ONML: the obligatory (or optional!) non-meta link
A silly idea that occurred to me, but I like throwing ideas at the wall that is the internet and seeing what sticks.
The short version: in boring tweets about Twitter, we should include an ONML, or obligatory non-meta link so we don’t get sucked into an existential black hole of self-reference.
The long version: Tumblr and Twitter are the two online communities where I spend most of my idle web-browsing time. And as I’m curious, nosy, and essentially a geek, I’m always interested in what goes on behind the scenes at these sites, both technically and business-wise. So a lot of my tweets and tumblelogging activities end up being about tweeting and tumblogging themselves.
I realised a while ago that this sort of meta-discussion is pretty dull for many people: not all my Twitter followers could really care about the platform itself, it just happens to be the place where they go to find out about music or politics or whatever interests them. Jeff Atwood’s Coding Horror blog has a great post about how “Meta Is Murder“, where he gives Joel Spolsky’s example that “all they’re talking about on this so-called ‘podcasting gear’ website is the podcasting gear website itself”. Which I’m sure you’ll agree is pretty useless (not to mention boring) if you’re actually more interested in the message than the medium, as I’d guess those without my geeky “how does it work?” tendencies are.
So I made a conscious effort not to talk to much about Twitter or Tumblr so as not to scare away/alienate/bore to death my followers who innocently followed me looking for some music links. And this self-imposed rule did mean my online output became a bit more focused. Atwood and Spolsky’s Stack Overflow programming discussion site employs a similar method of banishing all meta-discussion to a dedicated forum, so as not to destroy their community with feature suggestions for the community itself.
But I’ve realised recently that there is some merit to these discussions; I tweet about all forms of new media and technologies, so why exclude what may be genuine insight (or at least a LOL) about Twitter just because that happens to be the medium I’m using at the time? If nothing else, a shared interest every Tumblr user has is Tumblr itself. And we all like to write a blog post with “news about our blog” on the odd self-important occasion, right?
So perhaps the answer to the problem of meta-discussion is not to hide it all together, but to give it a value beyond self-reference. So I propose the introduction of an obligatory non-meta link (ONML) to be included in any tweet about Twitter or any blog post that’s just about how you’ve decided to change your WordPress theme. So rather than post something that may alienate some of my readers, I simply add an ONML like this, and voila: a post that was potentially only of interest to a handful of people instantly becomes valuable to everyone by the inclusion of something that’s not solely self-referential and meta. Because everyone likes pictures of cute stuff.
Or alternatively: I come across a lot of cool stuff online that I want to share, but don’t necessarily have much to say about it. It might not be the sort of thing my online friends would normally be interested in, but it’s worth pointing out nonetheless. So when characters are limited, why not kill two birds with one tweet (and mix metaphors while you’re at it) by mentioning something that would otherwise have been forgotten?
I’m going to try this a bit and see whether people are bemused or intrigued by it!
DailyBooth, 4chan and the importance of context
Apple's Photobooth application that ships with Mac OS
I know that title might sound like a PhD thesis, but stick with me; a few more posts and I think I’ll have the grand unified social meeja theory of everything…
Perhaps not, but there are of course a number of ideas I seem to notice throughout various online services, and TechCrunch’s piece today on a service called DailyBooth made me think of one of them. The TC post says “it’s a Twitter-like quick message service, only the main form of communication is pictures. You can send pictures of anything you want, though most users tend to send images of themselves, photo booth-style, and attach messages to them”. That’s sort of it, but I’d hold off on comparing to Twitter too much – TechCrunch (and most blogs) are well aware that lazy name drops of the Big T generate lots in interest in their posts.
What’s more accurate is a comment on the article that says “Wait what? This looks like they just slapped a new front end on 4chan. How is this news?”, referring of course to a cult message board that (arguably) gave birth to LOLcats, Rick Rolling and hundreds of other memes – it’s the grass roots (or cesspool?!) of web culture. There is a remarkable similarity, and undoubted influence (whether known to DailyBooth’s creators or not). 4chan wasn’t an original idea though – it’s just an imageboard, a type of message board popular in Japan. And looking at these imageboards, it’s clear that’s really all DailyBooth is, but with some real-time Web 2.0 buzzword magic thrown in.
So, if DailyBooth is just a community based around a bog-standard imageboard, why is it news that warrants a write-up on TechCrunch? One word:
Context.
And here’s my point: so many people get bogged down in what a site/service/app does from a technical or functional point of view (“but it’s just a 4chan/Twitter/Myspace clone!”), that they forget about what really makes these things what they are: their users, their design, the way they’re marketed, the attitude of their founders and so on. The context they’re placed in. (Not groundbreaking of course, but something it’s good to be reminded of).
No-one argues that LinkedIn is just a poor man’s Facebook. It’d be pretty difficult to argue that the former’s functionality is better – it’s actually pretty simplistic – but it’s the way LinkedIn is positioned as a “serious” social network that makes it popular with a certain type of user.
Similarly, Yammer is essentially a Twitter clone. But it’s aimed at businesses for use internally, which venture capitalists think makes it worth at least a $5million investment.
So by positioning itself as a “microblogging tool” (rather than a message board) at a time when such things are en vogue, DailyBooth has been able to get some mileage out of an old concept. Its changed the way people use this concept by guiding behavioural norms in the site’s community (eg. “post pics of yourself not random stuff you find online”). DailyBooth is transparent about its owners and terms of use, compared to the somewhat arcane shroud around 4chan. Most importantly, it seems to have a friendly community, rather than a cryptic network of in-jokes.
Admittedly, DailyBooth is not yet Myspace. But by changing the context of a simple imageboard, it’s overtaken a stalwart of internet culture (oops, incorrect stats – see comments) picked up a large number of users, got people talking and potentially begun to move the idea towards the mainstream, seemingly capturing the elusive teen audience along the way. So how many other simple, old ideas could become cool new web businesses by changing their context?
And next time someone says to you “that’s been done before!” or “that’s only 10 lines of code!“, just remember: context.
LIVE REVIEW – The Twang
It’s taken me ages to put this review (written for Orange) up here…spending too much blogging-time on Twitter and over at my tumblelog.
14th February @ Liverpool Guild of Students
It’s a scientifically proven fact that no rom-com has ever featured a Brummie lad-rock band’s live show as a major plot point. But a sold-out Valentine’s night gig with no shortage of snogging student couples might suggest that Hollywood’s missing out on something.
And just like a screening of the latest J-Lo blockbuster is unlikely to attract hordes of cinephiles waiting to draw comparisons with Citizen Kane, it seems that those who aren’t here with a partner are more interested in throwing pints on each other’s Ben Shermans than admiring some of the baggy cast-offs and U2 “me-toos” from The Twang’s forthcoming second album. Nonetheless, when the band stumble into their second single, 2007’s hit Either Way, early on in the set – a brave move, given that they’ve not exactly got a huge repertoire of anthems to save up for the encore – romancers and beer-boys alike are united in a stirring singalong.
The band’s odd double-lead-singer dynamic does afford them the luxury of being able to show particular onstage energy, but only the most casual gig-goer would be fooled into thinking that running about and shouting “come on Liverpool!” constitutes stagecraft. That doesn’t matter though, as the band know their crowd is more V Festival than All Tomorrow’s Parties, so their polished and competent, yet derivative, dirges are well received. And in a world where Mamma Mia DVDs have sold more copies than The Bible and Bride Wars can top box office charts, perhaps catering to the lowest common denominator with no regards for quality or originality is a recipe for success.
Research paper: can a profitable business model be applied to podcasting?
Just a quick post: I’ve realised that I’ve not yet put online the research paper I spent much of the first half of the year writing. As 2008 draws to a close, it’d be a shame not to unleash it on the world under a Creative Commons licence. Maybe someone will stumble across the wise words of one of my interviewees via Google and find them useful, so here’s the full thing in PDF format. Feel free to share or adapt for your own works.
I think the paper’s abstract does a pretty good job of summing it up:
This paper investigates the issue of whether a profitable business model can be applied to the medium of podcasting. It suggests a variety of potential business models that may be appropriate, and evaluates how they be may applied in this new arena.The literature review explains the parallels between podcasting and other more traditional media, paying particular attention to radio, which is deemed to be the most similar existing medium. The popularity and adoption of podcasting both among the public and media organisations indicate that now is an appropriate time for an investigation into the economics of podcasting. An outline is given of existing business models that have set a precedent both on the Internet and in other forms of media, as well as the wider world. There are a number of examples of how people have previously attempted to apply these business models to podcasting.
Read the rest of this entry »
