Scobleizer - Latest Comments in The elephant in the kitchen

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

schwarzbein principle vegetari — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:52:13 -0000

Thanks for accepting my post, that is the true spirit of this citizen's media.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Tamera Kremer — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:57:45 -0000

Blogger is derived from Weblogger.

A WEB LOG. Nothing in there about what you can or cannot log on your site. Photos, words, recipes, links, what have you... nothing in there about who might be interested in your log either.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Jon Husband — Sun, 27 Aug 2006 05:24:57 -0000

There are already many different types of personall or subject-related logs on the Web now .. hundreds of thousands at least that are active, if not several millions .. that are updated somewhat regularly, that contain links, and / or photos or video clips or podcasts or mp3's. Sifry parses and analyzes that kind of stuff, no ? 9as do many others). And as you point out there are many many logs that are empty of one form of symbol or another, but still may be communicating something to someone(s).

And different people use them (logs) for different purposes .. to teach, to learn, to amuse, to avoid other things, to yell, to pontificate, to practice activism or advocacy, to connect, to have an aklternate social life .. and so on. It's like Dave Weinberger has often said .. the Web gives new meaning to the question "what is a dociument ?" So too with logs on the Web.

And yes, there is a large segment that is emerging where service providers are trying to find ways to make money. Since it is the content (ideas, concepts, info, links, images) that attracts many (but not all) readers, an important element of this new environment is the drive towards monetizing content through forms of online advertising (which are also morphing as advertisers learn more about the dynamics of online sociology and psychology)

I also believe that what we call "blogs' today will morph into various forms .. what I like to call blog-like derivatives .. where the derivation comes from purpose, usability, added-value functionality, etc. Different platforms and services will increasingly seek ways to offer services to important and / or lucrative niches .. but in a future of increasing (and dynamic) niches ... what those niches are, how they behave and what they want is very very likely to keep on changing. And imo blogging and other personal publishing platforms will have to keep adapting in responsive ways.

So, the definition(s) of what a blog is today may become different, or mutiple, a year from now, or 3 years down the road .. whatever .. and whenever.

To pretend that YOU know all about what blogging is somewhat arrogant, I think. Even though you may read 1,000 or more blogs via your RSS aggregator (something you used to proclaim proudly about). That only leaves hundreds of thousands or several millions that you haven't looked at, haven't read and never will .. in all sorts of areas, addressing all sorts of topics and issues. There are by now many many people who have been blogging regularly for as long as you have .. they may not be blogging about the kinds of issues you have been, or for the purposes you address, but I consider those I know who have been at it for quite a while and who have grown or refined their blogging, just as "expert' as you.

And as communities (whether of 5 regular readers or 20,000 regular readers) form and de-form they will define (sometimes or often dynamically) their purpose, their context and how they relate to the logs on the Web that for whatever reason they enjoy. I have seen blogs that had thousands of regular readers die quick deaths when the changes the author made were not well thought through or were condescending to important parts of the audience / community.

I also think there may very well come to be ways to monetize, although not in large amounts, many different forms of "blogging" even if they are not pulling enough regular eyeballs to attract high-paying CPM's or utilize the highest paying keywords for PPC.

It's a vast area, and people are an intrinsic (or the fundamental) part of it .. to define it narrowly and introduce some relatively arbitrary standards based on a few high-profile peoples' opinions about how things should be is narrow-minded and short-sighted. There's so much more that can, and should, and will be done by the vast diversity of people who decide that they will work at sharing something .. even if it is stupid fart jokes or obscure extinct-plant-based vegetarian recipes .. with people who may just be interested by that tiny stupid topic.

I honestly thought you would know better than to proclaim yourself one of "the" authorities, when so much has been written about the turbulence and changeability of network dynamics (ssshhh, even in your book).

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Rob Dolin — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:32:03 -0000

I like post #66.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Liz — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:47:45 -0000

Blogging has other values than how much money it earns, mostly, it has the virtue of connecting to other people. All of the flaws of blogging are exemplified by this post and the post that it refers to. It is what we used to call "flames" -- stupid, thoughtless attacks on others, online.

If there were any question whether or not Robert Scoble was childish, narrowminded, egotistical, and bullying to boot, I think this post and his comments effectively proved that he is all of those things.

That an A list blogger would engage in such childish, narrowminded and yes, egotistical behavior demonstrates only that the quality of the A list is low, as it belongs to those who yell the loudest.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

jsaltz — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 18:41:03 -0000

This is an abomination.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Mike Abundo — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 09:18:33 -0000

You know how many Spaces feeds I have in my OPML file? One.

Robert's right. Spaces is a ghost town. Unless Microsoft comes out with a standards-compliant blogging platform independent of proprietary hosting, they're finished in this space.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Lex — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 07:26:58 -0000

Hmm I saw some of your videos on Channel 9 but this is my first visit here (via Dare).

It seems to me you may have had a point in there somewhere but you abandoned it in favour of a 'win'.

Blogging has become a handy tool for delivering views and opinion to and from those that were otherwise inaccessible, but I'd not say that was it's raison d'être, to me it is the social experience.

I'd say it was blogs like this, (and to an extent people like Dare) that are the exception and are really more like amateur (in a non derogatory sense) editorial newsletters than something I'd relate to as blogging.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Arjun — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 03:28:35 -0000

This is crazy. I can't believe the whole thing. I can't believe Scoble came with it for so long. I had no idea Dare was the son of the president of Nigeria (and I had no idea I'd been reading his blog for so long and never realized it was him!)!

And i'm soooooooooooo stoned right now

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Alan — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 02:18:06 -0000

Robert - let me (one of) the first to say that I'm *not* going to unsubscribe to your blog.
To be clear, I had planned to pull the plug you for at least a month due to complete lack of interesting content, but then out of the blue you go off in this ridiculous rant. The humour is enough to keep me around for at least a few more weeks until the dust settles down. Thanks for renewing my interest!

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

anand — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:28:05 -0000

lol looks like I made lots of spelling mistakes above..sorry for that before I get owned ..

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

anand — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:23:54 -0000

who are you to define what a blog is?? there are a hell lot of blogs out there having more useful information out there. You were in my list of to-read blogs because you were with uncle bill (I am sure this is what most of your readers are here.Ever since the media mania took over you when you were leaving microsoft, you have come to assume that you were the king of blogs...stop day dreaming and post some useful stuff..rather than teaching people what a blog is. First rule on the internet is to stop being an arrogant personl. Or else you will be OWNED :))

time to kick scoble out of my list...btw inspite of me visting your blog for almost a year now, I have just visited your new company website a couple of times. That will tell you that the power of your name is because of your association with MICROSOFT. Not many people are fortunate like this, thats why their blogs really dont take off.

BTW DID NOT ANYONE TEACH YOU THAT LETTERS IN CAPS MEANS YELLING AT PEOPLE. DOM'T YOU HAVE BASIC COURTESY WHILE POSTING... :)
end of story...

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Wharf — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:23:21 -0000

It's increasingly apparent that the A in A-list from a blogger context stands for Arrogant. Or Authoritarian. Or just plain Asshole. unsubscribed.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Ole Eichhorn — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:50:47 -0000

Crap, is that Robert Scoble? It think it is! He's baaack!! The best thing about Robert leaving MS is that he's free to post this sort of thing again. Yay!

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

macbeach — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:48:19 -0000

For what it's worth:

Lots of people have Spaces accounts, Hotmail Ids and so on who never use them, link to them or share them with family and friends. I would guess that quite a few of that 200 million, like me, read about some new Microsoft free thing and decided to try it out just to see if iit was worthy of their time. I use Hotmail for situations that might collect a lot of junk mail. I keep a MSN messenger id going (using GAIM for Linux) for those one or two people I know who use nothing else, and GAIM supports Jabber, AIM and Yahoo so I have all the bases covered.

I am of NO value to Microsoft, Yahoo, or AOL advertisers, but I do keep Adwords turned on in my blog since I use Blogger and it's trivial to do so (but I like the fact that it is not required).

I REALLY don't think the definition of the word “blog” is important. What MIGHT be important is how various filters (like Google's blog search) categorize things. But if anything I'm more likely to want blog results EXCLUDED than included. Blogs tend to be the “editorial page” off the Internet. I may wind up on a blog by going to Cnet looking for news, not the other way around. In any event, once I get to the news, I don't care whether it was formated and uploaded using blogging software or some other means, why would ANYONE care?

The Blogger interface has undergone a much needed revamp and now has many of the usability improvements just introduced by Spaces. In addition it still creates web pages that are viewable by just about any web browser. I applaud the MSN effort, but the pages it produces yield errors on older browsers. One of these days Microsoft may figure out that promoting IE as “most favored browser” doesn't necesitate making other browsers not work at all. Let the IE group fend for themselves, and put stuff out that “just works”. Do your testing on IE LAST for a few months if you have to until you get the hang of it!

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Dare Obasanjo — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:54:53 -0000

Robert,
It seems you have now resorted to making up motivations for Microsoft, Google and Yahoo! now that people have called you out on your A-list blogger elitist crap.

Mike Torres and I have blogged several times that we are more interested in getting everyone blogging and sharing their experiences with Spaces than simply catering to A-list bloggers like yourself. That's the power of the long tail. Instead of targetting a few users with lots of readers like yourself and other A-list bloggers (i.e. the head of the tail), we've built a platform that millions of people with a few dozen readers can enjoy.

I guess it makes you uncomfortable to realize that a few A-list bloggers aren't as important as millions of Z-list bloggers to us.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

radaronpaws — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:54:30 -0000

Bob Porter:

"I don’t pretend to be able to offer a better definition than anyone else, but I do believe advertising dollars know the difference"

You are equating professional blogging with blogging? Or those who generate money, whether it's their sole income or not?

By your definition, only pro snowboards are snowboards. Only pro volleyball players are volleyball players. Only pro racing drivers are racing drivers.

Maybe that's not what you meant, but it sure sounds like it. The whole point of blogging was that the amateurs and tiny guys could get in on the action, and you want to throw out everyone that doesn't get ad dollars. Shortsighted and dumb.

Robert: You were right in your comments on my blog, and I decided I was being unfair. I edited my blog to admit and reflect the fact. I also stated it was an edited blog and why I edited it. Sorry for jumping on the "Robert bashing bandwagon." Not sorry for thinking people here wanting to narrow the definition of blog to those who get ad money, as Bob seems to, are forgetting the whole purpose of RSS and blogging. So that everyone can be a publisher.

If you guys posting things like Bob (again, assuming I interpret his statements correctly) want a world where just a few people count or are considered bloggers, the rest not mattering, you can have it. I'd think with the large broadband providers trying to cut out the content providers and make the web inequitable that people supposedly in the know wouldn't be trying to pull the same kind of crap, but clearly I'm wrong.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Robert Scoble — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:19:23 -0000

Sriram: >>>Shame on you Robert for saying that a influencer is worth 1000s of normal people (or as you put it - a non-influencer).

That's why I titled this post "the elephant in the kitchen." It's the thing that everyone knows is there but that no one is supposed to talk about.

The problem is you think that MSN and Google and Yahoo are doing this stuff to be nice citizens, right? Well breaking news, they aren't. They are doing them for money.

And, the truth is that someone who brings in 1,000 visits IS worth 1,000 times someone who only brings 1 hit into the system.

Now, the problem is, when I say "worth" I'm talking about the worth to the business. Not the worth to YOU or the worth TO YOUR FAMILY.

Obviously every human has the same worth if you're talking about human values.

But, when MSN and Yahoo and Google (and SixApart, Wordpress, Technorati) executives get together they DEFINITELY compare their numbers and their demographics and all that and then they prepare PowerPoint slides and they head off to big advertisers like General Motors and Procter and Gamble and say "you should advertise with us, look at all the buying activity you'll get."

Here's another datapoint. The CEO of Printing for Less told me that not every customer is the same. For instance, if you click on the word "business cards" in Google he knows you'll probably spend about $200. If you click on the word "four color printing" you'll generate 10x that.

So, what does he do? He spends more in advertising to get the type who will click "four color printing."

That person is worth more to his business.

That's what I was trying to say.

That's why MSN wants to call their spaces "blogs" because bloggers are worth more to advertisers.

Hope that helps clarify what I was saying when I said "worth."

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Sriram Krishnan — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:17:35 -0000

Robert

Sorry, but I'm going to disagree with you for the first name in a long time.

- I dont care whether we are worth more to the advertisers

- I dont care whether we are losing deals with ad companies/whatever

I do care and appreciate that we are building tools for *normal* people. Moms and dads, uncles and aunts. People who dont know what RSS stands for. People who dont have a Del.icio.us account, Technorati watches and who dont fight it out every 5 months as to what a 'A List' blogger

I know that most of the 100 million Spaces would never be 'true' bloggers. I have a colleague on my team who uses his Spaces account to upload photos of his daughter, family vacation,etc. He's not a blogger. He'll never be a influencer. But I'd rather build tools for him than for any 'influencer'

Shame on you Robert for saying that a influencer is worth 1000s of normal people (or as you put it - a non-influencer). My sister is and so is my Mom. I would rather have Microsoft build software for my family rather than some exclusive club of geeks.

I dont care whether we have 75 million or 100 million. I dont care whether we call them blogs or spaces or just websites. I do care whether we can somehow enhance the millions of people who are using it. It matters to me whether someone is able to share his vacation photos with his family. If in the process we lose out on a few advertising dollars, so be it.

Software for normal people. That's what I joined this company to build. Not software for the 'influencers'.

- Sriram Krishnan

P.S Can you and Dare stop with all the name calling? It's getting quite childish.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Dan — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:01:45 -0000

I can't believe how arrogant and childish you are, Scoble.

Blogging doesn't belong to you; you don't own it. It's not your toy that you can take it back and tell people that they aren't blogging after all.

I've been blogging since 1992. Before trackbacks, before Technorati, before Blogger or Movable Type, before Google, before RSS or Atom. Don't you dare try to tell me that it wasn't a blog.

I don't recognize your authority or expertise. You are not an expert blogger -- you are a very poor blogger, all told. All that you are is a loud blogger, a frequent blogger, and a visible blogger. All you have going for you in this space is luck that you haven't yet managed to sabotage.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Ethan — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:28:10 -0000

I see, now we've moved on to defining the "web".

"Hint: the Web is public. Anything behind private doors is NOT the Web. That’s why we call those things intranets, etc."

Hint back: the web is a public medium. To my knowledge, there is no hard and fast rule that says that everything that utlizes this medium MUST be public-facing. Seems to me intranet sites (specifically domain-based intranets) use DNS, same as everyone else. (Yes, I am aware that intranet material can be served up without a web server.)

Again, we can split hairs to the sub-particle level. I've got all day, apparently. Of course, as this topic is officially "dead" by way of your apology post, I can stash the electron microscope thisquick. That sounds good too, huh?

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Nicole Simon — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:26:57 -0000

There is only one Spaces blog I read and 'really' know about - which is your wifes.

The Rockstar supernova phenomena makes people go out and make spaces blogs - to win something.

Yes, they may be the biggest, but I agree. IF you have 200 m MSN Messenger users, then your numbers should be much higher.

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Vivek — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:10:55 -0000

Robert

Recently, after the bomb blasts in Bombay, the Indian Govt had shut down complete blogging services like blogger inadvertently (instead of shutting down what they thought were blogging sites that looked suspicious). The service was brought back on with a lot of public support cause some of the blogs on some of those services were actually being used to communicate with the authorities and the common public with information on medical aid, routes that were being opened/closed after the blast, hospitals, phone nos, family contacts and so on.

Why do I say this? Cause none of these blogs will fall into your A list category - frankly is that the measure of popularity alone?

It isnt about Chris Pirillo's $10000 dollar virtual real estate - it is about people like you and me - real people who use the web (in whatever way they can) to share stories and bridge differences.

Why should anyone arrogate and stand in judgement over what stories they can and cannot tell?

If someone were to have used a blogging service to help the Katrina victims last year, it would be silly for you to say that since it isnt a live blog it isnt "contributing to the web".

What matters is how easy the blog was to create, how easy was it to access and how many people's lives it touched.

Pls dont forget that blogging is only the means to an end....

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

John Dodds — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:39:36 -0000

It depends on whether you agree with Jeff Jarvis's opinions - personally I would not be inclined to automatically take his recommendation because I find some of his thinking to be patently ludicrous

A listers may have reach but it is arguable that

1) this influence is in some way limited to the geek audience

2) since not all A listers have united opinions they might cancel each other out

Re: The elephant in the kitchen

Robert Scoble — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:38:41 -0000

Bruce: nope, I went to public schools all my life.

Ethan: well, I care about things that ADD TO THE WEB!!! If you don't share it with us we can't add it to our experience.

Hint: the Web is public. Anything behind private doors is NOT the Web. That's why we call those things intranets, etc.