/Message

Jeff Jarvis on The Worst Newspaper Ad Decline Since 1950

[from Do I smell smoke? Is that a fiddle I hear? by Jeff Jarvis]

[...]

we are at a full-blown, slippery-slope, accelerating-fall, watch-out-below crisis for the newspaper industry and professional journalism with it. It’s time for drastic thinking.

And not the soft focus, vaseline on the lens kind of bilge that David Carr wrote in the NY Times a week ago based on equally dismal news about staff cuts and fiscal hemorrhaging at other papers, like the Tribune Company and San Jose Mercury News.

Newspaper denizens are in a state of denial, hoping for some miracle, an end to the free fall. But there is no end in sight but a dead cat bounce at the bottom.

Beyond Blogs: The Conversation Has Moved Into The Flow

Loic Le Meur is only the most recent person to notice that the conversation online has moved away from the blogs that once seemed the nexus:

[from Loic Le Meur Blog: My social map is totally decentralized but I want it back on my blog]

[...]

The challenge for Friendfeed and the like is that while I really like all my services gathered in one place, I would rather that these would be centralized on my blog instead of a third party service.

I think that day is done.

Basically, conversation is moving from a very static and slow form of conversation -- the comments thread on blog posts -- to a more dynamic and fast form of conversation: into the flow in Twitter, Friendfeed, and others. I think this directionality may be like a law of the universe: conversation moves to where is is most social.

Personally, I don't think the genie can be put back in the bottle. Twitter et al are simply more compelling a conversational medium than blog comments. While the close relationship of blog posts and their associated comments may seem like a positive attribute, it is actually very limiting and closed. In general, people have to blunder into an interesting comment thread by moving to the post, opening the link to the comments, and manually scrolling down through them. A lot of time and effort, all based around the metaphor of wandering around in the web of pages. It's like a trip to the library.

Twitter and other similar apps are based on the web of flow: information of interest comes to us, not the other way around. And it flows through people, through relationships: it's not a bunch of clicks on URLs, scrolling, and so on. It's a move away from hunting and gathering and into relationship agriculture: information grows in our flow applications instead of us spending time hunting it down.

So, what are blogs going to be when the conversation moves away? They will be the place where we archive our posts, so that people can find them when they need to search, which still is a necessity.

But today's blog technologies were not designed with flow in mind: they are based on Web 1.0 principles, and although they have helped to engender a revolution in sociality and flow, they don't support it very well. This opens up an important new are for competition in the marketplace, perhaps, but more importantly, a new way to think about the role of social media. (Note: In the Workstreamr application, which is based on social media at a fundamental level, we have also architected flow into the solution at an equally fundamental level.)

The way I am getting tugged to blog posts is increasingly as a mention within a conversational bite in Twitter or Friendfeed. I then click out of the flow to see the larger post, and offer my view in the flow -- not on the blog -- and then I return to the flow, where I will be spending most of my time.

This makes sense: I want to talk about the blog post with the person who brought it to my attention, more so that with some group of strangers at the blog, or even the author, who I may not know at all.

I also don't think we can expect the fragmentation of the social experience to slow down: it will get a lot worse before it gets better.

We can expect new tools and technologies that will take advantage of this new dynamic to emerge almost immediately. I have more ideas on this topic, so more to follow.

Next Web Wifi Disciplinarians: You *Will* Pay Attention

[Update: 11:01 am ET --

Seems that the Next Web folks have posted their new info about wifi a bit earlier than planned.

[from TheNextWeb2008 Update: Love, Internet Access and Attention]

A lot of people have been asking us if we would provide Internet access and Wi-Fi during The Next Web Conference 2008. We sort of avoided the question and sometimes even said ‘No’. This has caused concern with some people so I thought it would be a good time to explain our ideas about the subject. [emphasis mine] But first THE answer to the question: “Will there be Wi-Fi for participants at The Next Web Conference 2008?”

The short answer: Yes.

The long answer: Yes, and a lot more! We will have a special area with wired ethernet connections to a 100mbit Up and Down connection, the fastest connection we could get. This area (front left at the main conference area) will also have enough power sockets to keep everybody online all day. In addition, we will have Wi-Fi connections for the rest of the audience people. We plan to split these up in several groups of 50 people who will all be able to connect to their own access point.

This means that if one of those groups takes the network down, at least the other groups will still be online until we restart the device. And if the Wi-Fi fails we always have wired backup for you. One thing: we DO expect the wireless network to go down. It is our experience that Wi-Fi becomes extremely unreliable when you get more than 30 people in the same room connected.

We hope that the speakers will be so extremely inspiring and captivating that the use of computers will be limited to live blogging, twittering and digitally reporting about the speakers on stage.

Sounds like the right approach (although I wouldn't try to tell the attendees what they should be doing with their laptops... if the presentation sucks, might as well catch up on email, or Facebook).

I would suggest that in the future, conference organizers should not start out by being ambiguous or possibly misleading about topics like wifi access.

I believe that Marjolein Hoekstra was reporting what she heard in a discussion with Boris Veldhuijzen van Zanten (@bomega), that wifi would be limited and it would be for the good of the conference (see below). But it appears they have either had a change of heart, or were just fooling all along. April Fools!
]

It appears that @bomega (or Boris Omega Veldhuijzen van Zanten), the organizer of the upcoming Next Web conference in Amsterdam, is taking on the dubious legacy of Walt Mossberg's D conference and the Nielsen "User Generated Content" folks, since the story going around is that he intends to limit Wifi access to only VIPs and selected bloggers in the main hall, so that attendees will... er, attend to what the speakers are saying.

CleverClogs Could anyone confirm or deny the rumor that during The Next Web Conference in Amsterdam the main audience won't have access to the net? 02:37 PM March 29, 2008 from web

CleverClogs @stoweboyd The idea is that by not offering net access, the audience will pay more attention to the hard-working speakers on stage. about 24 hours ago from web in reply to stoweboyd

CleverClogs @mathys 100 wired net connections only at Next Web? Are we expected to play the game of musical chairs to figure out who wins net access? about 24 hours ago from web in reply to mathys

CleverClogs @allanjenkins Smells excellent opportunity for the marketing department of Vodafone to provide us all with mobile data cards for the event about 24 hours ago from web in reply to allanjenkins

CleverClogs @fzelders From the chat I had with Next Web organizer @bomega a few weeks ago it seems a deliberate decision, if they insist on the idea... about 23 hours ago from web in reply to fzelders

Can't have people chattering in the back channel after all. Fold your hands! Shut up! Don't color outside the lines! Sharpen your number 2 pencils! Pay fucking attention, you lazy slackers!!

Good lord.

I really tried to find out what his story was, but I got off on the wrong foot by twittering this:

stoweboyd @CleverClogs Fucking idiots. Just like Mossberg's D conference a few years ago. about 23 hours ago from twhirl in reply to CleverClogs

I went on to suggest that this was 'Attention Fascism' -- the same nonsense that Mossberg and Kara Swisher pulled at D a few years ago:

bomega @stoweboyd are you seriously calling me a "Fucking idiot"? about 22 hours ago from web in reply to stoweboyd

Stowe Boyd @bomega I was referring to turning off wifi access at the #NextWeb conference: is that you? I am opposed to forced attention fascism. about 19 hours ago from twhirl in reply to bomega

I was warned by others that calling anything 'fascism' in the Netherlands is crossing a politeness line.

However, I was unable to get a straight answer from Boris about the wifi rationing planned for the conference. I asked a bunch of times and he was at best evasive:

bomega @stoweboyd I[t is not] very polite to insult the organization (me included) based on some rumor. We DO offer Wifi and VIP blogging seats... about 18 hours ago from web in reply to stoweboyd

bomega @stoweboyd I respect your opinion but you make it hard to do so by calling me a fucking idiot. Just not appreciated. about 16 hours ago from TwitterMail in reply to stoweboyd

NicoleSimon @stoweboyd are they going to remove pen and paper next because it distracts attention from the speakers? absolute nonsense. about 16 hours ago from web in reply to stoweboyd

bomega @stoweboyd I get your point. Don't agree but it doesn't apply to me or #nextweb. And, I repeat myself, don't like the way you communicate it about 16 hours ago from web in reply to stoweboyd

bomega @stoweboyd False. One polite question would have gotten you the answer hours ago. about 16 hours ago from web in reply to stoweboyd

bomega @stoweboyd You might be right. It is probably just stress that I'm so upset with your remark. Lets forget about the whole thing. :-) about 16 hours ago from web in reply to stoweboyd

But I never did get the answer. I presume that means no: wifi will be limited to VIPs and a short list of bloggers.

There is technological or financial basis for these issues: it is difficult and expensive to get reliable wifi for tech conferences. Conference centers often lack the necessary bandwidth, so they attempt to push the full expense for more back on the event organizers, without any amortization over future events. Otherwise, the event organizer has to come up with some alternative: like datacard based portable wifi hotspots or the like.

But to wrap it all up as attention focusing, like a third grade teacher telling us to stop looking out the windows and do our fractions, well, that is just arrogant bullshit.

It's not about paying attention, per se: it's about note passing in class. They are trying to stamp out the back channel. Event organizers should be in favor of the back channel, which can enrich a conference (so long as it is not projected on the wall behind the speakers, which leads to potential feedback problems, like the Mena Trott "Kinder, Gentler Blogosphere" meltdown in Paris a few years back). But social networks are not controllable, and some people are control freaks: put them together, and what do you get? A revolution.

Hey, Boris. You can't control the messaging. You can't control social networks. You can't control our minds. You can't control us.

I admit that some of this because I was impolite, which I admitted:

stoweboyd The fuss with @bomega may be a cultural toestub. He's mad because I am impolite. I'm mad because he won't answer a direct question. #nextweb

But he is closed, not open: he won't answer the question. It's just nuts to complain that people are repeating a 'rumor', and then to not make a statement that clarifies the issue.

Apparently he has a blog post coming out tomorrow, that @CleverClogs (Marjolein Hoekstra) has seen, but it hasn't made her very happy:

@bomega thx for trusting me with your upcoming blog post about Next Web wifi availability. Your pov is understandable, but not agreeable... about 15 hours ago from web in reply to bomega

@bomega's upcoming post about Next Web wifi availability, which I helped tune a little, seems to offer the best possible compromise now. about 14 hours ago from web in reply to bomega

It may seem all a tempest in a teapot, but I am strongly opposed to events -- or any public or semi-public gatherings -- where the organizers believe they have the moral authority, by virtue of their organizing role, to arrogate about the attendees' access to the web and each other. Or even worse, to argue that they need to do this for our own good, because continuous partial attention is robbing our souls. Take your Ritalin like good like boys and girls!!

It's particularly off-message at a conference about the Next Web, which is driven by the social revolution, Boris. We demand to remain connected, no matter what others say.

I don't have any great technological solution to the problem of wifi access, but I believe that it is something that has to be on the agenda for conference organizers to try to accomplish. That they fail at times does not mean that they shouldn't try. And just because they try doesn't mean that we won't complain if they fail: we will, trust me.

As I said in an earlier twittergram:

#social #networks aren't democratic, and they aren't hierarchical, they aren't manageable, and they amplify both good and bad.

Twittergram: What Do Executives Need To Know About Networks?

Patty Anklam:

what do executives need to know about networks?

Stowe Boyd:

@panklam That #social #networks aren't democratic, and they aren't hierachical, they aren't manageable, and they amplify both good and bad.

Twittergram, originally uploaded by Stowe Boyd.

Going Solo: The Three Skills Of Soloing

Stephanie Booth and I skyped this morning about the upcoming Going Solo (remember the early bird discount ends on Monday with the close of the month). Stephanie caught me making a face:

Skype - Stowe stuck making a face, originally uploaded by Stephanie Booth.

Looks like I will be talking about The Three Skills Of Soloing which is based on a post I made awhile ago:

[from Going Solo: A Few Words Of Advice]

The most difficult challenge for soloists is to find a balance between the various activities that must take place to survive. I like to oversimplify these down to three:

1. Doing The Work — The heart of consulting — of whatever description — is delivering the work. A soloist has to deliver value to the client in order to make money. Most consulting-oriented people start with this capability: it’s the other two that cause problems, in general.
2. Marketing and Networking — I have already noted that I principally market myself through blogging, and that I attend conferences: those are the outward signs of a willingness, or even an obsession with networking with likeminded others. When I find out about a web product that sounds interesting (my beat), I sign up for the beta, fool with it, write a review, ask for more info, and very soon I am involved in a direct communication with the company’s management. I read other people’s blogs and comment on their ideas. When attending conferences I try to chat with both old friends and folks I have never met before. I know many consultants whose natural introversion makes such activities difficult if not impossible. But these interactions are just as critical to being a soloist as performing the work, and are likely to take up just as much time!
3. Prospecting, Contracts and Cash Flow — I am always happy to talk about money, and as a soloist it is imperative to get what you are worth, and then to collect the fees. This is a blind spot for many, and a make-it-or-break-it issue. I know a lot of folks that find it hard — even with people they know well — to ask for a project, an engagement, whatever, and to demand payment later on. It may seem obvious but many consultants only get involved with this as a necessary evil, but it’s not. It’s just as central as delivering the goods and networking.

My sense is that you need to be doing each of these three things an equal amount of time. One third of your time should be devoted to networking and marketing, that is finding new clients, or letting them find you; one third to talking up new projects, getting them into contracts, and managing the business side, up to and including getting paid; and one third performing billable work. I can hear the groaning already: only one third of the time billable?

Yes, and you will have to jigger your billing rate to make that work. I plan to only work 10 days per month, so that has to make all the ends meet. I know that 10 days will go to marketing and networking, and 10 days to prospecting, negotiating, contracts, and getting the money. I no longer fool myself that these things will happen by themselves.

So balance is the most likely place for a prospective soloist to run aground. They do not allocate enough time to marketing, or they underestimate the level of effort involved in prospecting, or they hope that they will have 22 billable days a month and set their rates too low so that they starve to death while working five days a week.

The subtext is that the abiding skill is the balancing act, rather than the three skills being balanced.

I will also touch on countering your psychological tendency to skitter away from the areas you don't like to do as much, and other unsavory aspects of the job, like firing clients.

Stephanie also informs me that I will be involved in a second session having to do with money issues, like billing and negotiation. I am always happy to talk about money.