Archive for March, 2007

User generated content, what are they talking about?

March 23, 2007

One of the major components of the Web 2.0 revolution is User Generated Content or UGC to its friends. But while it undoubtedly adds colour and content to the traditional editorial on a site, just how useful is it?

The main problem with UGC is that nobody knows what the content is about. It’s difficult enough getting editorial teams to classify content consistently, so asking users to do this is unlikely to work. Of course we’ve seen the concept of tagging work brilliantly on the likes of Flickr and del.icio.us but even here there are a lot of inconsistencies. People don’t all use the same language, have the same idea about what the content is about and, some just can’t spell.

The upshot of this is twofold. Firstly, its pretty difficult to automatically connect editorial content about a subject to its UGC cousin. There’s no consistent tagging or mapping to enable this to happen automatically. So for example if I were reading an article about tagging, it would be great to see all the member blog posts that were related to that subject.

The second is more important to publishers which is that there is no easy way to target advertising at the readers of UGC. So despite paying $580M for MySpace, NewsCorp couldn’t run any of their conventional display advertising on the site. There was no targeting available other than the basic site demographic. They have solved their commercial problem in the short term by doing a $900M deal with Google to run AdWords on the site. Big advertisers though who want to reach the MySpace audience don’t want to do this through AdWords.

They want their brands and imagery associated with quality, targeted content, not mixed in with all the random ads in AdSense for unrelated products. If you have any doubt about this, have a look at the ads that get served against your emails in GMail for seemingly unrelated products. It’s a great game and depending on the subject matter you can expect to get some spectacular results including one example I found that combined British Airways, satellite TV, the best tennis grip and lingerie. I’ll leave it to you to work out what the email was about…

So what is the answer? Lots of sites have introduced tags as navigation devices either in clouds such as or associated to the stories as on my fovourite site ZDNet. The holy grail is to automatically tag all content consistently across the site whether its editorial, UGC or vendor content such as whitepapers. That creates a consistent way to connect content together and also to identify what its about so as to be able to target advertising.

The new search engine on ZDNet, provided by UltraKnowledge is designed to tag all content consistently regardless of where it originated from. At the moment it is only indexing the editorial content but soon it will be rolled out to the vendor and UGC areas. At that point, it should start to provide the targeting the publishers require to make money from inventory which was previously low value, run of site.

Innovation and marketing

March 13, 2007

Dr Mike LynchI attended the first day of the Innovation and Growth Forum today and it was interesting to contrast the style of both the event and the presenters with the Always On event I went to in NY recently. The events are slightly different with the AO event being pitched squarely at the media business and I+G covering a much wider range of industries. But both are a mix of entrepreneurs, VC’s and industry luminaries getting together to raise money/share ideas/sell products/network with each other.

The overall styles were pretty different, there was no “Bloggers Bullpen” in the Hilton Park Lane which I was quite disappointed about and the polo shirts, sports jackets and chinos were swapped for dark suits and ties. The formats were different too, the US event was fast and punchy, 6 minute slots to sell your story/idea/company. The UK event was much more level headed, more English, with civilised panel discussions and 35 minute vendor showcases running in parallel with the main event.

I was trying to work out the if this difference was was a result of the structure of the event or a US/UK cultural thing when the keynote speaker, Dr Mike Lynch (pictured) from Autonomy hit the nail on the head. He recounted a story about a “Dragons Den” type session he had attended earlier in the year. Two groups of tech students, one from MIT and one from Cambridge had to pitch their technology business ideas to a panel. The US team pitched with a great marketing story but very little substance to their product offering, the UK team gave a very convincing pitch around their product but in a very dry, detailed way.

At the end of the pitches, the moderator asked the panel who they would back with their money. Mike observed that the best way to do that would be to put the two teams together to create a team that was product focused and had the ability to sell that to the market. You have to have a great product and great marketing to stand any chance of competing. He was very concerned that UK tech start-ups lack the marketing skills to build great companies despite having excellent technology. This merger of tech and marketing is interesting as the one area that is leading the field in this area is media which I think explains why the AO event was so much more exciting.

Other industries involved in tech start-ups would do well to look to the media business to see how this marriage could work for them. Like all marriages, it’s not perfect and it’s still quite early days even for media. But the massive boom in on-line advertising and the Web 2.0 revolution have conspired to make it the most likely place to find inspiration.

Infinite choice = overwhelming confusion

March 6, 2007

Following on from my previous post, I’ve been spending a lot of time looking at retail sites over the last few weeks and it struck me that they have the ultimate infinite choice problem.

What’s really interesting is how poor most of them are when it comes to filtering the products they sell in a way that is meaningful to the user. Even the market leaders are way behind the price comparison engines like shopping.com and pricegrabber. There is a lot we can learn from these guys who live and die by getting the user to an affiliate as fast as possible.

In retail that means making an on-line sale, in publishing it could mean downloading a whitepaper, watching a video or reading a review. So what does it take to create great filters? The answer is simple, anything the user will recognise is a great filter. Here are my top 5

  1. Brands - some users will buy brands way above all other criteria
  2. Price - likewise some users will buy based on price rather than quality
  3. Editorial recommendation - the trusted third party
  4. User recommendations/ratings - 62% of people trust their peers more than anybody else
  5. Automated recommendations - “users who bought this, also bought that”

Obvious common sense stuff, so why aren’t more retailers/publishers doing this? Two reasons, firstly, you can’t do comparisons if your data is dirty and most big databases of content or products are very messy. Secondly, tying user opinions/ratings to that content is not always straightforward. Integration between E-Commerce systems and Content Management Systems is usually pretty light resulting in disconnected data.

What the price comparison engines have invested in is great data tools so that their databases are as clean as possible. This lets them create all manner of filters , safe in the knowledge that the results will be right. It’s time for the rest of the on-line world to take that on board as the volumes of content increase exponentially otherwise overwhelming confusion will reign.