OK, I think I made about 50 enemies yesterday. Telling people they don’t link, I learned, is one way to get everyone’s panties in a bunch.
Ryan Block, who is one of the main guys at Engadget, responds to yesterday’s rant with a long piece. Basically says that they went through an editorial process and found my video yesterday didn’t have any news value to Engadget’s readers.
Now, that’s new information. I disagree. First of all, I had the news out at 9:00 p.m. on Friday evening. Half an hour before Engadget had its news out.
Second of all, I had quotes DIRECTLY from Intel’s top management about the new 45 nm processors and how they did it ON VIDEO. This is something that Engadget didn’t have, and doesn’t have. That alone is news value for Engadget to link to.
In my two videos (and a third really cool one that PodTech.net did) we get the news about Intel’s new 45nm fab, and go way beyond what Engadget put up.
But the news of my videos isn’t WHAT was discussed in them, but rather the TOUR itself. I expect at least a few of Engadget’s readers would love to see the place where the chips inside many of their gadgets are made and hear from the people who make those chips directly instead of reading just something that sounds like a press release rewrite. Maybe that’s just me?
UPDATE2: Today Engadget has an article about a cancer patient getting their Xbox ripped off. You telling me THAT has more news value for Engadget’s readers than a tour of Intel’s factory which also included discussion of Intel’s new chips coming out later this year and how Intel got that breakthrough done? Give me a break.
Another point? That I’ve become less interesting since leaving Microsoft. Well, I think that’s because Engadget isn’t watching ScobleShow.com. Including an interview with the Zune team that wasn’t linked to by Engadget or Gizmodo, either.
Over there, in just four months, I’ve posted more than 120 videos, gotten more than 70 interviews with Silicon Valley CEOs, and had some real interesting ones with Retrevo and gang at CES, among others. But, nah, that’s not as interesting as seeing inside Microsoft, is it?
Oh, Gizmodo DOES link. Dan Farber, of ZDNet DOES link.
So does Alex Torex.
Frederic, in the Last Podcast blog, says this is part of a bigger blogger backlash (he sees it in places like Digg).
Jason Calacanis (the guy who founded Engadget) says the real “non-linking” enemy is the mainstream press. Ahh, but Jason, that’s why I was so pissed off yesterday. Every blog was linking to the New York Times (or, not linking to anyone, like the Engadget and Gizmodo pieces didn’t do) but they weren’t linking to the blog that ACTUALLY got the real news, straight from inside the Intel fab (the New York Times didn’t get you that). The truth is, if bloggers don’t link to other bloggers and, instead, link to the New York Times, they are just reinforcing the mainstream media’s position.
Michael Letterle says “I think the real problem is bloggers producing unique content.” Oh, that indeed is a problem, but on ScobleShow.com I’m producing one to two videos a day and finding it very tough to get links. Even when I’ve gotten something really exclusive. Seems most bloggers would rather link to the New York Times than start up a blog search engine and look for something really unique coming through.
Munir Umrani remains above it all, saying, “Does it bother me if another blogger doesn’t link to The Blogging Journalist? No. Am I appreciative if someone does? Yes. ”
But, Munir, how would anyone find you if you never are linked to? Especially if bloggers and journalists demonstrate they won’t do a simple blog search to see what else someone has written about a topic?
Scoble: pissing off the blogosphere so you don’t have to. 
UPDATE: TechCrunch’s Mike Arrington writes “Wow, Scoble just threw himself under a bus.”
I should update my last line, then to: Scoble: throwing himself under busses so you don’t have to. 
Thanks to Ze Frank! (I stole the “so you don’t have to” line from him, which is where I heard it first).
UPDATE2: It’s funny to watch more bloggers come online and link to the New York Times, without linking to anything else. BloggingStocks does NOT link.
UPDATE3: Slashdot links to a CNET tour of Lucas Film’s datacenter, but they won’t link to my tour of Intel’s 45nm fab. Interesting editorial judgment at these big sites.
Hmmmm, My guess is that this post is a carefully orchestrated linkbait strategy..
Hmmmm, My guess is that this post is a carefully orchestrated linkbait strategy..
I always link to other bloggers in my posts but NEVER to the mainstream media. However, I won’t write a post just to give a link. I must think the subject will appeal to my audience. If I think it will, I link away!
I always link to other bloggers in my posts but NEVER to the mainstream media. However, I won’t write a post just to give a link. I must think the subject will appeal to my audience. If I think it will, I link away!
Maybe it’s the fact (as Marc Canter points out) that it’s hard to link to the part of a video you want to link to, but it’s easy to link to the relevant text on a normal blog. We need deep links inside video for this to work better. I would say therefore, that it’s really the *form* of the content (video) that is not being linked to that’s one important issue here, not the content itself.
Maybe it’s the fact (as Marc Canter points out) that it’s hard to link to the part of a video you want to link to, but it’s easy to link to the relevant text on a normal blog. We need deep links inside video for this to work better. I would say therefore, that it’s really the *form* of the content (video) that is not being linked to that’s one important issue here, not the content itself.
[...] one of the questions arising from Robert Scoble’s rant that his Intel video interviews were largely ignored by gadget sites and mainstream media even [...]
jeez, came here for something else and saw this thread – is this some sort of joke or experiment? It’s hard to believe someone could be so full of themselves.
jeez, came here for something else and saw this thread – is this some sort of joke or experiment? It’s hard to believe someone could be so full of themselves.
Every time I drop in on this blog, I’m reminded why I don’t drop in here more often.
Every time I drop in on this blog, I’m reminded why I don’t drop in here more often.
Christ you could bitch about anything.
Didn’t know this became a LiveJournal…
oh boo hoo…Engadget won’t link to my stories it must be because they hate me. The thought that your post just might suck never came to you?
Christ you could bitch about anything.
Didn’t know this became a LiveJournal…
oh boo hoo…Engadget won’t link to my stories it must be because they hate me. The thought that your post just might suck never came to you?
Mickey: funny, my email has lots of people who say Engadget doesn’t link to them, either, for a variety of reasons. Like this guy: http://www.ohgizmo.com/2006/03/21/airing-dirty-laundry-engadgets-exclusionist-tactics-are-not-an-isolated-incident/
Mickey: funny, my email has lots of people who say Engadget doesn’t link to them, either, for a variety of reasons. Like this guy: http://www.ohgizmo.com/2006/03/21/airing-dirty-laundry-engadgets-exclusionist-tactics-are-not-an-isolated-incident/
If only PodTech would get ScobleShow a video editor
I’ve held off reviewing Podtech.net and more specifically ScobleShow, one of their flagship videoblogging shows (”A PodTech original”), primarily because I wanted to give Scoble a chance to get over there, situated and start cranking…
Hey guys…I think Robert gets the point. He made a mistake and apologized for it. There’s a person on the other end of this website.
Hey guys…I think Robert gets the point. He made a mistake and apologized for it. There’s a person on the other end of this website.
Robert Scoble wants some link love
Robert wants more link love, so I’m happy to oblige. Unfortunately, I think one of the problems is Robert’s video – it’s 40 minutes. I’m sorry, but there is no way that fits into my working life or personal life.
Thanks Brian!
Thanks Brian!
Robert -
You Rock. Don’t stop pissing people off by telling the truth. I may be a z-lister, but I agree with you completely. By not linking to the best source for a news item, other blogs are doing a disservice to their readers, and indirectly denigrating themselves – another blog isn’t good enough to link to, above the NYT? What does that say about blogs in general then? It’s not like you’re some kid in his parent’s basement, making things up – be it via blog or not, you provide a great deal of useful, good information. Since it is clear that mainstream media is not, for the most part, showing the blogosphere the respect it deserves, it is up to the blogosphere to show itself some respect, and when someone posts a scoop, jump on it!
Robert -
You Rock. Don’t stop pissing people off by telling the truth. I may be a z-lister, but I agree with you completely. By not linking to the best source for a news item, other blogs are doing a disservice to their readers, and indirectly denigrating themselves – another blog isn’t good enough to link to, above the NYT? What does that say about blogs in general then? It’s not like you’re some kid in his parent’s basement, making things up – be it via blog or not, you provide a great deal of useful, good information. Since it is clear that mainstream media is not, for the most part, showing the blogosphere the respect it deserves, it is up to the blogosphere to show itself some respect, and when someone posts a scoop, jump on it!
Robert,
The idea that 40 minutes of video can be bulky is interesting. I never had a TV and most of video content I watch is academic talks, so I couldn’t comment — but I think I have an idea:
Last night, I watched a TV series (a teen flick, not supposed to be on YouTube): before and after each 30 minute episode, there was half-a-dozen of key clips, each one sentence long, to summarize and tease:
- “You don’t love me? [Frown]”
- “This is getting *so* not were it should… [They kiss]”
- “You slept with her?! [Angry looks]”
- etc.
Thirty minutes of drama and bad acting, all rolled in less then 10 seconds. Very efficient stuff. What PodTech could develop (and I have a friend looking for VC money to develop something similar for instruction videos) is:
- Easy-to-make summarizes:
add a line to a video editing bench to indicate what segment should be used in a shorter version;
- Click-able video:
a shape with some text on screen could link to a precise moment later in the same video.
Even better: coordinating a text description with these segments. But that sounds like significantly more work for the editor.
Regarding disclosures, I would try to have a list of key-words (“Intel”, “Bezos”, “iPhone”, “throwing chairs”, etc.) that trigger automatic Disclosure statements at the end of each of your post: “PodTech does consulting work for Intel/Amazon/Apple/Microsoft.”, and, like a signature in an e-mail, you could edit them out if they are not relevant. I don’t think your being paid would have curbed your enthusiasm in any way, but if you want to play with grown-ups, that is a required, easy to automate, element.
And, on the issue at stake: I disagree with Endgadget’s editorial decision; but as it’s not the first time, I’m not paying attention to their feeds anyway. As you were an interested party in that matter, it was not up to you to point it out. That’s a second thing grown-ups don’t do; though the other extreme solution, having another blogger pretends he found that out by himself while he actually is posting under the dictation is bad too. “I was talking to Robert and he pointed out to me that Endgadget. . .” sounds like the best disclosure, grown-up thing to do.
Did you sounded like a wussy? Yes — but that is what blogging allows.
I’m off, so that I can be comfortably home to watch that ‘boring’ video of yours.
Robert,
The idea that 40 minutes of video can be bulky is interesting. I never had a TV and most of video content I watch is academic talks, so I couldn’t comment — but I think I have an idea:
Last night, I watched a TV series (a teen flick, not supposed to be on YouTube): before and after each 30 minute episode, there was half-a-dozen of key clips, each one sentence long, to summarize and tease:
- “You don’t love me? [Frown]”
- “This is getting *so* not were it should… [They kiss]”
- “You slept with her?! [Angry looks]”
- etc.
Thirty minutes of drama and bad acting, all rolled in less then 10 seconds. Very efficient stuff. What PodTech could develop (and I have a friend looking for VC money to develop something similar for instruction videos) is:
- Easy-to-make summarizes:
add a line to a video editing bench to indicate what segment should be used in a shorter version;
- Click-able video:
a shape with some text on screen could link to a precise moment later in the same video.
Even better: coordinating a text description with these segments. But that sounds like significantly more work for the editor.
Regarding disclosures, I would try to have a list of key-words (“Intel”, “Bezos”, “iPhone”, “throwing chairs”, etc.) that trigger automatic Disclosure statements at the end of each of your post: “PodTech does consulting work for Intel/Amazon/Apple/Microsoft.”, and, like a signature in an e-mail, you could edit them out if they are not relevant. I don’t think your being paid would have curbed your enthusiasm in any way, but if you want to play with grown-ups, that is a required, easy to automate, element.
And, on the issue at stake: I disagree with Endgadget’s editorial decision; but as it’s not the first time, I’m not paying attention to their feeds anyway. As you were an interested party in that matter, it was not up to you to point it out. That’s a second thing grown-ups don’t do; though the other extreme solution, having another blogger pretends he found that out by himself while he actually is posting under the dictation is bad too. “I was talking to Robert and he pointed out to me that Endgadget. . .” sounds like the best disclosure, grown-up thing to do.
Did you sounded like a wussy? Yes — but that is what blogging allows.
I’m off, so that I can be comfortably home to watch that ‘boring’ video of yours.
Late reply I know, but don’t worry about the deleted comments thing – was a cache problem on my end.
Otherwise I’ve put my 2(euro)cents in the jar about your behaviour and that’s all there is to it.
Until you can give valid justification for bitching about your paid-for vidi-press release not getting linked to by the likes of Engadget, there’s little here to be discussed IMO.
I believe it is quite common in this world to create kick-ass world-shaking stuff and feel as if nobody is noticing. That’s at least one perception. It’s hard to really ascertain and measure all the effects and ripple effects of our actions (even with Technorati
).
I’m not so sure that having Engadget note and link is any measure of the worthiness of the Intel video, or more importantly its impact. I think we all spend too much energy worrying if the big boys are watching and playing a numbers game. My hunch is that the folks that care to find the Intel video will find it.
And this whole brou-ha-ha obviously adds to the intrigue of watching the video btw
In Hugh MacLeod’s ‘How to Be Creative’ manifesto #4: “If your biz plan depends on you suddenly being “discovered” by some big shot, your plan will probably fail.” Same goes for if you content depends on the big media, big bloggers linking to you.
Should they have linked? Who knows, it’s their baby and they can do with it what they want. No one can force that other blogs follow blogosphere ethos and etiquette. It’s a free country this blogosphere.
The fact is I don’t think Engadget or Techcrunch or name-your-break-and-make-blog is going to make or break anyone. That’s reeks of old thinking to me, anyhow.
Distribution is on a cusp of a major change, and I don’t think the blockbuster sites are as crucial as we think.
Next topic: #33 Kramer says: “I just don’t consider video first class content. You are saying I have to watch the whole thing to get the content. With text I can skim, jump, stop and restart.”
Shameless plug: I feel exactly the same way about video and podcasts myself – and stick to text blogs primarily. So that’s just one reason I recently accepted a consulting engagement with Click.tv. It has the capacity to allow video to actually be social. Might be worth checking out for PodTech.
I believe it is quite common in this world to create kick-ass world-shaking stuff and feel as if nobody is noticing. That’s at least one perception. It’s hard to really ascertain and measure all the effects and ripple effects of our actions (even with Technorati
).
I’m not so sure that having Engadget note and link is any measure of the worthiness of the Intel video, or more importantly its impact. I think we all spend too much energy worrying if the big boys are watching and playing a numbers game. My hunch is that the folks that care to find the Intel video will find it.
And this whole brou-ha-ha obviously adds to the intrigue of watching the video btw
In Hugh MacLeod’s ‘How to Be Creative’ manifesto #4: “If your biz plan depends on you suddenly being “discovered” by some big shot, your plan will probably fail.” Same goes for if you content depends on the big media, big bloggers linking to you.
Should they have linked? Who knows, it’s their baby and they can do with it what they want. No one can force that other blogs follow blogosphere ethos and etiquette. It’s a free country this blogosphere.
The fact is I don’t think Engadget or Techcrunch or name-your-break-and-make-blog is going to make or break anyone. That’s reeks of old thinking to me, anyhow.
Distribution is on a cusp of a major change, and I don’t think the blockbuster sites are as crucial as we think.
Next topic: #33 Kramer says: “I just don’t consider video first class content. You are saying I have to watch the whole thing to get the content. With text I can skim, jump, stop and restart.”
Shameless plug: I feel exactly the same way about video and podcasts myself – and stick to text blogs primarily. So that’s just one reason I recently accepted a consulting engagement with Click.tv. It has the capacity to allow video to actually be social. Might be worth checking out for PodTech.
Late reply I know, but don’t worry about the deleted comments thing – was a cache problem on my end.
Otherwise I’ve put my 2(euro)cents in the jar about your behaviour and that’s all there is to it.
Until you can give valid justification for bitching about your paid-for vidi-press release not getting linked to by the likes of Engadget, there’s little here to be discussed IMO.
[...] Pissing off the blogosphere… « Scobleizer – Tech Geek Blogger: I wonder what Scoble’s opinion on payola and disclosure is? Unbelievable. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. [...]
I like what the FIRST commenter had to say… A LOT… but at least he has a letter – Z-list. The list I belong to probably begins with double letters – like YY-list.
And you have to think that this is a case where bad pub is still good. At least it got me to come to your site – from a link…
There’s a little misunderstanding here. Intel did NOT pay for my videos. PodTech paid my expenses to get to Intel. Intel did NOT have prior restraint on my video (they did NOT get to see what I’d say about them, or include in the video). I treated them exactly the same as I treat all other interview subjects.
On the other hand, PodTech did do a video for Intel. We made a mistake in not clearly marking that as content that was commissioned by Intel. We’re fixing that mistake right now.
I like what the FIRST commenter had to say… A LOT… but at least he has a letter – Z-list. The list I belong to probably begins with double letters – like YY-list.
And you have to think that this is a case where bad pub is still good. At least it got me to come to your site – from a link…
There’s a little misunderstanding here. Intel did NOT pay for my videos. PodTech paid my expenses to get to Intel. Intel did NOT have prior restraint on my video (they did NOT get to see what I’d say about them, or include in the video). I treated them exactly the same as I treat all other interview subjects.
On the other hand, PodTech did do a video for Intel. We made a mistake in not clearly marking that as content that was commissioned by Intel. We’re fixing that mistake right now.
Scoble, you’re a fucking sell-out and a shill for not mentioning you were paid for that video. How can you live with yourself?
You’re a Microsoft Man through and through, all right. Go take a long walk off a short pier, sell-out.
love Sho
Scoble, you’re a fucking sell-out and a shill for not mentioning you were paid for that video. How can you live with yourself?
You’re a Microsoft Man through and through, all right. Go take a long walk off a short pier, sell-out.
love Sho
Sho: I was NOT paid for that video. Please read my other comment clarifying what was paid for and what was not.
Please explain why anyone should believe a carefully spun, damage-controlled word you say?
Sho: I was NOT paid for that video. Please read my other comment clarifying what was paid for and what was not.
Please explain why anyone should believe a carefully spun, damage-controlled word you say?
Because it doesn’t matter? Who cares if you weren’t paid for that particular video? The fact is that Intel are a client of your company, and that simple fact colours everything you do. You can split hairs any way you like, the fact is that your company is on Intel’s payroll and thus anything you say about Intel is now suspect. The fact you didn’t disclose that critical piece of information is unforgiveable and you’ll pay the price.
Look, I live in the real world too, we all have to pay the bills. I’d take Intel’s coin too, all other things being equal. But you let your audience know that up front, or you stop claiming – explicitly or otherwise – to be independent.
Anyway, enough from me, sorry if I sound too angry, I’m not really. Sorry about your mother, I mean that.
Sho
Because it doesn’t matter? Who cares if you weren’t paid for that particular video? The fact is that Intel are a client of your company, and that simple fact colours everything you do. You can split hairs any way you like, the fact is that your company is on Intel’s payroll and thus anything you say about Intel is now suspect. The fact you didn’t disclose that critical piece of information is unforgiveable and you’ll pay the price.
Look, I live in the real world too, we all have to pay the bills. I’d take Intel’s coin too, all other things being equal. But you let your audience know that up front, or you stop claiming – explicitly or otherwise – to be independent.
Anyway, enough from me, sorry if I sound too angry, I’m not really. Sorry about your mother, I mean that.
Sho
Sho: but you act like this is “news.” PodTech has a whole list of corporate clients. We never hide from that. Just look at our home page. If you see an icon, then you know they are paying for advertising.
Sho: but you act like this is “news.” PodTech has a whole list of corporate clients. We never hide from that. Just look at our home page. If you see an icon, then you know they are paying for advertising.
Well if it’s nothing but advertising, with a “chinese wall” between advertising and editorial, then that is fine with me, all publishing works that way. That is not the impression I got from your use of the word “client” which implies a more interactive relationship.
If you’re going on the record as saying it’s just the front page ad, only the ad, nothing but the ad, straight from a standard rate card and no favours asked, then I withdraw any criticism and simply advise you to speak more clearly next time.
If your relationship with this “client” goes a little further than that, though .. you’ll have to come clean sooner or later, and there’s no time like the present.
That concludes my participation in this little episode. Good luck!
Well if it’s nothing but advertising, with a “chinese wall” between advertising and editorial, then that is fine with me, all publishing works that way. That is not the impression I got from your use of the word “client” which implies a more interactive relationship.
If you’re going on the record as saying it’s just the front page ad, only the ad, nothing but the ad, straight from a standard rate card and no favours asked, then I withdraw any criticism and simply advise you to speak more clearly next time.
If your relationship with this “client” goes a little further than that, though .. you’ll have to come clean sooner or later, and there’s no time like the present.
That concludes my participation in this little episode. Good luck!
Sho: I gave a talk to Intel executives (again not paid, I do that kind of stuff for free) telling them to blog more. We do consulting with many of our clients, I know I helped Seagate learn how to start a conversation with bloggers.
Sho: I gave a talk to Intel executives (again not paid, I do that kind of stuff for free) telling them to blog more. We do consulting with many of our clients, I know I helped Seagate learn how to start a conversation with bloggers.
[...] of the biggest stories over the weekend was Robert Scoble’s posts regarding big blogs linking habits. The story has been widely commented upon – follow it via [...]
>There’s a little misunderstanding here. Intel did NOT pay for my videos. PodTech paid my expenses to get to Intel. Intel did NOT have prior restraint on my video (they did NOT get to see what I’d say about them, or include in the video). I treated them exactly the same as I treat all other interview subjects.
On the other hand, PodTech did do a video for Intel. We made a mistake in not clearly marking that as content that was commissioned by Intel. We’re fixing that mistake right now.
OK – as far as I’m concerned it doesn’t matter if Intel paid for one video, all videos or half of them – whatever.
The fact is that PodTech has a commercial relationship with Intel and generates income from them… Given your senior position in PodTech, and your comments relating to the paid-for video, I am going to assume that you have some direct interaction with Intel in this commercial relationship.
Also, from what I understand you have stocks (or stock options) with PodTech and I’m sure your salary is paid by the commercial relationships like the one with Intel.
(correct me on any of this)
So basically you are dealing directly with Intel as PR client and you will benefit greatly if PodTech gets more of their business.
From that I can’t see any line between advertising and editorial sections here – you’re both. The invoice may say “payment for video A”, but that doesn’t make video B anything like an independent production in my eyes.
Just a quick anecdote – I’m a freelance journalist working (atm) for a business paper in Ireland. A few months back I won a mobile phone from a company’s blog which asked people to comment on their soon-to-be-launched site.
A week or so ago the company launched this site (and the related product), and in my mind it’s a pretty interesting idea and concept… in any other circumstance I would have gotten in touch and tried to write a piece on them… but I didn’t because I didn’t feel comfortable with the situation.
I got a free phone off them, and in my mind it would make me less able to be objective – even if it didn’t people would assume I got the phone in return for giving them press.
I guess my point is that you should rethink your own editorial policy before you start telling other sites how to work theirs.