Kent Newsome on technology, music and life

1/24/2006


Lessons from the Bayosphere

Dan Gillmor posted today about his experiences creating and trying to grow Bayosphere. He talks very frankly about the beginnings of Bayosphere, its successes, its failures and the conclusion that this well conceived and executed citizen media blog/website simply hasn't worked as well as he'd hoped.

This is a must read for those who still believe I am wrong about the steep uphill climb faced by new blogs in 2006. I'm not saying this proves my point- it's not about being right or wrong. I'm simply saying that if someone as well known and connected as Dan Gillmor can create something as good as Bayosphere, get the traffic Bayosphere gets and still conclude that it's "obvious to anyone who's paid attention, the site didn't take off," what does that say about the chances of a new blog created by some anonymous blogger without Dan's reputation and experience?

Dan talked about his approach to community building:

We envisioned Bayosphere as a place where people in the San Francisco Bay Area community could learn about and discuss the regional scene, with a focus on technology, the main economic driver. My tech and policy blogging would be an anchor, hopefully attracting some readers and, crucially, some self-selected citizen journalists who'd join a wider conversation.

And the lack of collaboration:

Many fewer citizens participated, they were less interested in collaborating with one another, and the response to our initiatives was underwhelming. I would do things differently if I was starting over.

And, finally, the conclusion that I believe is telling for the potential new blogger:

The evidence strongly suggested early on that this was not likely to be a viable publishing venture for some considerable period without partnerships to bring in both readers and contributors.

Dan makes a lot of other excellent points about community building. Since any successful blog has to be, at least in part, a community, these comments are spot on for blog building.

He also talks about the tension between writing to communicate and the compromises that are required in the search for a profit. Again, all of this is part and parcel of the blogging vs business stuff I am so interested in.

Does this mean that growing a new blog is impossible? No, but it is an object lesson in how hard it is. And if it's hard for Dan, it's going to be harder for the rest of us.

More Discussion:

Darwinian Web
SiliconBeat
The Bay Area is Talking
JLuster.Org

Tags: , ,
Posted by Kent @ 1/24/2006 10:41:00 AM | Permalink

Submit to: Digg | Netscape | Reddit | Tailrank
Bookmark on: Del.icio.us | Furl | Ma.gnolia
Reactions: 3 Comments | Post a Comment | Inbound Links

3 Comment(s):

Hey Kent, there you go, an A-list link! From Businessweek's Blogspotting.

Congrats :-)

- Amy Gahran
RightConversation.com
Contentious.com

By Blogger Amy, at 1/24/2006 3:03 PM  
**************************

Kent,

I thought that the first comment to Dan's post was more insightful, honestly. From what I surmised, Bayosphere was essentially a targeted blog, or blog network. Meh. I think "pay for blog" is a non-starter, as blogs are essentially free. Artificial attempts at "monetizing" them (see Pajamas Media) can't seem to get off the ground, which is not an indictment of the blog medium itself.

Let's shift gears and think in musical terms. Lots of illegal downloading gows on out there, effectively commoditizing popular music. But what about the public performance? There is more inherent value in that act than an MP3 file.

Todd Rundgren (sp?) once admonished the music world to quit thinking of their music as a product, and more of a service. The money is in the live performance, not the CD, per Todd.

I can't speak to this from experience, but the advice strikes me as plausible. Thoughts?

By Anonymous Ethan, at 1/24/2006 4:52 PM  
**************************

I thought that comment was well stated too, although a lot of those elements (passion, capability, credibility, etc.) are pretty subjective. If you do good, it's easy and often accurate to attribute your success to those elements. On the other hand, it is harder to attribute failure. Compensation is another key, and my point has been that if you want to be paid, you almost always need to have some product to sell other than the content on your blog. Leadership is also a difficult concept, because very few organizations, close or loose, are true meritocracies. The leaders are often a self-appointed group (or, perhaps, appointed by virtue of getting there first) that evolves into a self-perpetuating oligarchy. I guess what I'm saying is that you need all that stuff plus either (a) a ready-made audience or (b) an embrace by the oligarchy. It's too similar to the old media gatekeeper thing, but as I said the other day, there's no easy alternative. That might just be the nature of the thing.

I think the music analogy is interesting. Lots of guys I know view their records as merely dues to the man and consider touring income (gate and merchandise) as their real money. They look at records as supporting the tours, whereas the record label cartel looks at it the other way around. There's definitely more inherent value in a concert than a record, but each one needs the other to thrive.

But the idea of a blog as a record-equivilent supporting other goods and services (say Scoble's Microsoft and Rubel's PR business) is very consistent with the way I see things.

But that's on the business blog side. On the "I write because I want to join the conversation" side, which is sadly in the same bucket as the "my blog IS my business side," it's a little like putting out records but never touring. To begin with, those bloggers don't have anything else to sell. Furthermore, the cacophony of those who are trying to sell their goods (whatever they may be) makes it very heard to get heard.

By Blogger Kent, at 1/24/2006 5:54 PM  
**************************

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link
DISCLAIMER
Newsome.Org, Kent's blog and the related pages and content are solely the thoughts and opinions of Kent Newsome in his personal capacity and are not associated with any other person or entity, including, without limitation, any partnership or other business entity Kent may now or hereafter be associated with.