In short, Topix.net bought Topix.com and in the process decided to re-evaluate their product, brand, etc. According to their CEO, they asked themselves the question: “What do you do when your success … sucks?“. So what changed?

According to USA Today (~ sister company to Topix): “Topix.com homes in on citizen journalists.”

Who?

Citizen journalists, you know, people “who post stories and pictures online” (USA Today). Hmm, if they’re painting with such broad strokes, I don’t think they’ve missed anyone I know. Even my parents “post stories” by email.

It looks like all Topix wants is to recruit volunteers to post and moderate posts about their local communities. Why didn’t they say so?

So thank you, Doctor Gonzo (Hunter S. Thompson), for providing us with a term that’s much clearer and less susceptible to hype: gonzo journalism.

If I’d written all the truth I knew for the past ten years, about 600 people – including me – would be rotting in prison cells from Rio to Seattle today. Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity in the context of professional journalism.

Tags: gonzo, journalism, social, UGC, user generated content, web2.0

gonzo, journalism, social, UGC, user generated content, web2.0

They in this case is no other than Yahoo’s BoD. The big news is that Yahoo’s CFO, Susan Decker, gets promoted, while quite a few senior people leave. Here’s the details:

Sources told CNBC’s Jim Goldman that Lloyd Braun, head of Yahoo’s media and entertainment group, was asked to leave the company on Tuesday morning after Yahoo first suggested he take a lesser role. Senior Vice President John Marcom, who ran Yahoo’s International Business operations, also was asked to leave. Yahoo also announced that Chief Operating Officer Daniel Rosensweig, once considered a rival to Decker to succeed Semel, will leave the company in March.

Yahoo posted a 37% drop in quarterly profit and its long-term options don’t look too good either. MySpace and YouTube, are effectively Google’s playground now, so there isn’t a quick M&A fix for Yahoo.

On top of that I’m always suspicious of companies run by CFOs, especially when they’re in a high-growth market. My gut feel is that CFOs work best with milk cows. I already feel sorry for Jumpcut and del.icio.us.

Tags: google, jumpcut, online, social, video, yahoo, youtube

google, jumpcut, online, social, video, yahoo, youtube

Gizmodo did a pretty good job of coming up with a name of the merger between Google Video and Youtube. They even went so far as to create a logo. I love it.

Tags: google, google video, gootube, online, social, video, youtube

google, google video, gootube, online, social, video, youtube

Now, TechCrunch posts that there are rumors that Google’s going to acquire Youtube.

The Wall Street Journal is now reporting this as well, saying “Google Inc. is in talks to acquire popular video-sharing site YouTube Inc. for roughly $1.6 billion, according to a person familiar with the matter. The discussions are still at a sensitive stage and could well break off, this person says.”

It’s pretty obvious that Youtube have the FOR SALE BY OWNER sign on their front lawn. Their burnrate is in the millions per month which is close to the days of Bubble 1.0. Let’s see what happens.

Tags: google, jumpcut, mashup, online, social, video, yahoo, youtube

google, jumpcut, mashup, online, social, video, yahoo, youtube

When I met Jumpcut earlier this summer, they had 11 employees, had raised $1 million in seed money, and were trying to close another round. Perhaps it has to do with Jumpcut’s fairly advanced experimentation with Flash, led by former Macromedia developer Ryan Cunningham.

When I proposed buying Jumpcut might be a good competitive edge for one of the online video sharing sites or portals, CEO Mike Folgner told me he’d wasn’t looking to settle down with just one company, rather to build partnerships with everybody. Ah well…I can understand how a Yahoo acquisition offer could be persuasive.

Guess she’s right. Only problem is once Yahoo buys you there isn’t much AGILE development anymore. There’s some internal competition to boot. UC Berkley and Yahoo have already been developing a their own video mashup site. I guess they simply want to take Jumpcut off the market before Google buys them. Or, God forbid they become a real hit like Youtube!

Tags: editing, google, jumpcut, mashup, mixing, online, social, video, yahoo

editing, google, jumpcut, mashup, mixing, online, social, video, yahoo

I do have a degree in Journalism so someone might consider me a professional, ergo, no citizen journalist. A recent article on the subject however defined citizen journalism like this: The intent of this participation is to provide independent, reliable, accurate, wide-ranging and relevant information that a democracy requires.

In terms of the forms it takes, J. D. Lasica defines the following types:

1. Audience participation (such as user comments attached to news stories, personal blogs, photos or video footage captured from personal mobile cameras, or local news written by residents of a community
2. Independent news and information Websites
3. Full-fledged participatory news sites
4. Collaborative and contributory media sites
5. Other kinds of “thin media” (e.g. email newsletters)
6. Personal broadcasting sites (video or audio)

Citizen journalism isn’t without its critics. In his 2005 review, Tom Grubisich went through ten citizen journalism sites and found them lacking in content and far from the ideal. Maybe the solution is to go all gonzo like Doctor Gonzo (Hunter Stockton Thompson).

Here’s a few selected articles for further reading:

• Grubisich, T – Grassroots journalism: Actual content vs. shining ideal.
• Lasica, J. D. – What is Participatory Journalism?
• Maher, V. – Citizen Journalism is Dead

Tags: business, journalism, social, UGC, user generated content, web2.0

business, journalism, social, UGC, user generated content, web2.0

The guys at BusinessLogs have come up with something of a “theory” to explain the value the end-user gets by contributing to a site. The question that’s being asked is:

If you spend X units of time/creativity/effort do you get 3X units of pleasure/entertainment/utility in return, or do you only get 1.2X or .6X?

Here’s a snippet from the post.

…the most successful sites (based on user generated content) were the ones that gave the most bang for the buck, or, the most pleasure/utility back to the user. If I put in X units of effort and a site gives me back 2X units of entertainment, that’s good. If I put in X units of effort and get back 20X units of entertainment, that’s much better. On the flip side, if I put in X units of effort and get back 1/8th X units of entertainment, that means the X units of effort I initially put in were a complete waste of time, or, the site took my content and gave me squat in return.

I buy some of the utalitarian aspects of the theory. I’m not at all sure about the evaluations that they’ve made. Here’s the short list:

• Myspace: for each unit of effort, you get 50(!) of pleasure
• YouTube: a unit of effort gets you 20-40 units of pleasure
• Squidoo: 8-10 units of effort only get you 15 units of pleasure

I bet Seth Godin is furious about this assessment (he’s the guy behind Squidoo!). My Diablo lens at Squidoo is only behind Google in terms of the traffic it sends to my Diablo 3 blog.

Tags: myspace, social, UGC, user generated content, web2.0, youtube

myspace, social, UGC, user generated content, web2.0, youtube