Yes, and when we launch http://www.fastcompany.tv on March 3rd you'll see just how we can mix the two. Already I'm using this service: http://www.qik.com/scobleizer to get feedback LIVE WHILE I FILM INTERVIEWS from the community.
Yes, a publication can blend journalism - news and comment - with community - people, in their public and private aspects - but the user interface has to be quick and simple, but capable of fairly rich communication. One click to a video reply to a group, for example.
Definitely, but you still have some pretty big hurdles to jump over. All those editors that were schooled in the days of 'old' will definitely present a challenge to such ideas.
Perhaps there's a way to educate them to make some tweaks to the ways they write by having talks / webinars / etc. Or maybe have a renowned editor (with similar schooling experience) to speak out about writing for the Internet? This way, you won't have such a big age gap between speaker and audience.
I'm quite certain that you must blend the two to remain viable. The combined effect of the Industrial and Information ages has isolated each of us. Online social networking is simply re-allowing the interaction we all crave.
And as Microsoft's chief ad strategist Mike Galgon noted yesterday, journalism is "not worth zero". We need to be trust someone as an information resource.
Combining these two - probably across information sources - is a necessity.
Yes. More and more traditional publications will find themselves having to change their models to do so. Media has become a participatory tool -- equipping one's audience to become actors and speak to an audience of their own is smart because it guarantees are far more engaged and consistent community.
Sure it can. No one trusts journalism as the sole source of the news. The benefits of the community keeps the media honest. An example of this is http://www.gabbr.com where news agency based content is posted and the community is able to post additional content to support or refute the news agencies. This adds more sides to the story and takes readers closer to "the truth".
I'd say it can and it's going to have to. Their only saving grace is computers don't have the level of penetration that TVs do and high speed internet is still even further behind that.
Online journalism has the added benefit of instant gratification, instant feedback and adaptability. In the print world once it's on paper it's old.
sure, but first you have to jump over the words 'social network' for this to happen. I think that this is a great idea and some of what is put here should also hit the print. Then maybe even have some of the online monkeys featured in your mag (cept me I have a habit of rambling and breaking mirrors)( also I am not politically correct, I failed that class).
Anyways, then the world can see that there are lots of us socially responsible monkeys willing to do something to improve the quality of life for all not just some. Keep this rolling Lynne, you know from my emails to you my support is there
It can, if you proceed with caution. I find myself recommending FC to adult business students who have become used to interactivity in all their really reliable sources...including me. FC ought to be moreso. However, the danger with a "blogged" environment remains, as with talk radio, that not just the concerned and involved participate, but also the uninformed and compulsive malcontents. For this medium to maintain credibility as a source (and a forum), participants should cite their own credentials, or have them readily accessible to readers. Even at that we would all have to be straight up about it.
Better yesterday than today. Better today than tomorrow. You guys are late to class. Glad to see you finally join the camaderie of LinkedIn, Facebook, StartUpNation and a whole gang of early adopters.
Journalism and community; by introducing the vaguely French term rapporteur into my thinking 30+ years ago (UN's 7th Special Session, on the "New International Economic Order" ... the groundwork for what we now call "globalization") I came to an appreciation that I've been trying to share since.
Zero-sum games do not predispose folk to grok, so our techniques and methodologies are market-oriented, while computing for the public good is more about insight; "you can lead a person to grok, but you can't make them" is essentially false. Socrates showed that (Phaedrus?).
Fast Company should consider partnering with Fast Pitch! (arguably the best online business network for helping people promote their business). Here's a link to their site: http://www.fastpitchnetworking.com
It could, provided some of the following questions are answered:
1) Will members be given a share of ad revenues because their contribution is increasing page views?
2) The lines between information, decision and action are blurring online. So beyond being a place for good content, will this new space allow people to take key decisions and actions affecting their business?
3) How could the Long Tail model be incorporated in this space?
4) What does Fast Company stand for? Is it just going to be a smart marketer of content or will it find creative ways to embrace doing and advocating business that is green, socially responsible and equitable to all stakeholders without alienating less-enlightened business people?
5) Will the name Fast Company continue to be relevant for this space?
6) Beyond ad revenues, what might be other innovative business models that could benefit the entire community to sustain itself?
7) What could FC do to help individuals and organizations whose voices are not being heard but are important to realize the Creative Capitalism that Bill Gates talked about at Devos?
I think if it is well executed then yes, it can work. A company has to look at how to properly engage it's readership without it appearing that they are taking the ideas generated by the readership and using them exclusively without reward. There needs to be some feeling of ownership amongst the contributors as well.
Web 3.0 would be *mature*, it will be where stuff simply works right. The elusive quality of disruption will itself be commoditized.
It should be very apparent on the informational level. For example, if Fast Company succeeds as a platform for providing high-level UGC in bulk, the business content vertical would consolidate.
Disintermediating content in this way will hurt online advertising, but will be the fulfillment of the dream of the Internet as an educational medium.
There is a serious race for being an authority going on across the net. When winners are declared the average quality of consumed content will go WAY up. It will change the world as we know it.
Content needs to shift a bit from being news-oriented to tutorials and canonical information compilations.
Yes
your approach is classic crowdsourcing
having professional moderators to inject content, guidepost discussions and stimulate ideas and discussion. See this excellent (3 part) article by Monica Hamburg http://www.onedegree.ca/monica_hamburg/index.html
I think so and for a simple reason. It is easier to self-identify as someone who reads a publication than someone who evangelizes a brand. That, mixed with the fact that everyone wants to feel included, to own a part of something, and you have media outlets offering perhaps the best opportunity to build branded online communities.
I see myself as a Fast Company reader. I see myself in that demographic, not because I fit their demographic profile but because people who read it are people I identify with and share commonalities with. These are folks I'd want to hang out with. As much as I like a certain brand of whiskey, car, restaurant or vacation spot, there is a higher chance that people who aren't quite like me there, too.
This is why branded microcommunities can and will succeed, particularly if media outlets get on the ball and offer them.
If you change the orange links to black and just underline them. They are titles and we know how to use websites. Don't worry we'll know its a link. The orange is really harsh please tone it down. Also "Report Content" is a little too much, I mean it looks like it is the most important piece of information and really its the least.
Besides that you could work on your navigation for the social networking aspects. It's two lines jumbled with icons. Kinda goofy. Your footer is a good example of how your navigation could work.
Absolutely. You are already doing it! I think it's a brilliant idea and one that will no doubt succeed. I look forward to expanding my network through fastcompany.com.
My answer is a resounding YES! Wisdom, knowledge and ideas are available on an infinite scale, but our individual minds can only contain and process so much information at a time. Each individual has finite restrictions on what they can create determined by their talents, experiences, current knowledge, etc. When we combine our individual assets, by voluntarily working together as a group, there are no limits on what we can create. Therefore, we are all smarter and capable of so much more as WE than I. Steve Jobs, Richard Branson and other well known creative types in business have created enormous amounts of value by being smart enough to tap into the WE. This is the beginning of another WEBolution and I am glad to be a part of it! Johnny B.
I think so, but they shouldn't try to compete directly with Facebook and MySpace. Keep it proffesionally oriented. Stay away from ad-spamming people's pages. Try to keep it subtle. Most of all, it will take 12 - 18 months for this to play out. Don't blow all your money up front on crazy marketing schemes!
The challenge is to let the community sort itself out into subgroups. Although we're all interested in innovation and working with passion, some discussions are too beginners-level. Differences in experience will drive participation.
Yes, I believe it can. Well, I do now when I read how Fast Company is approaching the challenge! I'm impressed these folks have been working on it for year, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it goes.
can you take a horse to the water and force it to drink ?
Its the same thing, a genuine thirst for collective streams and crowd sourcing needs to be embedded in the ethos of the business model. Without that, they are doomed! With online communities the business gives control to the general public and thats a scary proposition !!
40 Total
February 8, 2008 at 7:14am by Robert Scoble
Yes, and when we launch http://www.fastcompany.tv on March 3rd you'll see just how we can mix the two. Already I'm using this service: http://www.qik.com/scobleizer to get feedback LIVE WHILE I FILM INTERVIEWS from the community.
February 8, 2008 at 9:03am by Richard Bray
Yes, a publication can blend journalism - news and comment - with community - people, in their public and private aspects - but the user interface has to be quick and simple, but capable of fairly rich communication. One click to a video reply to a group, for example.
February 8, 2008 at 10:50am by Ralphe Manzoni
Sure. Nowadays every publication has to start a conversation with our readers.
February 8, 2008 at 11:03am by Robert Safian
You better believe it!
February 8, 2008 at 11:24am by Gene Lu
Definitely, but you still have some pretty big hurdles to jump over. All those editors that were schooled in the days of 'old' will definitely present a challenge to such ideas.
Perhaps there's a way to educate them to make some tweaks to the ways they write by having talks / webinars / etc. Or maybe have a renowned editor (with similar schooling experience) to speak out about writing for the Internet? This way, you won't have such a big age gap between speaker and audience.
February 8, 2008 at 11:39am by Jeff Schmidt
probably not Bus Wk - but FastCompany already has the kind of community that takes these kinds of ideas seriously to begin with.
February 8, 2008 at 11:46am by Martin Nickel
I'm quite certain that you must blend the two to remain viable. The combined effect of the Industrial and Information ages has isolated each of us. Online social networking is simply re-allowing the interaction we all crave.
And as Microsoft's chief ad strategist Mike Galgon noted yesterday, journalism is "not worth zero". We need to be trust someone as an information resource.
Combining these two - probably across information sources - is a necessity.
February 8, 2008 at 11:47am by Saabira Chaudhuri
Yes. More and more traditional publications will find themselves having to change their models to do so. Media has become a participatory tool -- equipping one's audience to become actors and speak to an audience of their own is smart because it guarantees are far more engaged and consistent community.
February 8, 2008 at 11:53am by Daniel O'Shea
Of course!
Make it a 2 way conversation... and be sure to invite members as real "business partners", not just treat them as "content consumers".
February 8, 2008 at 11:55am by wood stock
Sure it can. No one trusts journalism as the sole source of the news. The benefits of the community keeps the media honest. An example of this is http://www.gabbr.com where news agency based content is posted and the community is able to post additional content to support or refute the news agencies. This adds more sides to the story and takes readers closer to "the truth".
February 8, 2008 at 12:15pm by Brad Bowman
Yes. Citizen Journalism is the next wave... especially since most people are obtaining news from the internet rather than printed publications. Look at what happened to KY Post ( http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20080101/BUSINESS/801010563/-1/RSS0... ).
February 8, 2008 at 12:37pm by Jon Gos
I'd say it can and it's going to have to. Their only saving grace is computers don't have the level of penetration that TVs do and high speed internet is still even further behind that.
Online journalism has the added benefit of instant gratification, instant feedback and adaptability. In the print world once it's on paper it's old.
February 8, 2008 at 12:39pm by Tim Tymchyshyn
sure, but first you have to jump over the words 'social network' for this to happen. I think that this is a great idea and some of what is put here should also hit the print. Then maybe even have some of the online monkeys featured in your mag (cept me I have a habit of rambling and breaking mirrors)( also I am not politically correct, I failed that class).
Anyways, then the world can see that there are lots of us socially responsible monkeys willing to do something to improve the quality of life for all not just some. Keep this rolling Lynne, you know from my emails to you my support is there
February 8, 2008 at 2:33pm by maz iqbal
Is the answer to be discovered or is it to be created? My view is that it is the latter - we, collectively, will determine the answer.
February 8, 2008 at 3:30pm by John Kelsey
It can, if you proceed with caution. I find myself recommending FC to adult business students who have become used to interactivity in all their really reliable sources...including me. FC ought to be moreso. However, the danger with a "blogged" environment remains, as with talk radio, that not just the concerned and involved participate, but also the uninformed and compulsive malcontents. For this medium to maintain credibility as a source (and a forum), participants should cite their own credentials, or have them readily accessible to readers. Even at that we would all have to be straight up about it.
February 8, 2008 at 5:11pm by Jeffery Turner
Is there anyone saying it's not possible? Those are the answers I want to read. "Of course it's possible," is my answer.
February 8, 2008 at 6:39pm by Russ Whitman
Depends on the willingness of the journalists to accept the community, and the community to realize it still needs good journalism......
February 8, 2008 at 6:42pm by Paul Denlinger
Why not?
At least it's worth giving it a try...
February 8, 2008 at 7:26pm by John McManus
Better yesterday than today. Better today than tomorrow. You guys are late to class. Glad to see you finally join the camaderie of LinkedIn, Facebook, StartUpNation and a whole gang of early adopters.
February 8, 2008 at 7:55pm by Surojit Niyogi
Sure - getting the community to provide content (the same way you posted this question and I answered it) is one great way to do so!
February 8, 2008 at 7:59pm by Ben Tremblay
Journalism and community; by introducing the vaguely French term rapporteur into my thinking 30+ years ago (UN's 7th Special Session, on the "New International Economic Order" ... the groundwork for what we now call "globalization") I came to an appreciation that I've been trying to share since.
Zero-sum games do not predispose folk to grok, so our techniques and methodologies are market-oriented, while computing for the public good is more about insight; "you can lead a person to grok, but you can't make them" is essentially false. Socrates showed that (Phaedrus?).
February 8, 2008 at 9:10pm by Becca Jean
Fast Company should consider partnering with Fast Pitch! (arguably the best online business network for helping people promote their business). Here's a link to their site: http://www.fastpitchnetworking.com
They stack up pretty well against the big boys too (Facebook, LinkedIn) as far as how they help business professionals. Compare: http://www.fastpitchnetworking.com/compare.cfm
My two cents... Good Luck with the new business. I look forward to participating!
February 8, 2008 at 10:15pm by Ragunath Padmanabhan
It could, provided some of the following questions are answered:
1) Will members be given a share of ad revenues because their contribution is increasing page views?
2) The lines between information, decision and action are blurring online. So beyond being a place for good content, will this new space allow people to take key decisions and actions affecting their business?
3) How could the Long Tail model be incorporated in this space?
4) What does Fast Company stand for? Is it just going to be a smart marketer of content or will it find creative ways to embrace doing and advocating business that is green, socially responsible and equitable to all stakeholders without alienating less-enlightened business people?
5) Will the name Fast Company continue to be relevant for this space?
6) Beyond ad revenues, what might be other innovative business models that could benefit the entire community to sustain itself?
7) What could FC do to help individuals and organizations whose voices are not being heard but are important to realize the Creative Capitalism that Bill Gates talked about at Devos?
February 8, 2008 at 11:40pm by Jason Shultz
I think if it is well executed then yes, it can work. A company has to look at how to properly engage it's readership without it appearing that they are taking the ideas generated by the readership and using them exclusively without reward. There needs to be some feeling of ownership amongst the contributors as well.
February 9, 2008 at 12:10am by Michelle Lee
Yes! This is a fantastic idea and right up my alley. Thank you for seeing the need and filling it.
February 9, 2008 at 4:39am by Steve Hunt
Can it create something better? Well, that's too subjective I think.
Can it create something useful and worthwhile to its existing community of readership whilst reaching out to a newer audience?
Sure - why not? This seems like a great start to me.
February 9, 2008 at 4:49am by yuval romik
Web 3.0 would be *mature*, it will be where stuff simply works right. The elusive quality of disruption will itself be commoditized.
It should be very apparent on the informational level. For example, if Fast Company succeeds as a platform for providing high-level UGC in bulk, the business content vertical would consolidate.
Disintermediating content in this way will hurt online advertising, but will be the fulfillment of the dream of the Internet as an educational medium.
There is a serious race for being an authority going on across the net. When winners are declared the average quality of consumed content will go WAY up. It will change the world as we know it.
Content needs to shift a bit from being news-oriented to tutorials and canonical information compilations.
February 9, 2008 at 4:59am by Akshay Shah
Graphology the science of hanwritting analysis isn't good to change yourself?
February 9, 2008 at 5:12am by miro slodki
Yes
your approach is classic crowdsourcing
having professional moderators to inject content, guidepost discussions and stimulate ideas and discussion. See this excellent (3 part) article by Monica Hamburg
http://www.onedegree.ca/monica_hamburg/index.html
Cheers
Miro
February 9, 2008 at 6:31am by Jason Falls
I think so and for a simple reason. It is easier to self-identify as someone who reads a publication than someone who evangelizes a brand. That, mixed with the fact that everyone wants to feel included, to own a part of something, and you have media outlets offering perhaps the best opportunity to build branded online communities.
I see myself as a Fast Company reader. I see myself in that demographic, not because I fit their demographic profile but because people who read it are people I identify with and share commonalities with. These are folks I'd want to hang out with. As much as I like a certain brand of whiskey, car, restaurant or vacation spot, there is a higher chance that people who aren't quite like me there, too.
This is why branded microcommunities can and will succeed, particularly if media outlets get on the ball and offer them.
February 9, 2008 at 7:15am by Kevin Milden
If you change the orange links to black and just underline them. They are titles and we know how to use websites. Don't worry we'll know its a link. The orange is really harsh please tone it down. Also "Report Content" is a little too much, I mean it looks like it is the most important piece of information and really its the least.
Besides that you could work on your navigation for the social networking aspects. It's two lines jumbled with icons. Kinda goofy. Your footer is a good example of how your navigation could work.
February 9, 2008 at 8:21am by Susan Murphy
Absolutely. You are already doing it! I think it's a brilliant idea and one that will no doubt succeed. I look forward to expanding my network through fastcompany.com.
February 9, 2008 at 9:39am by Jeremiah Owyang
Yes it can, and it can also learn more from it's audience, fuel research, ideas, and stories.
The successful business will learn how to get the community to be part of the content creation, and how to monetize on top of this.
February 9, 2008 at 9:45am by John Ballenger
My answer is a resounding YES! Wisdom, knowledge and ideas are available on an infinite scale, but our individual minds can only contain and process so much information at a time. Each individual has finite restrictions on what they can create determined by their talents, experiences, current knowledge, etc. When we combine our individual assets, by voluntarily working together as a group, there are no limits on what we can create. Therefore, we are all smarter and capable of so much more as WE than I. Steve Jobs, Richard Branson and other well known creative types in business have created enormous amounts of value by being smart enough to tap into the WE. This is the beginning of another WEBolution and I am glad to be a part of it! Johnny B.
February 9, 2008 at 10:30am by Michael Martine
Well, we'll find out, won't we? :-)
February 9, 2008 at 10:41am by Sunil Ciszewski
I think so, but they shouldn't try to compete directly with Facebook and MySpace. Keep it proffesionally oriented. Stay away from ad-spamming people's pages. Try to keep it subtle. Most of all, it will take 12 - 18 months for this to play out. Don't blow all your money up front on crazy marketing schemes!
February 9, 2008 at 11:19am by Theresa Quintanilla
The challenge is to let the community sort itself out into subgroups. Although we're all interested in innovation and working with passion, some discussions are too beginners-level. Differences in experience will drive participation.
February 9, 2008 at 11:26am by Graeme Thickins
Yes, I believe it can. Well, I do now when I read how Fast Company is approaching the challenge! I'm impressed these folks have been working on it for year, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it goes.
February 9, 2008 at 11:53am by Peter Dawson
can you take a horse to the water and force it to drink ?
Its the same thing, a genuine thirst for collective streams and crowd sourcing needs to be embedded in the ethos of the business model. Without that, they are doomed! With online communities the business gives control to the general public and thats a scary proposition !!
February 9, 2008 at 12:38pm by Steve Wilhelm
yes.