Archives For Web 2.0

The Tyranny of Numbers

September 15, 2008 — 8 Comments

Why is it, in 2008, that blogs in Australia are still not considered mainstream by many, still derided by the media and rarely breaking big news, unlike blogs in the United States, where blogging is mainstream, blogs are often the first port of call for breaking and big news, and where the line between blogging and the media has become so blurred that it’s difficult at the top to tell them apart?

We know that there has never been a break out blog in Australia that targets Australian news. We have great bloggers in many fields, and are strongly represented in the blogosphere, perhaps statistically more so than our population would dictate, and yet our blogging success stories tend to be global stories. Your Darren Rowse or your Yaro Staracks, even the likes of Tim Blair, News Corp deal aside, relied on an American audience more than an Australian one. There are prominent bloggers in Australia who do write for an Australian audience and I don’t seek to belittle what they do, but where’s our Andrew Sullivan, our Drudge or Daily Kos. Why don’t we see our own version of Michelle Malkin on TV, or a Robert Scoble turn up to the opening of an envelope?

There are several schools of thought. That we are behind the United States is a given, and I’ve usually put the figure at 5 years. The blogosphere here feels like the blogosphere in the US in around 2003, prior to the 2004 Presidential election where blogging came of age. There’s the psychological argument that Australian’s aren’t as open as our American friends, that we are more reserved and less likely to publish what we think at will that has stifled our progress. There is a good case against heritage media, who takes nearly every opportunity to bag blogs and blogging, fearful of competition as their glory days pass and the end of their business models are nigh. But there’s one factor we can’t change, one factor that continues to stifle local growth in blogging, and that is numbers.

Numbers dictate that there is not a big enough audience in Australia to sustain mass locally focused and profitable blogging.

It’s why I’ve never launched an Australian focused blog. Some people were suggesting to me last year that there needs to be a TechCrunch for Australia. My response was that there’s not a big enough audience here to sustain such a site. I’ve looked in past years at other vertical spaces, and I keep finding the same problem: great idea, audience is too small.

The reality is that for most wanting to make blogging a full time living in Australia, they have to target an overseas audience.

There are some exceptions. There’s the Auto blog guy who is suppose to be turning 6 figures on a car blog on a .com.au address. I’d bet though that most of his traffic wasn’t Australian. There’s people like Bronwen Clune and Paul Montgomery, who have turned their blogging come tech plays into reasonable money earners, through a combination of tapping into some premium advertising and working in desirable niche spaces. Allure Media’s Gawker titles are going ok the last I heard, but they had a couple of advantages: a pile of money to hire journalists up front, and a redirect deal with Nick Denton that saw Australian traffic hitting the US sites ending up on the Australian sites. Crikey is going where no Australian blogging network has gone before, buying in some great talent and traffic to give them a solid start out of the gate.

But that’s pretty close to it. I may have missed a few, so apologies if I’ve missed you (and please don’t be offended) but I can say with clear certainty that at most I’ve missed is less than I can count fingers on my hands.

No amount of spin changes the fact that we have a small market with limited opportunities. I don’t believe that this means that some won’t make it, nor do I believe that it would be impossible to build a blog today and score the breakthrough we collectively need, but it is that much harder for us all. We’re better of respecting that the tyranny of numbers works against us, and being more creative in response.

Sign up here.

This was run in Sydney recently, and looks like a great event. Dates are 3-5 October.

The Inquisitr at 4 months

September 9, 2008 — 11 Comments

September 5 marked the 4 month mark for The Inquisitr, and although I’m a little late with this post, some updated figures and observations.

We closed August with 420,000 page views, and this is before I noticed that Google Analytics was under-counting, likely due to page load times. Based on the top leaderboard spot, the figure was around the 460,000 mark.

It was a very good month, and I doubt very much if we’ll repeat it, but certainly I’m hopeful of a result above the 200,000 mark for September, hopefully more again. 1 week in and we’re just shy of 70,000 page views, so we’re off to a solid start, even if it’s not spectacular.

RSS subscriptions remain an issue, an under performing aspect of the site. Around the 3000 mark across the four feeds (I didn’t total them for the post), but off from a peak in early August, but slowly climbing again.

Technorati rank has been tough. The indexing went down for our two biggest days in August, so we missed what should have been a huge boost, and we malingered just shy of the top 2000 mark for nearly a week. Since then its started to move again, but as I suspected, the closer we got to the top 1000, the slower the rank improves as you need more and more links to climb the ladder. 1692nd as I write this, with just short of 2 months to get to the top 1000 based on knowing that the stats Technorati use are 6mths worth of links…basically, as we add incoming links, we can only go up until 6 months, when it will level out somewhat.

On the advertising front, we’ve signed a 6 month agreement with an ad supplier with the ad units to start in the next day or two. More details once the ads are up. Unfortunately it’s US inventory only, but if they deliver the rates they’re talking about, The Inquisitr should break even, and maybe even turn a small profit for the first time, not allowing for me to get paid out of that 🙂

Overall: at the 3 month mark I was starting to stress a bit, not because the site wasn’t performing well, but because it wasn’t performing well enough to cover costs. Ask me in a month and I’ll tell you if those fears were unfounded, but JR + Meieli have rallied around the site, and collectively we’re getting more things right now than before. It’s getting close…..

Update: I should have added, if only Awstats figures were actual page views, because we broke 1 million page views according to Awstats in August…I know, I wish 🙂

I’ve seen similar figures before, but they still amaze me. The Oz reports that job ads are down in Australia, a sure sign of a slowing economy. But the interesting part is in the divide between online and print. According to the numbers, weekly job advertisements in Australian newspapers averaged 15,105 a week in August, vs 234,009 online per week.

You did read that right. 234,009 jobs a week online, 15,105 in print. The online jobs market in Australia is now 15.6x larger than the print market. Print now delivers only 6% of all job ads in Australia where as ten years ago the figure would have been close to 100%.

Seek.com.au, the nations leading job site, launched in March 1998.

We know that real estate and cars sales are heading in the same direction. Niche publications target the general classifieds market (Trading Post/ Quokka). This is the bread and butter of newsprint, and it’s disappearing in our life time in Australia, and strangely enough, at a likely quicker rate than the United States.

Our newspapers are slimmer and leaner than their American cousins, thanks to the consolidation in the late 80s, early 90s, and news.com.au and the Fairfax titles rank well in terms of internet traffic, a small saving grace. And yet, denied the one thing that has kept them going for so long, there will be pain and blood letting ahead.

For love or money

August 23, 2008 — 15 Comments

I’ve already been accused of drinking the kool aid this week at Gnomedex, and there might just be an ounce of truth in that, but I really don’t care. In the last year and a half I’ve attended what many would consider to be among the biggest tech events on the planet (having done both a Steve Jobs keynote and a Steve Ballmer monkey dance among others) but in terms of substance, Gnomedex is the best so far.

It’s not as shiny as other events, nor does it have A-list speakers, but it’s the substance that counts. Where in the world could I get 30 minutes with the guy running Icanhascheezeburger, and finish the day with the Dancing Guy giving a dance with most of the crowd on stage. Speakers aside, it’s the mix of people that count. I shouldn’t say this, but unlike your typical Valley event where everyone wants to be your friend because they have something to sell, here people don’t have a hidden agenda (on the most part) so you see the real, non-shallow side.

I’ve met up with some really great people. I started the week with Christian Anderson from Jobster. Relatively unknown, but proof positive that PR isn’t evil. I caught up with the Grooveshark team, including the extremely talented SB Spalding. I finally met Drew Olanoff, who is perhaps one of the most energetic, genuine and awesome guys I’ve ever had the privilege to spend time with. I’ve shared a drink or two with Brian Eisenberg, a guy I only knew from Twitter but has turned out to be great company. Brian Solis, the champion of PR 2.0 has a great taste in champagne, and deserves his status as one of the leading PR guys in the Valley. Eric Rice, who sometimes scares me, but is intensely intelligent, and always adds something unique to the mix. I even caught up with Jeremy Wright, my former business partner, who was last seen having a serious drink at tonights (Fridays) party, and adding to the record of strangest things that can happen, we may even renew a business relationship in the future. Of course I can’t forget the world famous Liz Strauss. I remember she came into b5media years ago (I presume she’s no longer there, but I have no idea, we were just hosting her blog) and I can remember saying that I just didn’t get anything she did, but I knew she was the best at it. Years and wisdom have improved my understand of her appeal, and she’s as good in person as she presents herself online.

I’ve missed a pile of people on that list, so my apologies upfront, because there are way too many people to mention. A shout out to Chris Pirillo is due and just, because not only has he delivered the event, he somehow manages to be a nice guy despite the glare and attention he is constantly under. It could of course be a very good act, but even his employees sing his praises, and I’ve not once noted any insincerity yet, and I’d consider myself a reasonable judge on such matters.

What I really love about this event is that most people I’ve met do what they do because they love it. Sure, some make a lot of money along the way, but there’s a genuine passion here that isn’t focused on a Google buyout or their next $10 million round. For me today, it supports the notion that doing what I do for the love of doing it, not just the money, or even for money alone, is not a lost cause. Indeed, it will help drive me to continue doing what I’m doing. An echo chamber of sorts perhaps, but sometimes you have to fly half way across the world to drink that koolaid to keep yourself going. I can only hope that in 12 months I’m in the financial situation to afford another trip back.

Awesome Sauce

August 15, 2008 — 7 Comments

When The Inquisitr hit the 3 month mark I knew we had to lift our game to survive. The site has always done well, and our Technorati stats are proof positive of that, but when you have a writing staff of 2.5 on top of myself, the economics become more interesting. I had originally set out to pay the sites writers on a combination of set rate and traffic performance, but the indicators I’d planned on using didn’t pan out. Hence I ended up paying them a set rate every month. The second month I must admit to flinching, but I knew they were doing a good job, even if the revenue wasn’t keeping up. The 3rd month was up, but not enough.

The good news is a couple of weeks into the 3rd month that our traffic is through the roof. We’d had 2 solid weeks leading to the last couple of days, a couple of 5 figure days in terms of traffic, but the better news was even the quiet days were twice the size they were even a month back. Then there was bigfoot. I’m still waiting on the final stats for the second day of Bigfoot traffic, but it’s likely 2 days of 100k+. I’m also still waiting on the latest RSS sub rates as I post this, but we put on a solid 500+ additional subscribers on the main feed the first day of the surge, and hopefully something close the second day.

TechWinter wrote a post August 8 (currently throwing errors, but link here) suggesting that the traffic was in some sort of terminal decline, but he used Compete, and it’s a seriously flawed way of tracking any site, let alone ours. That the site opened on a bang I’ve written about before, mostly due to a Digg day 3. The following 4 weeks were down, because unfortunately Digg traffic doesn’t convert into long term readers. Since that time though we’ve been on a steady climb north, and there has never been a climb down from about the 3-4 week mark in.

Will the site make it? Still can’t tell. The bar is set high for The Inquisitr, mostly due to the investment in a writing staff. Standalone without any paid staff it would certainly put some food on my table now, but on the same token could I have grown it that far without the support of our writing team? I would be lying to say we’re out of the woods yet, but the trends are positive and if it does fail, we’ll go down fighting. Alone, considering Technorati rank, traffic and even revenue, it’s a minimum $20-30k sale on Sitepoint, but possibly pushing $50k or higher. There’s great value there, and hopefully it will start paying for itself soon.

Google Australia has launched Google Street View locally (via Simon Goudie). Privacy issues perhaps, but letter boxes have all been blurred out. Here’s our house in Google Street View:

burke

Here’s a close up of the letter box

burke

Interestingly, they’ve really gone all out in the coverage of Street View. My old house complete with sales sign (so it would have to have been in December/ January), notably in Australind, Western Australia. You can’t really get more regional than Australind

6 ruby fairway australind - Google Maps

note though that although they have the house, the satelitte images are still woefully old for that part of the world

6 ruby fairway australind - Google Maps

The shift is on

August 4, 2008 — Leave a comment

In Online Musical, the Mad Doctor Is In NY Times.

One case, but further proof that content can be sold online first. It will be far from the last.

I don’t know why I still care. I guess that some small part of me still believes that perhaps Gabe is interested in impartial news and tracking the big stories as opposed to just TechCrunch. However tonight (my time) proves once again how Techmeme is failing the tech community.

As I write this, at 9pm AEST, or 4am PDT Saturday, the biggest story by far in the tech and blogging community is Site Meter enabled sites blocking Internet Explorer users. I don’t use Site Meter, but many do, including the Gawker Media blogs. The Inquisitr had it first and others followed. Here’s the state of play as I write this. Note that both Wired and Mashable have the story, and Mashable links to The Inquisitr.

sitemeter - Google News

Google Blog search has even more blogs

sitemeter - Google Blog Search

And yet Techmeme has nothing. If it isn’t on TechCrunch, it isn’t news. And you can include Mashable and Wired in the not counting list

Techmeme

a close up of the most recent stories

Techmeme

I know, false hope.

The results of the Australian Governments first test of internet censorship have been released today (pdf) and The Australian, as usual, runs the Government spin:

THE federal Government will embark on the next step of its internet filtering strategy after initial trials proved successful, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said….

In the past, one of the main drawbacks of the technology has been web performance degradation but the government now says the trial showed that ISP-level filtering technology had significantly improved compared with technology used in a 2005 trial.

“It is very encouraging to see that the industry has made significant progress with ISP filtering products and we are heartened that many of the products tested are commercially available, with many of them already deployed overseas,” Senator Conroy said in a statement….

Senator Conroy said the tests proved that the web filtering technology could be expanded to a wider base.

A side note: I always love it how some mainstream journalists here preach that bloggers don’t research a story properly then run a Government press release without actually reading the paper or providing critical analysis on it. But I digress.

The ACMA paper looked only at the technology in use and did not consider the cost of any filtering technology, a critical consideration when implementing broadscale internet censorship in Australia.

Speed

The paper finds that filters in place, but not actually filtering content (bizarre test, I know, but the results are telling) resulted in the following degredation of service (by which you would presume meant reduction in data, hence speed):

below 30 per cent for all products; and
below 10 per cent for five of the six products.

In short form: even when not filtering content, the filters for all products saw a decrease in internet speeds of up to 30%. For 5 products, the speed reduction of up to 10%.

When actively filtering content, these figures change again

2% for one product;
in the range 22 to 30 per cent for three products; and
in excess of 75 per cent for two products.

Translated: one product only caused a 2% drop, 3 products caused speed reductions in the vacinity of 22-30%, two products a staggering greater than 75%. Notably the product that causes the least speed reduction is not named nor related to the success in filtering results (which we are about to get to), so it may have a lower impact on speed, but it may have higher rates of failure in actually censoring content.

Effectiveness of Blocking

ACMA found the following success rates in filtering nominated content:

above 0.88 for all products; and
0.94 or above for three products.

88% accuracy on all products, half with 94% or above.

How those figures relate to the next set I’m not sure, because this set indicates the failure to block nominated content

below 0.08 for all products; and
below 0.03 for four products.

Maybe it’s buried further into the paper, but if the base is 88% yes, and the fail rate worst figure is 8%, where’s the missing 4%?

Overblocking may be a new term to most, but it means censoring content that isn’t meant to be censored. The results

The previous trial reported a difference in the level of overblocking (that is, the proportion of content that was blocked that should not have been blocked) between the most and the least accurate filter products in the range six to 62 per cent. The corresponding levels measured in the current trial varied across a significantly smaller range?¢‚Ǩ‚Äùbetween one and eight per cent, with most falling under three
per cent. The median overblocking rate was significantly improved from the previous trial.

Yes, somewhere between 1-8% of perfectly legal sites were blocked in the trials. But that’s ok, because it use to be 6-62%.

Here in lies the problem with censorship: once it starts, it rarely stops, and in this case, innocent content providers and online retailers may find themselves blocked for no other reason that the technical failure of the Government’s plan.

Conclusion

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is hell bent on selling a rabid, three legeed dog no matter what the cost to ordinary Australian’s.

22-30% reductions in internet access speeds are not acceptable at a time where Australia lags behind most of the world in Internet access connection speeds. Consider also that our distance from the rest of the world delivers us slower access times anyway, where as my 14mbps connection in Melbourne does not deliver the same results as the same connection in the United States, simply due to the time data takes to travel across the world (or lag time).

That censorship will no longer deliver 75% drop in speed doesn’t make 22-30% acceptable. Any cut in internet speeds places Australia at a further disadvantage in the information age.

Success rates of 90% in filtering trials are irrelevant on two fronts. First, the testing considered a list of sites to be blocked, but as anyone sitting behind a corporate firewall knows, or even in China for that matter, it’s extremely easy to bypass content filtering. Those that want the content the Government is so keen to censor will still get at it. Secondly, it is NOT acceptable that in a democratic, free country that the Government deems it acceptable to implement technologies that censors any amount of legal content, let alone up to 8% of it. Who are these future victims of accidental Australian Government censorship? will they be compensated? Would we accept the Government accidentally taxing millions of Australians, or denying them social services? Imagine being removed from Government databases, to be a non-entity in your own country. The outrage even in a handful of cases would be loud and long, and yet our Government is planning to accidentally block Australians doing their business online from being seen by other Australians.

Censorship is always flawed and always has unintended victims. The victims of Senator Conroy’s bloody mindedness will be every internet user in Australia, through increased costs, lower speeds, and for some of them, to be denied their legal rights in what is suppose to be a free country.