Advice for About.com

I've seen the announcement for about.com's changes on a bunch of new's sites. I didn't think it was extremely news-worthy until I chewed and spit some of Susan Mernit's thoughts regarding it. About.com has changed their look and feel and started using ad technology from tacoda. I did a quick perusal of the site and it still looks like they are serving google ads, even though they supposedly switched to tacoda's contextual ad program. Maybe I am missing something here - or maybe it just isn't in effect yet - or maybe they plan on using both google adsense and tacoda - or maybe the tacoda software works in the background with google's ads. Anyone know?

Susan has some interesting commentary on about.com and their strategy.

A year ago, pre-new regime, an executive no longer there explained in detail that About.com's strategy was to be discovered as top-line results in as many search queries as possible, particularly on Google.Now Peter Horan, new CEO of the unit, is directing that the site have a make-over "in an effort to draw in more readers and build brand identity," as the Reuters story says.

I do know that they are a Primedia Property, which is primarily a magazine media company, that was as late as a few months ago (or still is) struggling on the financial side of things. I know that they recently sold sprinks, their keyword and content matching technology to google. I thought there was an agreement to use Google's programs across their properties. It does look like they are a bit confused on which way to run or who to turn to. But, who knows. I am not on the inside.

I do think about.com has an excellent opportunity to do something big. Long ago, I applied to be an about guide for soccer and a few other topics. I was rejected. Now I blog. I get traffic. And if I advert-ed up my blog, I could probably make some money. What I don't have is the advantage of the about.com directory traffic that about bloggers/writers get. And unless I suddenly acquire a boatload of readers, there isn't any chance I'll be retiring or even living off of my weblog income. I think about.com could embrace people like me (not reject me) and the rest of the weblogging community and help us make some money/gain some notoriety, etc and make themselves some money and retain the crown of "publishing for and by the people.", albeit centralized.

The about.com model was that [online] publishing is now a much lower-cost business than it used to be [offline]. However, they haven't adapted to new technologies and new realities. Specifically, they haven't adopted to blogs and bloggers. Publishing (not journalism) is now a no-cost / low-cost business because of tools like blogger and typepad.

People like Jason Calacanis and Nick Denton have realized this and are building their own little versions of about.com one topic at a time. It is virtually no cost to them to add more topics, except the cost of acquiring talent and bandwidth costs. Nonetheless, they aren't doing much more than what about is doing, just on a smaller scale. And I'd imagine that about.com has hired a writer for all of the topics that they have figured to be profitable. For example, they probably don't have a writer dedicated to writing about 1967 red corvettes. So, if they don't have a writer for that, then they obviously don't have content for that. Neither will Calacanis or Denton (although Denton's kinja is a step in the right direction). Therefore, they don't have readers that are clicking on their content for that and they don't have advertisers that are paying for that. But the advertisers do exist.

So, how should they address this issue? How do they expand their content and associated ad-space without increasing costs (head count)?

This may almost be too smart of an idea. I hesitate posting it up here. Given all of my other projects, I wouldn't be able to develop it, anyways.

Three Steps:
1. Syndicate Weblog Content to about.com directory. (acquiring content is now dissociated from costs of acquiring writers - of course, permission from bloggers is necessary.)
2. Develop a decentralized Journalistic editorial community with a centralized system to store weblog post evaluations. (Not all weblog posts are worthy of being associated with about.com. So, they need a team to review, fact-check, etc- Keep costs down by only fact checking posts that have a lot of readers or links to it.)
3. Compensate webloggers and editors based on ad revenue generated from their writing/editorial activities. (To make it all work, the people gotta get cash. Otherwise, people (writers and readers) will flock to sites like weblogsinc and denton's empire in the making where the writer is rewarded - instead.)

If anyone wants to know more from me, they'll have to pay me consulting fees. Feel free to chew and spit. There is obviously a lot of tools/technology to build as well as people to 'move' to make something like this happen. It may be impossible and there probably is some huge flaw in my thinking, given that I have no publishing experience. Or maybe it'll evolve this way without about.com. There is a lot of entrepreneurial activity in the repurposing of blog content (short list: feedster, waypath, blogdex, technorati, kinja, bloglines, pubsub). Somebody with cash and something to lose, like about.com, could make this happen a lot quicker, though.

Sidenote: I was also rejected by Calacanis when he was looking for writers for his social software weblog. (Justifiably so due to conflict of interest). And Judith Meskill was a better choice anyways.

Comments

[susan mernit]

Great post! Let's talk more--phone calls are good--Susan

[Matt]

Interesting post.

[Scott Allen]

[DISCLAIMER: I'm the About.com Entrepreneurs Guide]

Not a bad idea, Peter, but About isn't the place to do it.

As you pointed out, there are advertisers willing to advertise about 1967 red Corvettes. How many click-throughs are there, though? How many searches are there even? Overture shows none (which means it was less than 25 last month), and only 3,124 searches last month for "1967 Corvette". Not enough to pay someone to write ONLY about 1967 Corvettes.

But they do have someone writing about them. a) they own Vette, Corvette Fever, and Motor Trend, and articles from there come up in searches on About, and b) there's a "Vintage Cars" category (it's open - maybe you should apply!). My point is not about this particular topic -- my point is that just about everything you can come up with falls under a broader topic. Does that mean that every micro-topic gets covered? No. We read what addresses reader interest.

Bottom line, though, is that About is using blog tools, and we have a blog-like style, but the content is still significantly different from other blogging -- not better or worse, just different. We have editorial guidelines we have to follow. We have style guides we have to follow. We focus more on writing about what our readers want to read about, rather than necessarily what we want to write about. And accountability is higher. When I write an article criticizing Entrepreneur Magazine over their attempts to trademark the word "entrepreneur", I get a letter from their President.

But I don't think of it as getting paid to blog. I have another blog where I can write pretty much whatever I want. I think of it as being a journalist, and using blog tools to help keep the content fresh.

So there may be a place to do what you're suggesting, Peter, but About isn't it.

[Peter Caputa]

Scott. Thanks for the thorough response. From my email conversations with Matt (about.com editor), I've realized that this idea isn't the best one for about.com given about.com's goal of creating 'content that people want' as opposed to 'content that writers want to write about'.

That is the 'brand image' that about is trying(and doing) to portray. If that is where the money is for online content now, that is the image that about.com needs to protect.

I do think there are a lot of bloggers that bridge the gap, such as yourself at obn.com between writing for others and writing for themselves. Even though I am writing about what I want to write about, I write to connect with people. So, I am hoping that what I write resonates with people.

Blogging provides me with feedback on whether that is happening by how many links and comments I get. So, Apparently I (and you) are doing pretty good.

Ultimately, I see blogging as providing the tools to anyone that knows how to write to be a freelance journalist. Everyone can have their own brand. I can be a mechanical engineer or hair dresser by day and a writer by night. Everyone has their own press and it costs $14/month.

I see blogging as a power shift in the publishing industry. However, there are a lot of issues to work out. Namely, Who plays the editorial role and how? And how is money made?

I think these issues should be addressed by anyone that wants to be in the content business in the near future, about.com included.

[Scott Allen]

$14/month? Mines less than $20 a year, including the domain! ;-)

And yes, I agree.

In re: Calacanis and Denton, check out the sparks that flew back and forth between them this weekend at the New York Bloggers event. My co-author, David Teten, was there and took copious notes:

New York Bloggers Event—-2004.05.02

[Peter Caputa]

I've seen. It is all a PR stunt, so that we'll talk about it. Do you want to start a pissing contest? We could drive traffic too.

I know I am paying more than normal. I got too many other projects going on to worry about hosting movable type.

I like the convenience of using typepad, anyways. I'll pay the premium. I have a money tree out back, anyways.