The Value Of Twitter As Compared To Google

from the it's-growing dept

I recognize that it's becoming fashionable among many to bash Twitter, but for those who have learned how to use Twitter well (as opposed to many who use it poorly), the value of it is quite impressive. I now spend a lot more time using Twitter to find news than I do my feed reader -- and that's amazing to me. However, I think Mark Cuban actually has made the strongest point, noting that in many ways, Twitter is becoming more useful than Google. This isn't to say that Twitter is "killing" Google (x killing y stories are lame), but that many people are finding information via Twitter now, where they used to find it via Google.

Cuban gives an example of trying to buy a car, where there may be a lot of value in being able to message a guru on the type of car he wants to buy via Twitter (or, better yet, finding a few of them). I know I've found Twitter to be useful in this manner. A few months ago, I was looking for a new backpack for my computer -- and I had very specific requirements (such as the ability to carry both a laptop and a netbook at times comfortably). It was quite difficult to come up with a Google query that made sense for such a thing, but I could ask it easily in 140 characters and plenty of people could easily understand it, and then provide thoughts and recommendations. It comes back to two points:

• Having real humans respond to a query works well for more specific queries that simply aren't well automated.
• Perhaps much more importantly, real people can better offer recommendations or explanations than an automated query on Google, which simply seeks to find data or answers.

Basically, what Twitter is enabling is an entirely different form of information gathering online: via conversation, rather than via data dump. Each has it's place, but the reason many of us find Twitter so compelling is that it's opening up tremendous new possibilities to enable useful information flow that simply wasn't possible before.

Filed Under: answers, automation, community, explanations, recommendations, value
Companies: google, twitter

Ten Lines Of Code Is Easy; Building Community Is Hard

from the yup dept

Fred Wilson has a good post pointing out how ridiculous it is for various elitists to scoff at a certain internet startup because it could be recreated in "ten lines of code." I certainly know the feeling (and have, at times, felt it myself), but as Fred notes, the comment is really far off the mark, and is a situation where techies tend to be doing the same thing that content owners have been known to do: overvaluing one part of the product over what's likely to be even more important. While content owners overvalue the content itself, techies often overvalue the code. But with certain services, it's the community that's more important than the code. The fact that the code can be (and has been) replicated is meaningless, if you can't also create the same community around it.

This is a point that's also important when it comes to the various discussions we have about patent law around here. Some patent system defenders insist that they need to "protect" their invention. But, again, if that invention isn't bringing users, there's not much worth protecting, at all. You can copy all you want, but if no one's willing to use what you do, you haven't done much valuable. Ten lines of code may be meaningless. But if those ten lines of code bring in millions of users, it's a different story.

Filed Under: code, community, elitism, techies
Companies: bit.ly

Yes, A Newspaper Can Survive If It Focuses On The Community

from the well,-look-at-that... dept

When it comes to newspaper business models, we've been saying over and over again that the problem has never been about "free" vs. "paid" but the fact that newspapers have never done a very good job enabling their communities. It comes from the fact that many newspapers incorrectly think they're in the business of selling news to people. That's never really been true. They've always been in the business of selling their community to advertisers. And if they do things to drive that community away (or to fail to keep up with other, competing communities) they shouldn't be surprised that their business disappears as well.

As evidence of how focusing on the community can work wonders for newspapers, just check out this recent column by David Carr (who just a week or so ago had jumped on board the "all newspapers should collude to start charging" bandwagon). In it, Carr talks about the success of the Austin Chronicle, the local newspaper in Texas that has been able to weather the "newspaper business model crisis" just fine while (get this!) giving away its newspapers for free. But, it's also built up the famous South by Southwest event that just happened in Austin, and has become a huge community builder for Austin. In fact, many now identify the city with SxSW -- and that only helps the Chronicle. While others are shutting down, the Austin Chronicle isn't looking to lay anyone off. Business is off a bit due to the general downturn, but the paper doesn't have massive debts and seems to have a really loyal following among locals who recognize the overall value it adds to the community. Meanwhile, it's the newspapers that haven't bothered to really connect with their communities that are suddenly demanding those community members pay -- and are suddenly offended when people tell them "no thanks"?

Filed Under: austin, community, newspapers, south by southwest
Companies: austin chronicle

President Obama Still Missing The Point: Include The Public In The Process, Not Just The Selling

from the the-difference-between-transparency-and-outreach dept

The new Obama administration was supposed to represent a revolution in participation and transparency -- and while there have been some moves in that direction, there's plenty that's troubling, such as its recent decision to declare negotiations on an intellectual property treaty a state secret. However, more troubling is this fundamental disconnect between what the administration seems to think "participation" in the process means -- and what it really should mean. Rather than actually having people participate, it seems the administration is a lot more focused on having people sell.

That's not the same.

We saw it in the stimulus plan -- which was written by the same political insiders, and then the various email lists and social network connections were used to try to get the public to support the bill -- and now we're seeing the same thing with the budget. Apparently, the DNC is putting on a big push to use the 13-million emails collected during the campaign to help urge passage of Obama's budget, with David Plouffe claiming this is "the first major engagement" of that public list in the legislative process.

But that's the problem. This is a bit late to be engaging everyone. The budget's already been written. Shouldn't participation included more openness earlier in the process and more of a real way to participate to get these people to actually buy into a budget that they had input on? But that's not what we're getting. We're getting the same stuff, handed down from on high by the same political operatives, and being told that the people's "participation" is to help this budget get passed.

I would imagine people would be a lot more excited about doing that if they'd actually been asked to help out in the process. I'm glad that the administration is trying to reach out to people more, but so far it's doing so in a very fake way. It's not getting people to really participate in the process at all. It's just looking at them as a way to help sell. That's not the same.

Filed Under: budget, community, obama, participation, politics

Slate Realizes It Has A Valuable Community

from the take-a-hint dept

What will be the defining picture of today's economic crisis? The '30s had bread lines and the '70s had gas lines, but as Slate points out, "in many ways this economic crisis, despite its deepening severity, has been less visible than previous ones. You can't take a photograph of a collateralized debt obligation." So, like any smart media company these days, Slate is turning to the community for help capturing that iconic moment.

To do so, Slate has created a Flickr pool entitled Shoot the Recession that currently has more than 100 user-contributed photos in it. NPR's Planet Money has been doing this, too, but because Slate is more visual, it would seem that more people would be motivated. This is a smart move - it lowers the expense for Slate to report on the crisis and recognizes that people are motivated by things other than money (reputation being the big one here). But it is also smart because instead of reinventing the wheel, Slate loosely joins together another small piece of the web - Flickr. Though there is still a lot more Slate and its peers can do, this is a step in the right direction.

Filed Under: community, news, photos, planet money
Companies: slate

Looking For A Little Info On The Community

from the survey-time dept

One of the examples I used in the Trent Reznor case study I did was how he sent out a survey to everyone on his mailing list -- but was quite open and honest about doing it -- and he did so in a way that actually made him sound human. Such surveys are a pain in the ass and they certainly annoy some people -- but, as Reznor pointed out in his email, since he and his team are figuring out everything as they go along, it certainly would help to have some info from his fans. We're in something of the same position. We're always working on ways to improve things for our community, as well -- and have a bunch of projects in the works, all focused on helping to reward you, in the community, further. The Insight Community has been quite successful so far, and in 2008 we were able to pay out five figure commissions to our top contributors. What other community are you a member of that pays you for being smart?

Please take a moment to fill out our reader survey.

Like Reznor, it would help if we knew a bit more about you. And, yes, we know that taking surveys is a pain in the ass. And, for those of you who feel that way, please just skip right on over this post and the survey. Sorry for wasting your time. But, for those of you who do feel like a part of the community and wouldn't mind sharing a bit of information that should help us provide more for you in the future, we'd really appreciate it if you could take just a few minutes of your time and fill out the survey. Thanks!

Filed Under: community, survey

Letting The Community Be A Journalist's Assignment Editor

from the that's-one-way-to-do-it... dept

Jay Rosen points us to the news that a journalist for the Patriot-News, in Pennsylvania, is experimenting with letting the community be his assignments editor. Basically, he's hoping that readers of his work will submit story ideas as blog comments. From there, he'll choose a few that look interesting, create an online poll, and then see what the community thinks is most important for him to work on. It's an interesting experiment, and one worth watching, but I'm not sure if it's enough by itself. It's great that he's tapping into the community, but a mere voting mechanism sort of misses the point of what that community can add. It should go beyond voting to actually helping out -- giving tips, feedback, ideas, facts and opinions. Let the community help research a story. Yes, some of that might happen in addition to the voting, but the voting by itself seems like a bit of a gimmick rather than real participation.

Filed Under: assignment editor, community, journalism, newspapers
Companies: patriot-news

Reminder: Not Everyone Online Is A Jerk

from the nice-to-know dept

Following the incredibly tragic story of Abraham Biggs' live broadcasting his suicide, plenty of "web 2.0" critics such as Andrew Keen jumped on the chance to blast the "anomie, cruelty and narcissism that characterises much of the web." Of course, if you think social networks are evil, you're going to interpret events that way, but, of course, as has been pointed out before, communication tools don't discriminate over who can use them -- so of course there are some awful people who use them, just as there are many good people. Communication tools don't change that. And, for every tragic Abraham Biggs story out there, it seems likely that there are many, many stories like Ayelet Waldman, who talks about how her online community of friends saved her from committing suicide. Of course, those stories don't get nearly as much attention, so folks like Keen can pretend they don't exist and that social networking communication tools are mainly used for shallow, meaningless conversations.

Filed Under: abraham biggs, andrew keen, ayelet waldman, community, social networks, suicide

What Obama Should Do To Get The Entrepreneurial Viewpoint

from the we're-about-to-find-out dept

Two contrasting articles crossed my desktop this weekend, both about how President-Elect Barack Obama is likely to govern. The first, by Mark Cuban, criticizes Obama for the list of economic advisers that Obama chose to consult concerning his plans to take on the economic downturn. Cuban, correctly, worries about who is missing from that list:

Notice anything missing?

Not a single entrepreneur. Yes Warren Buffett started a business, but he will be the first to tell you that he "doesn't do start ups". Which means there isn't a single person advising PE Obama that we know of that knows that its like to start and run a business in this or any economic climate. That's a huge problem.

I absolutely agree. It is the entrepreneurial spirit that is needed right now. But, at the same time, it makes you wonder just how Obama would have accomplished this. Any one or two entrepreneurs are unlikely to do a really good job representing all entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs, for the most part, don't all view things the same way, and there's no real organization of entrepreneurs. The reason entrepreneurs become entrepreneurs is often that they see their own way of doing things and don't want to be locked up by convention. So, while it is worrisome that there aren't any entrepreneur-types on the list, I'm not sure I'd be that much more comfortable with a few entrepreneurs representing the interests of all entrepreneurs either.

That brings us to the second article. It's by David Carr in the NY Times, and looks at how Obama's campaign ran like an entrepreneurial startup itself, leveraging the internet and new technologies to do a complete end-run around much bigger and more well-known "corporate brands" in the political space. And it wonders if Obama will continue to use those tools to govern as well.

So, at the very least, one could argue that Obama, himself, is something of an entrepreneur, but more importantly, one would hope that Obama does, in fact, continue to leverage the internet to hear from folks -- and is actually willing to listen and take suggestions seriously. Why not create an economic roundtable of sorts online that lets more people weigh in? Let ideas in the mix bubble up to the top using ratings systems (and maybe some White House moderators) and contribute them to the mix. If someone has a particularly good suggestion, why not invite them to a meeting with those "big shot" economic advisers as well? It doesn't mean that every hare-brained scheme needs to be listened to, but if there's a good way to allow the best ideas to bubble up and get recognition, it could be quite a powerful new way to govern. To some extent, there's already some indication that this is where things are headed with the transition website Change.gov, but it remains to be seen if that's just a Presidential suggestion box... or something a lot more powerful.

Filed Under: advisers, barack obama, community, economics, entrepreneurship, financial crisis

Belgian Newspaper Lets Readers Into Editorial Meetings On Financial Crisis

from the connecting-with-your-community dept

Earlier this year, I wrote about how too many newspapers thought that adding "community" just meant putting comments on stories. That's not really engaging the community, though. While we've seen a few examples of newspapers doing a better job of really engaging communities, this new story out of Belgium may be one of the best examples so far. A reporter for a newspaper there, De Tijd, had been experimenting with some live blogging solutions, and decided to basically liveblog an editorial meeting where the paper decided how to cover a developing chapter in the financial crisis. While some others in the editorial meeting were nervous about "opening up" their editorial process, it actually was quite useful.

The wider community contributed plenty of useful feedback both on what they hoped the newspaper would cover (which was different than what the editors originally planned to cover), but also in providing more details about what was really important. It gave the journalists there much more insight into the real story, rather than the usual shallow coverage that often comes out of newspaper reporting on a sudden crisis (for example, recognizing that interbank lending -- or the lack thereof -- was a much bigger story than a collapsing stock market). It became truly interactive, with various journalists bouncing ideas off of the community and getting a lot of real time feedback to create a much better product.

Even more interesting was that after the reporter shut down the live chat, many in the group simply organized themselves into an IRC chat room and continued the conversation themselves. It's a fascinating story of how a newspaper embraced an actual community, rather than simply thinking that community was something you add on as a module at the end of the "real journalism."

Filed Under: belgium, community, editorial, financial crisis, newspaper
Companies: de tijd