More on ChuffPo

Internet, Media,

I’ve mentioned before the difficulty I have in deciding what to blog about here and what to blog about at TOC. My TOC blog post on Huffington Post Chicago – or as I’ve been calling it ChuffPo – could have gone either way. But the gist of that post ended up directed not so much at ChuffPo, but at the whole of the arts and entertainment press and their blogger brethren. In our quest for page views or cover lines, we’re missing some things, or letting publicists dictate our coverage. So we – the experts – are missing the city that exists all around us, and running the risk of someone else acquiring the mantle of the most informed.

Which brings me back to a few lingering thoughts on ChuffPo…

Granted, it’s only a few days in, but I’m not really sure what the site has to offer. As I allude to in the TOC post, most of the content on the site consists of links to stories you’d see in many other places. Nothing wrong with that, but there’s nothing that distinguishes that content. Even Gapers Block‘s Merge section, which offers a quick to-the-point glance at big headlines of the day, still manages to do so with a certain style and voice.

Yes, it has some celebrity bloggers you might not find elsewhere. Unfortunately, none of them have had much to say (really, John Cusack, that’s all you got in you?). And the true Chicago voices in the mix have…well, if I want to read or hear what they have to say, I can go elsewhere, as most of them have columns, features or work in other places.

Speaking of HuffPo contributors, Steve Rhodes at The Beachwood Reporter raised an issue last week (2nd to last item) about the site’s lack of monetary compensation that’s been on my mind as of late, ever since a Gawker post on the same subject: If people are going to write for you – and you’re making money off them – you ought to be paying them. Rhodes has a point, to an extent, particularly about the lunacy of helping a competing business for free. But magazines – and newspapers – utilize unpaid talent (we call ’em interns) all the time. In fact, they depend on them. And those who excel in this grindhouse boot camp are often placed at the front of the line when there are jobs to be had at those same publications.

Disclosure time: I used to blog at Chicagoist, and while there was some monetary incentive for going above and beyond, I gave it away for free during most of my 2 1/4 year stint there (not to mention the work I did for our Ctrl-Alt-Rock events that were for the promotion of the site/brand). But all that free labor directly led to paid freelancing work, and is largely responsible for me having a job at TOC. So it’d be ridiculous of me to suggest that free labor in this environment is unethical (a Gawker blog commenting on fair labor practices would seem problematic as well, but nevermind). And since most of the critics in a TOC roundtable back in January said they’d still be doing what they do even if they had to do it for free, who am I to criticize?

It’s fine for these folks to look for more exposure (and some of the print scribes probably see it as I saw Chicagoist – as a door to more work down the line). But the whole thing has a very arm’s length feel to it right now, a sort of best-of compendium that has yet to present a real view of the city. And frankly I worry that its east coast pedigree will give it the bona fides that it hasn’t earned (especially since according to Ferdy, it can dish it out but has trouble taking it).

Yet.

Consider the following:

“With all its unfair built-in advantages, Huffington Post Chicago could actually help push one or even both of Chicago’s daily newspapers — both struggling mightily for different reasons — right to the brink of extinction. And if that happened, HPC would ultimately be shooting itself in the foot. If the Chicago Tribune disappeared, so would half of the actual news the Huffington Post now highlights.” – Will Bunch; Philly.com

To be fair, ChuffPo is blogging about stories from all over. And since sites like ChuffPo actually funnel traffic to newspaper sites, I’m not really sure how Bunch’s point follows. Besides, a site like ChuffPo ought to be filling in the blanks – particularly with content like this nightmarish account of one person’s stay at Swedish Covenant Hospital – not trying to do what a daily does. That’s now how it will become a source of real power.

Maybe Bunch just wanted to get quoted on Romenesko, and that’s why he said something so ludicrous. In fact, in the next paragraph he turns around and says that dailies and ChuffPo need each other. So there you go.

And that’s what I mean about the view from a distance. If Bunch knew anything about Chicago, he’d know the Tribune isn’t in any immediate danger of disappearing (even if some of its great talentis). The Sun-Times is doing a fine job of killing itself, with no help needed from ChuffPo or anyone else.

The question of how much to tip at the Salon just got more complicated

Internet

Salon announced this week that they’re going to start a tipping program for user-generated posts. It’s a well-timed announcement – coinciding with the Bejing Olympics this week – as we’re often reminded by many gratuity-based businesses that tipping is not a city in China.

(That was a long way to go for a groaner of a joke, I know. But tough. If you want Internet-publishing commentary without Catskills moments, go read Scott Karp.)

One point Caroline McCarthy makes in the link above is undeniable: This kind of plan won’t work for all sites. But I’m not sure she’s right in saying Digg! – “a more rabble-friendly site” – wouldn’t be able to adopt it. It smacks of elitism, or the kind of thinking that says – to steal a bit from Orwell – some user-generated content is more equal than others. The issue is not your user base, it’s about what you’re asking of them.

First of all, Digg! already has its own version of this plan. In fact, it’s the very idea on which the site is based though without the monetary incentives. And Yelp!* also has a large user base, full of plenty of rabblers, but they also have a smart, engaged group of people who are generally able to separate the wheat from the chaff, without the financial incentive.

Admittedly, Yelp! is also a good example of how a pay-for-home-page-play scheme might backfire and get abused, since they haven’t figured out how to separate their editorial from their marketing content (or rather, don’t see the need to do so). On a review-based site, I could see businesses opening accounts to “tip” good reviews of their businesses and tainting the value of the site for the less engaged members of its community (the person who just drops in occasionally to read reviews, not post them).

(There’s also a discussion to be had here about whether sites should be paying people who contribute content. Gawker recently came down on the side of “yes” which is funny for a number of reasons. Based on my own free-posting past at Chicagoist – and based on my experience in the offline world where interns are a crucial part of the economies of business with advantages for everyone involved – I’d say “not necessarily” but I’m still working it out in my brain for a future post.)

The question isn’t “Is there too much rabble on this site for this idea to work?” The question is “Will this plan encourage people to give us the kind of content we want more of?”

An idea like this won’t work if you’re just trying to generate more content. Asinine comments, silly-ass videos and eye-bleeding profile pages will sprout up no matter what. But if you’re a site that wants to encourage its users to provide something specific – say, pictures of news events or reported articles – then it has potential.

Still, I think the viability of a currency-supported system of recommendations is an open question. As McCarthy points out, people will spend money when they feel like what they’re getting has value they can’t get elsewhere, be it warrior helmets or music. Sometimes the value is the product itself, sometimes the value is immediacy, and sometimes it’s the model itself. (I’m only a moderate Radiohead fan, but I supported the idea of what they were doing, so I dropped a few dimes on In Rainbows for that reason, not because I was a rabid fan or felt I needed to hear it before other people.)

Just like customers stop spending money at brick-and-mortar businesses when the product quality is no longer worth paying for, so too will users spend their time and money elsewhere. If Salon can use this model to provide better – and easier to find – content, it will have a future.

* If I start a social networking site, I’m going to avoid the use of exclamation points. Might actually go with a semi-colon, which suggests that the real meat of the discussion is coming up. If anyone steals this concept, I will punch you in the solar plexus.

A Lollapalooza story you haven't heard

Music,

Lollapalooza is such a massive experience that it’s almost impossible to cover the full story of what happens there. Therefore, most people just end up covering the bands and/or any celebrity crap that goes along with it. When actual news happens – especially when it’s not related to the music – you end up dealing with organizers who aren’t prepared to deal with questions, not necessarily because they don’t want any bad press (although that’s part of it) but also because they don’t understand that real reporters have a job to do: Report the story that’s there. Just like asking questions about the actions of your government doesn’t make you an enemy of the state, asking questions about the story you’re being given by a promotional machine, doesn’t make you a hater of music and culture.

What happened during Rage Against the Machine’s set – inside the grounds of Lolla and out – has been mostly underreported or misreported (with the exceptions of the Sun-Times and Windy Citizen). But at least it’s been covered. There were likely many other stories that fell through the hole in coverage.

This was almost one of them.

I’ve got more thoughts on this, but I’m going to wait until there’s some follow-up first.

Update: As you can see, the post linked to above now includes a response from a Lolla spokeswoman who says “proper safety procedures” were followed. In addition, I’ve created a Flickr photo set of all the photos we have of the incident. You can view that here. I’ve asked some additional questions, which I’ve listed in the post at the TOC blog.

Lollapalooza (again) (and again…and again…)

Music,

I didn’t mention it at the end of the week, but hey: I’m at Lolla.

I’ve posted reviews of Witchcraft & Ting Tings, Sharon Jones, Raconteurs and documented some of general craziness, and the scary craziness like the fans outside rushing an open security gate during Rage Against The Machine.

You can read more reviews from TOC’s music staff on our blog, and follow along with the TOC Twitter stream as yours truly runs up his cell phone bill.

What I learned this week: Web biz edition

Internet

Any of these points would warrant a post of its own, but this has been a packed week so all I can provide here is a few bullet points:

1. It’s entirely possible to only network online, but networking offline makes the former much more effective.
2. Even the most staid business properties could benefit from using easily available online tools to create more understanding of, and inject personality into, their brands.
3. When you use online tools that make your business personal, and start networking offline, even your personal interactions will mean you’re representing your business, and become fair game for later online discussion.*
4. The only group of people who have an across-the-board understanding of the importance of the online world for business are the people who are just now graduating from college. Not because all those 24 year-olds are watching The Hills, but because it’s just now becoming a part of business and journo curricula.
5. Even the smartest geeks misunderstand – and fear – Twitter. (Some do because it makes it easier for non-geeks to work online.)

Reading back over this list, some of this strikes me as completely obvious, but I didn’t develop a true understanding of some of the points – or realize how much this isn’t commonly shared knowledge – until this week.

* There’s a corollary to this which, in the colloquial, is “Don’t get shitfaced at networking events.” And no, I didn’t violate that.**
** This week, anyway.

Our Man In Chicago recommends the following post to you

Music

Before we begin, did you check out TOC‘s Pitchfork coverage? It’s quite good.

Now then: I got this e-mail yesterday from Amazon UK:

“We’ve noticed that customers who have purchased or rated Spaced Out – The Very Best of William Shatner & Leonard Nimoy by William Shatner have also purchased The John Baker Tapes Vol.1 by John Baker. For this reason, you might like to know that The John Baker Tapes Vol.1 will be released on 28 July 2008.”

First: Yes, I did buy Spaced Out. Before you mock, listen to Spock sing “Both Sides Now,” and see if you don’t choke up a little.

Second: My first reaction to this was: “How idiotic. There’s absolutely no reason why someone who likes ironic renditions of hits and novelty songs of the ’60s would like this.”

Third: They’re totally right. As soon I read track titles like “Big Ben News Theme” and “Radio London (News Idents)”, I was looking up what the current exchange rate is, wondering if other Spaced Out purchasers also like Prime Minister’s Questions, and thinking about starting a Facebook group called “Marketers Know Me Better Than I Thought And That Scares Me.”

In conclusion: This is why I finally decided to read The Long Tail.

MP3 – “Both Sides Now” by Leonard Nimoy

Pitchforkin'

Music

This weekend I’ll be at Pitchfork Music Festival all weekend. We’ve got a really solid feature up, including a hipster fest checklist that’s pretty amusing.

We also rolled out a mobile version of our Pitchfork feature at timeoutchicago.com/p4kmobile. This is the first part of our plan to roll out more mobile-friendly TOC sites. Plus, reviews and photos all weekend at timeoutchicago.com/blog and updates to our Twitter stream, too.

And we’re not done yet! We’re asking readers to send us their own texts, photos, and overheards to p4ktoc at timeoutchicago.com. We’ll be posting them to timeoutchicago.tumblr.com.

So yeah, lots of online experiments stuff this weekend. We’ll see how it goes.

The problems of innovation

Internet, Media, ,


From a piece by the Trib’s Mo Ryan on the new J.J. Abrams show Fringe:

At a Monday Q&A session on the show at the Television Critics Association summer press tour, J.J. Abrams, one of the show’s co-creators, recalled watching an “Alias” episode late in that ABC show’s run.

“I watched a few minutes, and I was so confused,” Abrams said. “[I]t was impenetrable. I was like, ‘I know I should understand this. I read the [script] — who the [expletive] is that guy?’”

Glad I wasn’t the only one.

Abrams seems to me like one of those creative guys who gets easily bored. The last three shows he’s done that I liked started to go off the rails in their third seasons: Felicity, Alias and Lost. (By all accounts, Lost regained its footing in its 4th, but I’d stopped watching by then.)

This is because Abrams usually gets involved with a new project. Those projects were Alias, Lost, and Mission Impossible III, respectively. No one would argue that those weren’t all worthy projects. Alias and Lost walked a new path for network television shows (though to be fair Alias had much of the brush cleared by Buffy) and I still think Mission Impossible III is one of the smarter action movies of the past five years.

So what’s to be learned here? Three things:

People who are true innovators need to be challenged in order to keep coming up with interesting new ideas. If the opportunities to do that aren’t available in the organization, they will go someplace else to find them.

Also, innovation requires evolving maintenance. It’s not enough to create new ways of doing things. You also need the right people in place to maintain the tone and structure. In organizations, this means one or two wunderkinds aren’t enough: you need a group of people who understand the underlying goals of a project and how to make new additions serve them. You want to add social networking features to your site? Fine, good. But why? And what purpose will they ultimately serve. Not every site needs to be a new Facebook. But if those new features are used to highlight excellent content that might otherwise get ignored, that’s innovation that serves your site.

Similarly, on creative projects, there can’t be a brain trust. This is often difficult with auteur works like Abrams’s but again Lost has shown that having the right lieutenants in place makes the battle that much easier. In the workplace, maintain a knowledge base through Wikis and share evolving information throughout the group often. The idea of redundant systems isn’t just for servers. When an expert develops an expert process, note it. That way when your expert leaves for a new project, the rest of your team won’t be trying to find its footing for the next 3-6 months. And much like a television show, it’s important to have regular “story meetings” that involve everyone to discuss that year’s overall themes, arcs and possible new plot developments (Oh and do these in person so people can see each other. Even video conferencing is better than conference calls facilitated by speakerphones.)

Oh I almost forgot: Don’t add the half-sister of your leader to your crew, especially if she is related to the lead antagonist. Eventually, she’s just going to end up as an evil zombie who you’ll need to put into a coma. You might think that’s just applicable to Alias, but really that’s just a solid rule across the board.