasion says Social Media is Dead.

His claim is based on the fact that most mainstream media now has comments and forums and blogs etc... so there is no longer a difference between 'unsocial' and 'social' media - therefore it is now all just media.

What do you think? Is the mainstream media a product of social interactions or a highly controlled editorial process?

Maybe we are can call it Media 2.0

Interesting...

Research on Feed Reader behaviour from Microsoft

It's so nice of Microsoft to publish their research.

They really are far more transparent than Google these days. It's funny that more people don't recognize them for that.

Check out this great little paper about Feed Reading Behavior.

Via Touchstone

Best of Breed Future

As Richard mentions on Read/Write Web today - John Milan wrote an excellent two-part article for R/WW earlier in the week, about the future of software. However - I have not yet had a chance to read it. It was too dense and long and I have not had the time to dedicate.

But Richard, being the excellent site editor and blogger that he is, recognized the possible problem and posted a summary today.

He summarizes it like this:

In Part 1 John argued that data should become open and accessible, just like the code in Open Source software. Code is often re-written and re-factored, but systems only work if they agree on the data.

Part 2 contends that people will demand more access to their data and more integration with their apps. This will result in the single minded, all-encompassing applications of today dying off - in favor of multi-celled, specialized solutions. So the future will be combinations of best of breed technology, rather than monolithic software.

John's conclusion was thus:

"And what trait will the eventual winners in this brave new world share? The solutions that can hone their data requirements, move results from system to system, use the best form factor for the job and still keep it on a human level."

Richard compares this to the new Firefox and I think he's right. But I would also like to compare it to Touchstone (surprise, surprise).

With Touchstone's input and output/hub and spoke model, it effectively moves data from one system to another and at each point making a decision about the best form factor. The example we use most is 'the more important the info the bigger the alert'.

This is probably not what John meant - but I think it still holds true.

Thanks to RSS as the universal syndication format and Microformats as growing standards, users can pick and choose the best apps to use together. We hope that Touchstone will be the best notification platform in that mix.

Via Touchstone

Note: I will start to say 'Via Touchstone' on posts when my post is based on something that I found from Touchstone. I have found that Touchstone has started to become one of my main information sources as it evolves into a complete solution and more and more of my posts are based on info it alerts me to.

A touching tale of Recommendation

This is a sweet story of love between a woman and her Amazon Recommendation Engine on The Onion.

"Pamela Meyers was delighted to receive yet another thoughtful CD recommendation from Amazon.com Friday, confirming that the online retail giant has a more thorough, individualized, and nuanced understanding of Meyers' taste than the man who occasionally claims to love her, husband Dean Meyers.

While the powerful algorithms that power Amazon's recommendations generator do not have the advantage of being able to observe Meyers' body language, verbal intonation, or current personal possessions, they have nonetheless proven more effective than Dean, who bases his gift-giving choices primarily on what is needed around the house, what he would like to own, and, most notably, what objects are nearby.

I don't know how Amazon picked up on my growing interest in world music so quickly, but I absolutely love this traditional Celtic CD," Meyers said. "I like it so much more than that Keith Urban thing Dean got me. I'm really not sure what made him think I like country music

It was nice to know that on my birthday, someone or something was out there thinking about me, and what boxed sets I wanted,"

This is a sweet story (in a strange, Amazon loves me more than my husband sorta way). Now imagine this sort of power across your entire Attention Profile.

Remember though... Touchstone is NOT a Recommendation Engine.

Via The Long Tail.

The Bigger the Company, The More We Expect

3 severe security vulnerabilities in 3 weeks, is not good for any software company these days. But when you're a company held with much higher standards and expectations (at your own request), its far far worse.

Haochi uncovered another XSS vulnerability that easily and without the victims consent can steal cookies and hijack your Google account. Just like the others, victim's need only visit a hosted site by a malicious attacker. I can only imagine the panic at Google as they try to put out these spot fires.

Blogger Garett Rogers, highly recommends "making sure you are completely logged out of your Google account while browsing the internet, until we have an official statement from Google stating their security team has thoroughly reviewed every Google property for these types of vulnerabilities". This seems a bit alarming, but maybe it's better to be safe then sorry.

That being said, no-one suggests staying logged out of Windows until Microsoft fixes the bugs.

Well, maybe if they were black, white and feathered they might.
... or if they often felt compelled to put an "i" at the start of their surname.

Did I Miss a Memo? I Thought the Browser Wars Were Over?

According to Mary Jo Foley, the Safari Web Browser may be coming soon to Windows' users. I can't even begin to understand if this bothers me more from a CSS designer perspective (anyone who's tried making a complex CSS design for Firefox, IE AND Safari knows what I mean), or more from a Business perspective.

The browser wars are over. We've all moved along (or so I thought). Since RSS our focus has shifted from the medium (the site) onto the content (through our feed readers).

Why would anyone bother to compete with Mozilla/IE on any platform? Seriously, Apple - Mozilla and Microsoft have got it covered.

Happy Birthday Wikipedia

In case you've been living your life under a rather large rock, there is this site called Wikipedia, and it one of my personal inspirations. You see, I consider myself somewhat of a sociologist and I am fascinated by any group of people collaborating and focussing on a single goal. To me, Wikipedia is the ultimate embodiment of on-line collaboration and cooperation.

Touchstone has just informed me that Wikipedia has just turned six, which makes it more or less one of the few remaining "old school" start-ups still around from the *ahem*, the 'you know what'!

I wanted to take the opportunity to extend a warm "Happy Birthday" to the crew over at Wikipedia, and wish them the best of ongoing luck with what I believe, to be one of the best examples of world cooperation ever conceived. Thank-you for showing us a glimmer of what we can become if we work together.

Disagree with me!

I like people who disagree with me. They force me to better refine my arguments and reconsider my assumptions.

Scot Karp's last two posts directly disagree with me so I thought I'd note them here with some of my own thoughts.

First he thinks that news is a shared, social experience. He claims that 'Technology' is as personal as we need to get. Any further personalization takes the 'water cool effect' out of the equation and makes news not very fun. He claims that's why Findory failed.

I would argue there are two types of news. Popular news and Personally Relevant news. Popular news and serendipity is found on Techmeme and Digg, Personally Relevant news is found... well... in Touchstone.

Findory did not fail because it was anti-social - it failed because it had some major gaps (a topic for another post).

Second Scott talks about the iPhone as a platform issue. My post on the iPhone issue expressed my feelings that PDA style phones are platforms and that Apple is missing the point by trying to build an expensive CE device instead of a rich mobile platform. Scott believes that Apple bets on user experience over platforms and it's success with iPod is proof that it works.

I'd argue that the iPod is a cheap CE device. PDA Phones are not.

Let the debate roll on...

The Touchstone Theme Song?

One of our fantastic alpha testers made a theme song for Touchstone. Get it while it's hot.

Thanks for that Marcello! Make way Brett Lee...

Touchstone declared "Closest to being an Attention Management System"

The Burton Group recently released a report in their series on "Collaboration and Content Strategies".

Specifically this report covered "Techniques to Address Attention Fatigue and Info-Stress in the Too-Much-Information Age" which compares approaches, products and services for Attention Management in the enterprise.

Touchstone was reviewed as part of the vendor lineup. Here are some excerpts.

"[...] The concept of a hub-and-spoke architecture for processing messages and applying attention rules can be found in Touchstone (currently in alpha release) [...] Touchstone is the product on the market that is closest to being an attention management system [...] Touchstone is a useful example of how to specifically target the attention management problem and we look forward to following its development. The company expects to ship the product in early 2007."

I won't give away the ending for them - but suffice to say Information Overload is a significant and growing problem.

I'd like to thank Craig Roth and his team for their hard work in compiling this report to raise awareness of the growing Information Overload problem. We look forward to evolving Touchstone to maintain its position as the platform of choice for the Attention Management issues he outlined in his report and supporting APML for cross-vendor/application compatibility.

You can purchase the report from the Burton Group.

Update: There is a great podcast from Craig about the report and Attention Management themes in general. No mention of Touchstone here but he does describe the problem in simple to understand way.

You Can't Stop The Signal

A recent Techcrunch article struck me today. Someone created a Windows Mobile iPhone skin:

Today Apple is engaging in similar [legal] tactics against a number of bloggers who simply reported on the fact that someone created a skin for Windows Mobile phones that looks exactly like the new iPhone user interface [...] If Apple wants to go after the guy that made the Windows Mobile skin that looks like the iPhone, fine. But to bully bloggers who are simply reporting on this is another matter.

Now, at the risk of dragging Touchstone into a cease and desist land mine, obvious bullying tactics like this are simply ridiculous. It's not the first time Apple has been so aggresive with the community. There was the Apple Rumor mill Wars, the more recent demanding that YouTube videos be removed from sites and various issues with the use of the iPod brand. Can I even say Podcast now?

This is the latest in a long line of over-the-top legal war-mongering. Apple has earned a lot of respect and loyalty from it's fan and not only does this irritate me, it may well kill one of their key stratigic advantages by acting this way.

Which is why I posting it here.

My theory is that if a company is going to actively and aggressively try to stop the blogosphere (which is largely only opinion anyway) then I will add to the news. What are they going to do if several million people post about it? Sue everyone? I don't think so.

So here it is!



You can't stop the signal.

Book: The Paradox of Choice

I'm starting to sound like a broken record now - but here is yet another quote about hyperchoice from a lengthy interview with Barry Schwartz, the author of 'The Paradox of Choice'.

“The problem used to be, ‘how do we get information out to people?’ That problem has now been solved in spades. Now the problem is, ‘how do we filter the information so that people can actually use it?’”

He is concerned that filtering technologies may not be up to the task of helping us deal with the overabundance of choice and information we seem to find ourselves having at the moment.

We'll see what we can do.

Thanks to Marjolein of CleverCogs for this!

Well done Microsoft; Another 1 Step Forward, 5 Steps Back

For those of you like me who are too stubborn too busy to move to Gmail; our worse nightmares have been realised. Microsoft Outlook (whom consumes approximately ¾ of the corporate world’s email client market) will no longer render HTML emails with Internet Explorer, but instead with the crippled Microsoft Word HTML Engine.

I read David Greiner’s post on the Campaign Monitor Blog, and I agree with his sentiment totally.

After picking up the contents of my desk off the floor and taking a few deep breaths, I tried to come up with a few decent reasons why Microsoft would go in this direction. Here's what I came up with.

1. Security - But wait! Microsoft have touted Internet Explorer as "a major step forward in security". Surely they'd just replace the IE6 rendering engine with IE7 and be done with it. I'd also love to know how float and position impacts the security of an email in any way.
2. Consistent rendering - By default Outlook uses the Word engine to create HTML emails, which it's done for years now. Perhaps Microsoft figured that in order to keep the look and feel of emails consistent between Outlook users they'd display emails using the same engine that created them. But what about the millions of other email newsletters out there that aren't created with Outlook or Word? If an email is created with Outlook, then surely it should display perfectly in a modern browser like IE7.
3. They hate us - OK, this one might be pushing it, but I'm running out of explanations here. Don't get me wrong, we're not Microsoft bashers here. Both our products are developed on Microsoft's .NET platform and we've been a fan of their development environment for the better part of a decade. But seriously, they've taken 5 important years off the email design community in one fell swoop.

Without entering the Plain Text/HTML debate, there is simply no sense to Microsoft’s Product design decisions lately. I think we’re starting to see what happens in the IT marketplace when it takes a company too many years to release new versions of their software.

They claim that they are going to start itterating faster yet we have not seen any evidence of this so far.

I personally needed Outlook to load faster, use less CPU/Memory and respond far, far faster than it does. I didn’t need its HTML rendering handicapped. Like I said, Microsoft seems to be failing me in areas it used to excel.

Betting on Windows - iPhone a closed platform?

I've stayed quiet on the iPhone announcement because I figured that it was getting more than enough coverage from everyone else - I certainly had nothing original to say. It looks like a very nice device - although the name is in some dispute!

This quote, however, got my attention.

From this post on Michael Gartenburg's Jupiter Research blog, in regard to the iPhone being a closed system (as opposed to an open platform for 3rd party developers), Steve Jobs said:

"You don't want your phone to be an open platform", meaning that anyone can write applications for it and potentially gum up the provider's network, says Jobs. "You need it to work when you need it to work. Cingular doesn't want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up."

Hah.

We have received a bit of heat for choosing .NET (and by extension - favoring windows) for the first version of Touchstone. The early adopters among us (probably most people reading this blog) seem to have a cult like 'appreciation' for all things Apple and some refuse to accept that perhaps a small startup should target the platform with the most users first (i.e. Windows).

Putting the 'Crossing the Chasm' arguments aside - and I will get a lot of flak for this - one of the reasons I actually like Windows and will typically bet on Microsoft every time is because they understand that ultimately while overall user experience and style are becoming more important (and to me they are VERY important) - better tools and platforms will win every time.

What does that mean?

With the XBOX 360 they understood that it was not about building the most powerful hardware mix, but rather building the best overall entertainment solution. A solution that had a known platform and comprehensive development tools.

With Windows Mobile, they understood (before Palm did) that they should separate the software from the hardware and make the development tools easy.

With Windows Embedded and Windows Media Center they are doing the same thing and will therefore outplay Apple TV and Tivo etc.

And each time they do what they do best. They leverage Windows (in this case the many, many windows programmers - both amateur and pro) to create broad developer adoption for devices based on their OS.

By building a great software platform and the tools, they empower developers to more quickly (and therefore cheaply) target the device. The result - more content/software for your device and more extensibility.

User choice.

All that being said though, I thought the iPhone is based on OSX? So why can't developers write apps for it?

Update: Read/Write Web has some coverage of this too.

Me too me too!

Oh come on... I have posted before about how sick I am of 'me too' services and derivative 'new' ideas but this is just crazy.

It gets worse, check out the origional story for more comparison screenshots and commentary as well as a post on Techcrunch about it.

I think this also feeds into Stowe's post about the changing landscape and the tendency for investors to cluster around certain problem/solution domains rather than taking risks. Sort of like network television making 100 thousand cop shows.

Morphing Media - Signposts of Media 2.0

Meredith Obendorfer writes a post called 'Investigating the Case of the Morphing Media' over on 'Echo Base' where she predicts the rise of Media 2.0.

She explains a set of recent circumstances that are signposts of a failing Media 1.0 world and the rise of... something else.

At the end of the post she suggests that perhaps it's time to call it Media 2.0.

At a time when VC investment in new media is surging, the question remains, will traditional media be able to keep up? And at what cost will it learn that it needs to morph with the rest of ‘em? Overused dot-oh or not, it’s clearly time for media 2.0.

I have been talking about Media 2.0 for quite some time and as I explained, I think that Attention and Aggregation will play a key part.

Watch this space Meredith!

Follow up: More talk of bubbles

Following up from my last post about bubbles, this time from people who know what they're talking about - VCs (hah) - are joining in the discussion.

Check out the Wall Street Journal's discussion between VCs.

Here's a quote from Todd Dagres about why he thinks we are indeed in a bubble.

Web 2.0 is a bubble for 3 reasons: 1) There is far too much money chasing Web 2.0 deals. Too much money means too many companies getting funded at higher valuations. 2) There are virtually no barriers to entry in Web 2.0 and therefore the ability to develop a unique solution and sustain a competitive advantage is virtually nil. Therefore, it's difficult for Web 2.0 companies to build long term value. 3) There is very little liquidity in the market for Web 2.0 companies.

There are some great arguments for and against. In the end though, as I said previously. If you have a business plan and are solving a real pain then you can worry... less.

Attention based workplace

Greg Yardley posts about Google as an 'Attention-based workplace' because they have:

• infrequent meetings;
• no project management cruft;
• no management directives;
• the ability to switch projects at will;
• an utter lack of date-driven releases;
• motivation created through incentives.
  

They allow their staff to focus (or pay attention to) the things they care about.

He goes on to say:

I’m sure they think of it in different terms, but I suspect Google’s become so successful because they’ve brought the rules of the emerging attention economy back into the workplace.

However I disagree with Greg on this point - I am all for the Attention Economy, but I think Google is so successful not because of its focus on an Attention based workplace, but rather because it serves and monetizes everyone's ads for them.

However, that specific business (like search) is actually Attention based. Context Sensitive ads are actually about looking at what your giving attention to and determining your Intentions.

If I am looking up a movie, then chances are I want to buy the DVD hey?

Don't get me wrong though - I agree Google has a great workplace. That being said, our monitors are better than Google's - most of our team have dual 24' Dell monitors. All we need now is free laundry services and a gym.

Attention is Saturated - not Scarce

I have grown to like this quote very much:

"What does an abundance of information create? A scarcity of attention."

So if scarcity in a marketplace creates value, then tools that help with attention scarcity are the brokers of the new economy.

I like it because it puts things in economic terms and some people like to think in monetary terms.

David Henderson, however, has another great idea. He claims that his Attention is not 'scarce', it is Saturated.

He says that:

Attention scarcity implies there is attention available. Come on in and I will give some of my remaining scarce attention. Attention saturation implies there is no attention available. It’s all used up. It means you need to displace some already engaged attention to get my attention.

I think that is a fascinating way to look at it.

Because, as he alludes and I have outlined in the Media 2.0 Roadmap, in a world where your attention is saturated, people don't need more ways to find stuff, they need a way to automatically and personally FILTER it.

In a post called 'The Aphrodisiac of Attention', John explains the sinister game that telecommunications companies are playing with our Attention and how filtering might play a role.

...a conversation I had ten years ago with a senior exec of a major telecommunications company. He proudly announced to me that his company had a twenty year plan: "In the first ten years, we will commercialize technology to help everyone connect anytime, anywhere. But the real money will be made in the next ten years. At that point, we will focus on providing technology to block access anytime, anywhere. Can you imagine how much people will pay for that capability?"

John also has the following quote:

Trusted filters, trusted protectors, trusted concierge, human or technical, removing distractions and managing boundaries, filtering signal from noise, enabling meaningful connections, that make us feel secure, are the opportunity for the next generation. Opportunity will be the tools and technologies to take our power back.

Attention is Meme Sex

I just came across a facinating post by 'Stan'. He compares Attention to 'Meme Sex'. At first I thought that was a crazy idea, but then when I read further, it all made perfect sense!

He states that:

Biological sex is the penultimate act by which a gene may hope to achieve replication in another body. The genes of the mother and father combine somewhat randomly creating a unique set of genes for the child. This is basic biology.

Right - with you so far... But then he asks...

But how exactly to memes replicate? "Imitation" is often suggested, as in the Wikipedia article. But imitation presupposes something more fundamental: attention. You can't imitate what you haven't paid attention to. Attention is meme sex.

The best part, however, is when he goes on to compare advertising to a kind of sexual assault of our attention.

Read the full article - Attention is Meme Sex. Great metaphor!

I'm suddenly feeling a little randy.

Greg Cohn wants Touchstone

It always amuses me when someone who has not yet found Touchstone writes a post describing the need it fills perfectly. Reminds me why we started this project/company in the first place.

I will quote Greg word-for-word because he is spot on. Hope he does not mind! Check out the full, more detailed post.

This leads to a three-fold problem: As a user, I want to aggregate the things I consume effectively and across all of my consumption devices and venues. I may want to publish my aggregation in various ways in various media, like a blogroll on my blog, bookmarks on del.icio.us, or an OPML file or attention stream in a conference panel bio. (Thus, “distributed aggregation”.) Also, as I chime in with my comments and ratings and other UGC submissions, this becomes part of the publishing side of the problem as well.

As a publisher, I want to streamline my production across many points of access while providing a good, unified experience to some members of my audience. I may want to be able to control my profile pages at Flickr and other places - both to reflect my self-expression goals and to capture data that lets me know how I’m doing - but I don’t want to be responsible for maintaining 13 websites. I want the principle of “write once / publish many” to apply not only to my blog posts, but also to my preferences as a publisher. Thus, aggregated distribution.

Finally, from the point of view of efficiency and value-creation, there is a lot of interesting attention that could be harnessed (and fat in the system that could be eliminated) for the benefit of advertisers, knowledge-aggregation companies like Yahoo! and Google, and, more generally, anyone who wants to communicate with like audiences either in niches or en masse (i.e., media) efficiently. Again, aggregated distribution.

Follow up: Making money in the long tail

Guy Kawasaki has posted a follow up to his post 'A review of my first year of blogging' which sparked a flurry of interest from bloggers because it revealed just how little Guy actually makes from advertising on his blog (and by implication, how little money there is in online advertising)

The new post - entitled 'The Short Tale: Much Ado about Not Much' goes further - explaining that he did not mean to cause any controversy and explained, if not for money, why exactly Guy blogs.

He says:

In case you’re interested, the reasons that I blog are:

1. To increase the likelihood that “two guys/gals in garage” with “the next Google” will come to Garage for funding.
   
2. To help companies and people that I (a) like, (b) have sometimes invested in, (c) am sometimes advising publicize their products and services. This is also known as “alignment of interest” as opposed to “conflict of interest.”
   
3. To be able to tell Web 2.0 entrepreneurs how full of shiitake they are if they think that advertising is a slam-dunk business model. Essentially, a Web 2.0 company would have to be 10,000 times better at selling advertising than me before it gets interesting.
   
4. To test ideas with “reality checks.” How many guys have 30,000-person focus groups?
   
5. To tap the “wisdom of the crowd.” For example, ideas for my next book. How many guys have 30,000 people providing new-product ideas?
   
6. To make meaning and fulfill my mantra of “empowering people.”

As I explained - I personally never imagined that individual bloggers would blog for the advertising revenue. Not successfully anyway.

In case you're interested - here's the reasons I personally blog here on the Touchstone blog.

1. To join the daily discussion about topics and issues I am passionate about.
   
2. To explain to our testers/users, partners, investors and anyone else who will listen why we should all be paying attention to Attention.
   
3. To keep everyone up-to-date about our challenges, goals and intentions with Touchstone (as guy says, how else can you get such a large focus group).
   
4. It helps me structure my thoughts and clearly express them for our team and the wider community to see.
   
5. To encourage people to connect with me if they have similar ideas or potential opportunities that could benefit us both.
   
6. To be heard...

Making money from the long tail...

There have been a number of posts lately about the profitability of the long tail.

First Guy Kawasaki posts his year in review where he mentions how little he makes from his very successful blog.

Then Chris Anderson posts called "Don't quite your day job" a reaction to Guy's blog revenue talking about the long tail and its profitability.

Then Chris makes a follow up post where he clearly explains who in the long-tail ecosystem can make money, and why those that can't, shouldn't worry anyway because direct revenue is not the main motivating force or reward.

This is how he explains it:

1. Consumers. Effect: Largely cultural. People have more choice, so individual taste increasingly satisfied even if the effect is an increasingly fragmented culture.
   
2. Aggregators. Effect: Largely economic. It's never been easier to assemble vast variety and create tools for organizing it, from search to recommendations. Increased variety plus increased demand for variety equals opportunity. Also note that just as one size doesn't fit all for products, nor does it for aggregators. I think the winner-take-all examples of eBay, Amazon, iTunes and Google are a first-inning phenomena. Specialized niche aggregators (think: vertical search, such as the real estate service Zillow) are on the rise.
   
3. Producers. Effect: Largely non-economic. I responded to a good Nick Carr post on this last year with the following: "For producers, Long Tail benefits are not primarily about direct revenues. Sure, Google Adsense on the average blog will generate risible returns, and the average band on MySpace probably won't sell enough CDs to pay back their recording costs, much less quit their day jobs. But the ability to unitize such microcelebrity can be significant elsewhere. A blog is a great personal branding vehicle, leading to anything from job offers to consulting gigs. And most band's MySpace pages are intended to bring fans to live shows, which are the market most bands care most about. When you look at the non-monetary economy of reputation, the Long Tail looks a lot more inviting for its inhabitants."
   
   

Nik Cubrilovic still holds onto the hope that producers can indeed make money from blogging and suggests some alternatives to AdSense which should be more profitable.

But of course, each of these commentators have day jobs.

There were some posts from bloggers who do basically make a business out of their blogs. First Yaro Stark who posts "Is Professional Blogging a Sustainable Business Model" and Darren Rowse with a post called "Does AdSense Suck for Bloggers?".

This is an interesting topic to me because I have had a number of conversations with friends, partners, investors etc about 'where the money is' in this emerging marketplace.

My feeling is more closely aligned with Chris Anderson's. Participants who create long-tail content are not doing it for money. We don't write open source code, contribute to wikipedia or blog about our lives for cash. We do it because we want to contribute - both to our egos and to the world. We want to be heard.

Professional producers, however, need to pay the bills. But unfortunately they are finding it hard to monetize their 'participants'. That's why I think aggregators should give something back. But that's a post for another time.

I thought bubbles were pretty

Remember when bubbles were a good thing? When you had that bubble gun that you would fill with magic bubble formula, pull the trigger and giggle like a school girl? Maybe that was just me...

It seems now that I'm older (and arguably more mature) bubbles are far more sinister.

In my new reality, there are the sort of bubbles that politicians build for themselves so they can ignore reality and lead the world into disasters and there are the sort of bubbles that burst and ruin the hopes and dreams of young entrepreneurs.

Everyone is deathly afraid of it happening again. In the streets of Silicon Valley and San Francisco people can't mention the buzzword 'Web 2.0' without quickly apologizing and talking about a bubble.

To an outsider one would think that the IT industry had an unhealthy obsession with soapy liquids.

Most people forget, though, that some (very few) companies actually survived the bubble. Why? I can't promise to have the all the answers but I suspect it involved some hard work, sacrifice and a little thing called a 'business model'.

I however, like Michael, feel a sense of optimism around the latest wave of innovation, enthusiasm and investment. In his post "Bubble, Bubble, Bubble" (which further helps confuse people into thinking the tech community seems to like floating balls of soap) he explains the difference between the Web 1.0 house of cards and the normal ebbs and flows of the current Web 2.0 landscape.

As Michael explains it, the fact that we have had some failures is further indication of a healthy market - not a signpost of doom and gloom - or bubbles.

All that being said however, I do feel a sense of dismay at some of the investments being made in silly ideas - seemingly just because of the names and popularity involved.

The comments on the TechCrunch post "Rumor: Slide's Venture Round was $20 Million" shows a slew people who think that the valuation, if true, is a joke. Slide makes slideshows widgets - primarily for myspace and other social networks.

I commented there saying:

...what happens when myspace shuts them down and does their own widget like they have tended to do in the past?

The point is if you are aiming for 10x return it’s a pipe dream - the points of failure are many and highly probable and the revenue or buyout can’t be that high.

I could never stand every widget on any one of my pages (not that I’d use myspace) having an ad. Is it self-expression or advertising central at that point?

Sponsorship? So themed widgets with coke on them? I thought this was self expression not corporate branding?

Freemium? So what, I have to pay photobucket/flickr for archiving, and I have to pay slide or rockyou for display?

I agree with the sentiments above - perhaps consider the idea as well as the team? Look at the roadmap/beta’s a little closer - you might find some surprises.

Traction only gets you so far - if you want to go on adoption rates then maybe Cigarettes are a great business to get into too.

Pop...

I'm a big RSS user - 20 feeds or so

I just found this comment on a post about free desktop readers and it made me chuckle.

bardicknowledge Says:
December 11th, 2006 at 11:34 pm
Hey, I’m a big RSS user, with 20 or so feeds that I keep an eye on regularly and there are two others options (the two I use ) that I would like to point out.

I guess I should not tell him about the 170 I'm subscribed to. And I know others with many more than that :)

FYI: I currently have about 12,000 unread items in my feed reader.

Channel ME

Mark Sigal's recently posted about Channel Me and the Rules of New Media.

He talks about concepts that we have long discussed here such as:

1. If content was king, then aggregation is now the master of the universe
   He writes: Unlike "old media," where content was the star, in new media, it is about the users and giving them control of what they digest, how they digest it and with whom. This article attempts to provide a framework for thinking about the rules of new media and how to work them to your benefit.
   
2. The audience has left the building
   He writes: Once upon a time, content was content, an ad was an ad and the audience was a passive consumer. No more. Increasingly, the lines between consumer and producer are getting blurry.
   
3. Personal Relevancy is more important than What's Popular
   He writes: These tools will have built in recognition systems (like deep profiles) to systematically connect like minds together, and filters that provide transparency that highlights what’s new, popular, recently viewed, talked about or related content.

And he finishes with:

The evolution of the Web from text, pictures and links to video-powered social nets is as profound as the evolution of broadcast media from radio to television, and it is destined to be no less exciting.

I wholeheartedly agree Mark.

Thanks for pointing this post out Randal