DISQUS

Well said Robert, and thanks for the nod by the way -- I appreciate it (more, I appreciate that you are taking the time to read my stuff).

Hey Robert,

First thing I'd like to say is that I loved the post. I loved it because it proves more than ever that you believe strongly in the world you spend your life reporting on, which regardless of any failings that blogging has is the most important thing in the world (which I've been rambling on and on about for the last week).

The only part I had to comment on was HP reference you made. I am an Electrical Engineer by trade, and it stuns me so much how quickly we (as "blog people") convolve the concept of technology with neat gadgets. I've had to pleasure of seeing implementations of Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning (among other technologies, including so really cool Solid State research like you described) that completely blow every web app I have seen in the last 3 years right out of the water. Implementations of these technologies put together by grad students without any other commercial interest other than their degree.

There is so much more out there, and I think we get so caught up in the muck that we lose focus on a lot of it. Worse, we forget that the only point in any of this, as John pointed out, is to solve problems.

Solve problems, for people, using technology.

Either way, great post and I am looking forward to seeing what you come up with.

Thanks for the nod mate, great post!

Thanks so much for joining in Joe. It should be fun!

Pay As You Want as an economic model works best in industries where the marginal costs are low. If I can sell 10 Million MP3s for fractions of a cent, then it makes a lot of sense for me to let people buy them for whatever they are willing to give me.

For retail, it becomes a little stickier. You need to come up with a way to make it so that on average you are making back at least as much as you paid to produce.

Good article Anthony!

My problem was never with well thought out slogans like Bebo's or Hi5's, it was with the less thoughtful ones like -- as you mentioned -- Facebook.

A slogan is supposed to tell a story, but much more than that it is supposed to tell a story that is palatable to the demographic that you're targeting.

A good example of this is, "I'm Lovin' It." It's thoughtful and it speaks to those who McDonalds sees as its target demographic.

Now lets look at Facebook.

"Facebook is a social utility that connects you with the people around you”

Beyond the fact that this is an extremely long winded explanation of Facebook's approach to Social Networking, it also doesn't resonate with Facebook's college demographic, which is -still- a very large percentage of its traffic.

I don't think that every company creates thoughtless slogans, I think that -many- companies would do well to clarify their vision so that their slogans are more meaningful to those who they are trying to court.

It boils down to the fact that everyone who would balk against this knows it is true. More than that, they wouldn't have it any other way.

Great analysis!

Hey Mike,

Great article. You quoted my "Web 3.0" piece, but the cited it as belonging to Steve Rubel. Thanks so much for the link, but it would be great if you altered the citation.

Have a fantastic evening.

-I- agree with that.

The problem is that on a whole, our industry only buys into journalistic integrity when it is convenient for them to do so.

The fact of that matter is that they can get away with it because when all is said and done there is no editor or oversight to call them on it. That's the beauty of blogging.

We should take ourselves more seriously, but while we are at it maybe it is time for yet another discussion about what the "point" of blogging is and how it is different than journalism. I suspect if you asked the question, you'd get some interesting responses.

Robert, you are perfectly right to be upset about the rumor. At least the parts of the rumor that call you out to the carpet.

However, this whole situation has some positive value. It gives you an opportunity to hear varied opinions as to -why- PodTech might go under.

I am tired of arguing the "are Bloggers Journalists" thing. Depending on which way the wind is blowing we all change our stripes on that one. You can't expect people who only occasionally consider themselves traditional journalists to do primary research. You can wish that they did but that is about it.

What I will say is that PodTech -can- be improved, and many of the comments you received here could be passed along to those who can do something about it.

Everyone needs to start taking these things less personally. Ignore the noise and make some use of the signal.

After reading some of the comments, I can understand the hostility.

Pick your battles though Robert.

-I- was not -trying- to attack you. In fact, I was agreeing with you. No, seriously, I was. As hard to believe as that might be. There was no veiled attack, no patronizing, no bull...hockey. I really was agreeing with your assessment about how Techmeme works.

Since it is a rare day when I agree with anything, I suppose that I can see the confusion.

I'm not going to leave the snarky close that responses like "whatever" usually draw but come on now. Don't get so used to attacks that you start seeing them where they don't exist.

This is a more defensive sort of response than I was expecting. No matter, it's likely you misunderstood what I was saying and decided it was some kind of veiled attack. Either way, to the points.

1. Adbrite is running PPP ads on my site? Interestingly enough that doesn't bother me. Not that I use PPP, but I also am not against it. I would go in and manually delete those ads, but considering the semi-arbitrary nature of how they are placed, you might as well be balking at Adsense (which I think also runs PPP ads every now and then, darn that Google).

Also, not a really fair way to argue -- is it? Setting up a Straw Man and then trying to tear down my credibility? Dirty pool.

2. It was a post written as a response to someone asking about how Techmeme might work (not as Techmeme bait). It was based almost exclusively on anecdotal evidence (much like your claims). Confidence should be reserved for something a little more solid than anecdote, non?

3. Exactly, I said similar -points-. I didn't say the medium was similar.

4. Robert, that is an assertion based on nothing. I read a terribly large number of blogs, feeds, etc...

5. Why do I feel a touch of hostility?

Good points Robert, though I say this with a touch of sour grapes.

Considering I did a similar analysis of Techmeme, with many of the same points no less than 10 days ago but, alas, no Techmeme love for me.

I suppose it just goes to show that our theory of how Techmeme works is more valid than not.

Well said. If I hear one more person tell me that Facebook is going to kill [insert] my head will explode.

we should try an experiment, Matt. heh.

I can't help but agree with Tim. While a certain amount of reinforcing behavior is necessary to get the full scope of opinions about a subject, I think that because we all source our material from the same limited set of sources we are -missing- a lot of interesting pieces of news.

Unfortunately, this means that we are also propagating this rather myopic view to our readership.

Well written Robert, all of these would be great additions to the program.

In the top tier blogs (for the sake of argument, call that the Technorati Top 35) and maybe some of the big media properties like CNET, it really all depends on the piece.

If it's something entirely new like a product release, it might drive a lot of traffic. If it is some small piece of niche news (like V-wag tends to publish), you will only get those few people who actually care clicking through.

Publishing cycles have expanded to include dozens of posts a day on some of these blogs. Only a few posts a day will catch fire. It's the way it has to work, I fear. Thus the belief that these sites are driving less traffic per link.

Once you get past that top tier, then the traffic that any individual site can drive is nominal unless they happen to write for a very close-knit niche. Example, a post of mine appeared on the front page of a blog in New Zealand for 2 days. The traffic for the site is about 1/20th of Digg but I probably got 10k visitors in that period.

Nail on head mate.

I really respect the candor Robert, good job.

Heh, fair enough.

Well then, I'm calling it a night. I still think it was a finely orchestrated return to the webosphere Robert, whether intentional or not. Malhalo, Facebook and Google in the same post -- might as well have thrown in the iPhone for good measure.

Good night and good luck.

A lot these videos are excellent, many of them I have seen. Some of them I have pointed out to others.

Honestly, and I am being serious here, I just have a hard time believing that someone as clever as you did not know he was opening up a powder keg with that post. I really, really do. You don't need to justify yourself to anyone but come now, the old innocent shtick is a bit much.

I respect the conversation you started. I always feel sorry when the winds of the blogosphere turn against someone who is trying to voice an opinion, but all of this notwithstanding, when you make an argument like you did -- it's hard not to expect some kind of reaction (positive and negative).

As a final point in this comedy of errors, the entire thing was so well put together that you drew the -worst- possible reactions out of the tech blogosphere. Which, as you certainly know, stratifies the community along two lines.

The people who think you have gone insane (who didn't like you much to begin with).

And the people who think your detractors are just being big meanie heads (a -strong- new reader base).

Once "Bashing Scoble" becomes a meme, you can't make a counterpoint to the argument without seeming like you are just joining in on a public hanging.The more I look at this, the more I am amazed that no one saw it more quickly.

Well played.

At first I was arguing the -point- of Robert's somewhat misguided statements, but I think I lost the forest from the trees. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Google will be blitzed by "social" search systems. The argument seems to have been thrown together without even considering market forces beyond hype. The question I asked was, "Why would Robert do this? Shouldn't he know better?"

Then it came to me. This is the internet equivalent to yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater. Robert disappeared for a time, came back and wanted to draw a reaction. Since there was no Apple rumor out there to ride, he picked the next best thing. "Big Google is on the outs folks!"

We bought it hook, line and sinker -- as we usually do. Bravo for coming back with a bang Robert, I couldn't have played it better. Bashing Robert isn't helping anything folks, if you think he has 'jumped the shark' all you're doing is making the ramp higher.

Alright, I've decided to look at this debacle from a personal marketing perspective. When you do, you might go as far as calling Mr. Scoble a genius. I'm sure he has pulled in a lot of fresh readership from this little spectacle.

In the blogosphere, all press is good press.

I am going to partially agree with 16 on this one Robert. Having sat in on last night's discussion there were plenty of measured, candid disagreements with your claims.

You have chosen a laundry list of the most scathing of them in what -appears- (I say appears, mind you) to be an attempt to prove your point by contradiction. Since all your detractors are obviously just looking to start a fight -- you must be right.

Well, I am not looking to start a fight but here is what I will say.

Maybe a Malhalo, Facebook or Techmeme -like- product will revolutionize search for the masses, but I would put good money down to say that none of these will topple Google at the search game in and of themselves.

The old directory structure (Malhalo) and even Techmeme rely too heavily of Google to do the initial sorting before they are able to take this vetted information and use it in their systems.

Dozens of people have voiced similar opinions in varying degrees of frustration. Robert, this is a decent debate and honestly it just goes to prove that the tech community still puts the blinders on when trying to separate hype from real market potential.

Maybe you are right. All things are possible, but I am sure (like any good marketer) you know that compelling headline aside, that post doesn't go very far towards predicting the future of search.