Pissing off the blogosphere…
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.
January 28th, 2007 at 6:24 am
Scoble, one of the things we always tell people from a PR perspective is that you can’t expect every story to be covered, and even if you are the subject being interviewed, the reporter won’t necessarily write a story. Sometimes, the reasons they choose not to carry something don’t make sense, and sometimes, the way they interpret your words can be mind-boggling, but when it comes down to it, that’s the game. As the biggest blogs (and Engadget is very big) approach the influence of old, big, media, we can expect them to become similarly difficult to penetrate.
And for what it’s worth, you are one of the A-listers who everybody who does link links to. As you know, all us Z-listers are pumping out content every day and it could be nobody notices…
January 28th, 2007 at 6:30 am
You’ll make a thousand more enemies when techmeme breaks the news about your brother.
January 28th, 2007 at 6:31 am
I am not sure if you have become less interesting Robert, but you certainly have become a hell of a lot more narcissistic.
January 28th, 2007 at 6:41 am
Pissing off the blogosphere — it’s a dirty job, but somebody’s got to do it. Rock on!
January 28th, 2007 at 6:43 am
When you are right, you are right. :-)
January 28th, 2007 at 6:53 am
Louis, just subscribed to you. I appreciate it is tough for a new blogger to get noticed. I wonder how we can solve that?
January 28th, 2007 at 6:54 am
The byline is a work of art :)
It’s a pity you started just now. I already succeeded in pissing a couple of A-Listers. If I knew you were taking care of it, I would have refrained.
January 28th, 2007 at 6:54 am
Well Done! :p
January 28th, 2007 at 7:10 am
At the end of the day a factory tour is newsworthy to no more than a few hardcore people. An Intel fab. Sexy news it is not.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:13 am
Had you a tour of the Apple iPhone design office, I bet you’d have been linked by a few more people.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:14 am
Damien: so you’re saying a tour of a chip factory isn’t as important as someone getting their Xbox stolen? To an audience of gadget freaks? Come on.
Here’s the Engadget article in question: http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/28/cancer-patient-has-xbox-360-stolen-whilst-in-hospital/
January 28th, 2007 at 7:15 am
Damien: I’d love a tour of Apple.
But, why is that more interesting than a tour of the place that makes things about 300 million times more complex than an iPhone?
January 28th, 2007 at 7:19 am
Reading this rant makes me never want to read your blog again. So you didn’t get linked to - big deal. You are coming across as bitter, angry and narcissistic. Who really wants to read that? Not me. I also agree, I thought your stuff was more interesting when you were with Microsoft. You were really able to put a human face and voice on an otherwise faceless company. Pissing off A-List bloggers? Who really cares? It’s doming across as childish. I know you’ve been very successful Robert, but please don’t believe your own hype. So you didn’t get all the credit. Welcome to the real world. Move on to the next story. Best of luck!
January 28th, 2007 at 7:19 am
[...] like the previous one, the target of this FotoChop as well is Scoble. The last sentence of today’s first post was seen on his T-Shirt on May 05. Scoble:Pissing off the Blogoshpere Hosted on [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 7:19 am
BTW, you’ve had parts of this discussion before back in August at http://scobleizer.com/2006/08/03/not-linking-starts-a-conversation/
You said then YOU don’t link to the AListers. I think you’ve linked to Kawasaki and Godin a bunch since then though and maybe Calcanis a time or two. Maybe a certain 15 year old in India can yank some stats out of thin air for us:) Now, to say Gizmodo and Engadget should have but didn’t link to your VERY cool Intel video… rings kinda hollow.
I understand why linkjuice can be a big deal. And, should you ever decide to REALLY sell your soul with paid ads/sponsorships… well, in a case like that it’s easy to noodle through what you’re fighting for. But, it could be as simple as gunning for some kinda high score. Heck, I’d get a kick outta that too. Or, and this might be more probable, they don’t care to help out PodTech’s ventures. In which case, they should just come out and call it as they see it.
Transparency is a good thing.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:21 am
[...] related to the story below. After his first rant, Scoble goes on another one wondering why people aren’t linking to this stuff - much of which is a lot of high quality video footage of startup CEOs. I’m not [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 7:23 am
Robert,
Learn this now… it’s your blog. Do things your way.
DO NOT be afraid to say what you want and on your terms. These sites out there CANNOT make or break you. You will have readership because people want to hear what YOU have to say.
If such-and-such blog says something about you… so what. Sometimes it’s OK to piss off other people. Sometimes it’s even encouraged.
You said and did what you thought was right. Don’t come back on your blog on try and justify what you did to your readership. Feel comfoortable with your actions and let’s move on to the next story.
Robert, you do a great job. Don’t get YOUR panties ina bunch over what other bloggers think or say. They piss people off as well. Tell the truth as YOU see it and feel comfortable doing it.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:29 am
gwhiz: obviously I was pulling your leg a little bit in that post.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:33 am
Robert:
It seems to me that this is a bit the pot calling the kettle black. The Scoble Show provides very little external linking as well.
In my mind Engadget, Gizmodo and the Scoble Show though are most often not “blogs” at least not in the traditional sense, They more like traditional specialty magazines (or perhaps TV shows in the case of the Scoble Show) albeit online, done in a ad hoc timing format and with RSS feeds. There is probably very little reason for them to link to other sources a practice seen rampant in traditional blogs.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:38 am
Brian: good point.
So link here then. Now that we have a player that we can embed anywhere, does linking from one URL really matter anyway? I have three URLs: my blog here, which has the most subscribers anyway, my link blog, and ScobleShow.com. ScobleShow is just my video stream. In my videos I’ve talked about dozens of blogs, which is its own form of giving credit.
But this goes to news value. Today Engadget has a story about a cancer patient getting an Xbox ripped off. http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/28/cancer-patient-has-xbox-360-stolen-whilst-in-hospital/
You telling me THAT has more news value to Engadget’s audience than three videos of a tour of the plant that’s going to make the next chips in all sorts of gadgets coming later this year? Not to mention those videos include discussions of how Intel got the breakthroughs that led to Friday’s announcement?
January 28th, 2007 at 7:43 am
@gwhiz: I certainly didn’t codename my app Thin Air:D
But anyway, despite that post being more of a leg-pull than a rant, here are your stats:
After 8th August, he’s linked 5 times to Guy Kawasaki, 8 times to Jason and 6 times to Seth.
But, the really hot to-links?
Dave Winer: 26
Hugh MacLeod(GapingVoid): 20
Maryam: 18
Thomas Hawk: 17
Ze Frank: 17
Yuvi: 4 :D
January 28th, 2007 at 7:46 am
Yuvi, you rock.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:50 am
Robert: I saw the hospital one and skipped over that one too but at least that can tug at heart strings or get people angry. But yes, if I had to choose, I’d read the X-Box story over the Intel story. Intel, to me, is like a concrete block manufacturer, sure they make complex things but they go under the hood of something else. They are the equivalent of an autopart maker.
If you were at Intel and donned one of the neon bunny suits and did some dance with one of their designers, I’d tune in. But a talk about chips, not for me. Did you get any links from sites dedicated to chip design? Engadget is probably like the e! of the tech world, maybe your show is more like PBS?
January 28th, 2007 at 7:52 am
Damien: I put on part of a bunny suit, but kept that off of video. I figured the more important news was watching a senior technical fellow, who’s worked at Intel for 29 years, put HIS on.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:52 am
Welcome to how Z-listers feel EVERY SINGLE BLOGGING DAY!
It must be very nice to be an A-lister. Then even your complaints about not getting enough attention get lots of attention.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:53 am
Yawn
You think Intel making a smaller chip is more important than cancer?
Try having someone you love having cancer. You might get a persepective on life then.
January 28th, 2007 at 7:59 am
Richard: having cancer is important to THAT ONE PERSON. Intel chips change the lives of hundreds of millions of people. Glad to see you understand news value. But, now, I understand why so many people buy those grocery store gossip magazines. Next you’ll try to tell me that what Paris Hilton isn’t wearing matters to me more than what Google is doing in its labs. Sigh.
Seth: being an A-lister has its advantages, yes. But you do notice that in the past two days I’ve linked to more people than Engadget has, don’t you?
January 28th, 2007 at 8:00 am
I certainly find (found) your writing much more interesting and honest than the videos. In fact, Scobleizer has turned into more of a link blog to your videos than the thought blog it used to be. Which is fine for some readers, not for others.
Speaking of readers, RSS has less value lately with this blog because so many of the posts have links to the videos. Which means I can’t get the content by reading, but have to sit through a video, which I don’t have time for most days. It seems also that the video posts generate fewer comments, further diluting the value of the blog.
It is kind of weird, because your older posts did seem to generate more conversational value than the videos of suits telling us about their big businesses do. The videos are far more one way.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:04 am
Paul: good point. My blogging quality has gone down because I’m spending more time each day doing videos, which I’m trying to build a business around, and helping run PodTech (I’m a VP there). I think long-term my videos have a lot more value than my blog does. Or did. But, maybe I’m wrong there. I guess history will have to judge that. I’ll keep playing with the balance. I’ve been working my ass off getting great videos, the Intel one is just one of many.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:07 am
Goodness me Scoble. What an ass you are. I can’t believe how condescending you are.
Cancer affects many more people than Intel will ever touch.
One person having cancer affects far more than one person. My family just watched my Aunt die from cancer. You think it only affected her?
I could care less what Paris Hilton is wearing. I could care less what Google are doing in their labs. I could care less what Intel are doing in their labs too. They don’t affect me in my day to day life where I’m now trying to help my fiancée in her fight with cancer. I’m so happy to see that life is so insignificant for you, as you quite obviously don’t have one.
I’m talking about people’s lives and you’re talking about a crappy two hour video (who has 2 hours to watch a 3 inch video for crying out loud?)
Get some persepective man.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:09 am
I think I’m liking the R.S. with the chip on his shoulder. The fab video *was* exactly what I wanted to see and not even the cable news had it at first.
Robert - please keep plugging your SS content on the blog!!
January 28th, 2007 at 8:15 am
Richard: >Goodness me Scoble. What an ass you are. I can’t believe how condescending you are.
Ahh, so you’re of the “I must point out another person’s sins by doing those same sins myself, albeit 10 times worse” school of thought?
How does that work for you? Gain lots of friends that way? Influence lots of people?
January 28th, 2007 at 8:30 am
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. So when you say you’ve done all this video and that makes you interesting, that’s probably true, but not if people don’t watch it and video is less likely to get watched.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:35 am
Kramer: with video you can skim, jump, start, and restart too.
So, write me a 10,000 word essay on what Halo 3 looks like.
I’ll do more in 20 seconds of video than you’ll be able to do in 10,000 words of ASCII text.
Actually, I’ve found that video is more likely to get watched. Next weekend millions of people will watch the Superbowl. Next you’ll try to tell me that we should just read a blog about that game instead, right?
Both text and video has their places. It’s not one or the other.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:41 am
[...] About time. Things were getting so so boring. I truly love it when people say they are unsubscribing in the comments after Scoble says something. The blogging version of “you were cool but now you’ve sold out to the man”. Still, I totally disagree that you can even measure a cancer patient story against an Intel story, let alone say your Intel videos are more important than a cancer patient having his XBox stolen. [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 8:46 am
Just wondering…ever consider that sites don’t link to 40 minute long videos is because they’re a really bad way to catch up on news?
I mean, what would 99.9% of the readers of Engadget get from the Intel video that:
[a] They care about
[b] They can’t get from short textual summaries (journalism) all over the web?
Like most other people interested in tech, I saw that Intel were moving to 45nm fab, and that this would mean faster chips at similar temperatures. To be honest, that’s probably more detail than I’m interested in.
“Intel announces way to make improved chips” is probably enough of a summary for me and most of the world. I don’t need to watch 40 minutes of Intel guys telling me how great it is, and neither does most anyone else, I’m guessing. So it’s not surprising such videos don’t get much link love.
Such videos are pretty niche, tbh. Even something like C9, where the videos actually have information that affect developers (as opposed to “CPUs get faster? Film at 11!”), don’t get linked a lot from big sites - for similar reasons.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:46 am
> Kramer: with video you can skim, jump, start, and restart too.
The facilities on video are uneven and poor, but it still won’t make difference because you don’t know what you will be skipping where text you are guided by land marks.
> So, write me a 10,000 word essay on what Halo
> 3 looks like.
Apples vs tanks. You are comparing writing a great lump of text versus concise text backed by picture and video.
> I’ll do more in 20 seconds of video than you’ll be able to do in
Only if people watch it.
> Next weekend millions of people will watch the Superbowl.
If you think your Intel video has as much pull as the Super Bowl then perhaps your expectations are set a bit high.
> Both text and video has their places. It’s not one or the other.
Very true. I was just offering a reason why some may think you have become less interesting.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:54 am
Kramer: I told you here exactly what part of the video covers what things, so you could have “scrubbed” to the right part of the video: http://scobleizer.com/2007/01/26/looking-into-intels-new-fab/
>>If you think your Intel video has as much pull as the Super Bowl then perhaps your expectations are set a bit high.
Heheh, no, you misread me. I was just making fun of your “text rules” bias.
>>Like most other people interested in tech, I saw that Intel were moving to 45nm fab, and that this would mean faster chips at similar temperatures. To be honest, that’s probably more detail than I’m interested in.
You’re telling me that all of Engadget’s readers are like you? Interesting theory.
At Microsoft I helped build Channel 9 into a site that had 4.3-million unique visitors a month. How did we do that? By showing long videos with engineers discussing stuff that probably has more detail than you’re interested in (I did 700 interviews, most of which were longer than 30 minutes and most of which most people on earth would find incredibly boring).
Fine, leave Gizmodo and Engadget out of this. I had the news on my blog at the same time the New York Times did. I was more authoritative because my articles’ info came straight from the fab’s workers itself. The New York Times didn’t get that tour. It just wrote up the info from the press announcement.
So, bloggers that linked to New York Times only, or who didn’t link at all, didn’t link to the best information available.
January 28th, 2007 at 8:55 am
Tim: >Even something like C9, where the videos actually have information that affect developers (as opposed to “CPUs get faster? Film at 11!”), don’t get linked a lot from big sites - for similar reasons.
Channel 9 was linked, on its first day, by dozens of newspapers, including the New York Post. More PR for Channel 9 continues to this day.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:05 am
That fact that Microsoft had been so tight lipped for so long had a lot to do with Channel 9’s success. Many of us learned a lot of new information that was going to or did have an impact on our work or businesses. It was kind of a big deal.
Chip announcements just aren’t that exciting.
It would be interesting to see data on how many of of those 4.3 unique visitors to C9 sat through how much of how many videos.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:06 am
I’ve been reading you for years but never commented. I have two passions, politics and technology, but I’m far from a geek. My problem with your videos for a very long time, I couldn’t watch them. Now the geeks out there will say what an idiot. But there are millions just like me who don’t want to jump through hoops to watch a video. To my surprise I clicked on your video link today from this post and was able to watch the video. I have no idea what’s changed but it was for the good.
My readers will not be interested in your technology stuff for the most part. But some of your other political stuff (John Edwards) and other things you may decide to do could be interesting. So I’ll be keeping a look out for things to link to.
I feel there are millions of people out there who don’t want to read the hardcore right-wing blogs, left-wing blogs, or hardcore technology blogs they don’t understand. While the blogosphere is growing and there are more blogs for “regular” people, we still have a way to go. That’s where the growth is, the regular people.
Sorry for the long comment. I’ve been saving it up all these years.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:08 am
Robert - There’s been more than enough commentary on the central topic. I do feel the need to chime in just to point out that you ought to be a bit more discriminating about the size brush you use when you paint these rants.
Making any kind of a statement about ZDNet as a one-size-fits-all, for example, is just plain silly. I use this as an example because that’s where I hang my blog shingle of course. I certainly link to other blogs all the time. So do most of my fellow ZDNet bloggers. So any unilateral “ZDNet doesn’t link” or “ZDNet’s Dan Farber does link” statements are either just plain wrong (the former) or specific (the latter) as to be relatively meaningless. ZDNet is a massive network of content in every shape and variety you can imagine from podcasts and video to blogs to straight up news and reviews.
You’ve castigated and ignored most ZDNet bloggers because we don’t have full text feeds. Fine. That’s your prerogative (despite the fact that we have no control over that - it’s a corporate decision that we discuss frequently but are pretty much resigned to). But you miss out on linking to some great content as a result of that decision. Again, it’s yours to make.
The point is, no one at ZDNet is throwing a hissy fit because we don’t get Scoble link love and we do, by the way, get quite a bit from many of the Weblogs, Inc./AOL blogs. Disclosure: I used to write three blogs for Weblogs, Inc. and have nothing but great things to say about working with Jason, Peter, Ryan, and the rest of the crew.
You know how much affection and respect I have for you and everything you’ve accomplished. But you went over the top, under the bus, or somewhere else on this one and I really wish you’d think things like this through for… oh, I don’t know… ten minutes before you publish. You sometimes end up eroding the legitimacy of the point you’re trying to make because you work yourself into a frenzy.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:11 am
Marc: Yeah, you nailed the major mistake I made yesterday. I apologize to ZDNet. I thought it was clear that I was only talking about that one article. And, I should have made it clearer that I was mostly talking about the Intel annoucement, not past behavior.
I agree, though, that that part of my post was stupidly thought out. If there was any thinking in evidence there at all.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:12 am
From what I can see, Scoble, you’re throwing your toys out of the pram because people aren’t paying any attention to you.
It’s irrelevant what story [b]you[/b] think is more important, because you’re not the one calling the shots at Engadget. If they miss a beat, that’s their problem and they’ll suffer as a result of it.
I also think the “them and us” attitude to the mainstream media is childish (as I said elsewhere)… they’re not your enemy.
Just out of curiosity - did you report on the Intel news because you thought it was really news worthy and people needed to know about it, or because you wanted recognition for having the story before (or better than) everyone else?
Oh - and while at first you seemed to be saying that a story about a stolen xbox wasn’t news-worthy, your comments since seem to suggest a general ignorance towards the issue of cancer.
Sure, I don’t think Engadget’s story is all that captivating (I don’t think yours is either btw), but to say that cancer only effects one person while Intel makes millions of lives better is just moronic.
In case you don’t realise, each cancer case effects way more than one person, and there are millions of cases every year across the world. Intel may make things that benefit millions of people, but I think it’s safe to say that avoiding cancer is far more important to (most?) of us than having a fancy new Intel-powered device.
And I don’t speak about cancer from personal experience (thank God), although I have seen the effect it has on the victim’s loved-ones.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:12 am
“Channel 9 was linked, on its first day, by dozens of newspapers, including the New York Post.”
Right, alternatively, let’s look at a normal time period, which the launch period so obviously isn’t that I’m not even sure why you mentioned it. (And Google reveals no results for Channel 9 on the nypost’s website - I’m guessing the link love tailed off after the launch phase).
“More PR for Channel 9 continues to this day.”
I think we’re talking about different things. I’m talking about being linked because the site is considered useful to the audience, not because there’s some people doing a PR blitz. In fact, the latter’s probably much less likely to work on a ‘geek’ site (but I could be wrong - maybe geek sites like shiny press releases).
January 28th, 2007 at 9:14 am
Roy:>I have no idea what’s changed but it was for the good.
We put up a Flash-based player a few weeks ago. I agree it is a lot better than the Quicktime player we were forcing people to use before.
I also agree that blogs have a ways to go.
One thing is that the world is niche-oriented now. If you’re a gadget freak you can follow along on the gadget sites. Or, if you’re a green freak, you can read Treehugger.com, etc, etc.
The trick is to get more niches covered with the same quality that Engadget and Gizmodo do.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:17 am
Tim: >>(And Google reveals no results for Channel 9 on the nypost’s website - I’m guessing the link love tailed off after the launch phase).
That’s a HUGE problem with linking to mainstream media sites. Most newspapers hide their information behind registration or pay firewalls after a few days.
Oh, I think geek sites like shiny press releases just as much as mainstream press. Actually, Engadget and Gizmodo both answered yesterday “why don’t you just email us when you think you have something interesting?”
Which is part of my point yesterday. In the old blogosphere it was bad form to beg for a link via email (my brother even got yelled at by Dave Winer when he tried doing just that).
Today, doing “marketing” for your content with “Digg’ers” and with other blogs and content sites isn’t just expected, it’s mandatory, otherwise no one will ever see your stuff.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:23 am
Adam: we’re all talking past each other with the cancer issue.
OK, OK, I see I’m going to have to throw myself on the ground sobbing about every cancer survivor now.
My mom died last year. I understand the shit that families go through with illness very well and very intimately. Want to look back on my blogging about her and her death? I guess not.
But if you think that one person dying in a hospital is news, let me break it to you. It’s not. There are thousands of hospitals with millions of people dying RIGHT NOW. My heart breaks, just like it broke when my mom died last year.
But it’s not news.
>Just out of curiosity - did you report on the Intel news because you thought it was really news worthy and people needed to know about it, or because you wanted recognition for having the story before (or better than) everyone else?
It’s obvious you didn’t watch the video. If you had, my dad worked in microelectronics his entire career. I +knew+ just how hard it is to build a 45nm chip. It is a major fing story. It took one of the world’s biggest corporations three freaking years to do it. Billions of dollars of the world’s resources.
And the chip that they are producing might just cure cancer.
Which, makes it BIG news for the world and certainly for Engadget and Gizmodo and Slashdot readers who depend on the chips that come out of that factory for probably a majority of the gadgets they’ll be reading about over the next two years.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:26 am
Robert,
Can I make a constructive suggestion about linking to ScobleShow video content?
Now that you have an embeddable video player, how about making it super-easy for people to embed your (PodTech’s) videos in their blogs? By “super easy”, I mean: do something similar to the way YouTube does this. That is provide the URL, and the HTML needed to for someone to embed the player video in their blog.
Right now, it’s more difficult than it needs to be. I actually embedded one of your videos about ten days ago ( see - http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2007/01/17/confusion-over-java-on-iphone/ ), and I have to admit - it took me a little while to figure out how to make it work.
If you make it really easy to embed your videos, maybe people will be tempted to do that. It worked for YouTube - maybe it might work for you?
January 28th, 2007 at 9:27 am
For me, videos are almost never as useful as text. I can scan text in seconds, focus on the parts I am interested in, and read those parts in a minute. I have fine grain control over my attention. Video takes many minutes to watch and I can’t scan it. My only control is to watch / don’t watch. I seldom watch.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:30 am
> Simon: hmmm, on my video player there’s a “share” button, which gives you the URL. You copy and paste that URL into your blog’s HTML editor, and you have embedded video.
>George: hmmm, again, tell me what Halo 3 looks like by using only text. I’ll beat you every time with video.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:32 am
Oh for crap’s sake Robert, take a friggin’ Midol and eat some chocolate until you stop PMS’ing.
So they didn’t link to you. Big deal.
What’s your reaction? Well, you probably didn’t physically fling yourself on the ground while kicking and screaming, but goddamn, you did the blog version of it.
WAAAAAAAAAAAH! THEY DIDN’T LINK TO ME, BUT I HAD BETTER STUFF. WAAAAAAAAAH!
Do you act like this at home when you can’t get your way?
In what reality did you think that whining and being a baby about it would work? So Engadget didn’t link to you. BFD. I don’t read them anyway, it’s a fucking myna bird site.
Christ dude, this is just the stupidest, lamest thing I’ve seen in a while, even from you. All you’re missing is OMGTEHINTARWEBISTEHMEAN!!!11 and it would be a perfect center of idiocy.
Get over it man.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Robert, dictating to Engadget what does and does not merit editorial content is just an invitation for ridicule.
You don’t run Engadget, and your little hissy fit just guaranteed you could get video of Bill Gates making sweet man-love to Steve Jobs and Engadget STILL wouldn’t link to you.
OK, so you got some video no one else did thanks to a PR flack. Congratulations. If you get off on silicon fab porn, it’s great stuff. If you’re a run-of-the-mill gadget geek, I’d say it’s not all that and a bag of chips (ahem).
And your videos really are too long.
My suggestion: If you really want to get linked by the other blogs, provide your content in a way that’s accessible to them — a 30-second YouTube clip with the best stuff from your long video, then “deep tease” to the long video.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Ah - yes, that’s exactly what I was looking for Robert. Interesting that I didn’t notice that button though… YouTube has that information visible 100% of the time on each video’s YouTube “home page”.
Another suggestion I had is to turn one of the criticized (by Loren, at least!) aspects of your videos into a unique advantage… You remember the company you did a video with a while back - the one that lets parents make their own edits of movies to show to their kids, and to share those edits? Well, your videos sometimes cover a bunch of different topics, that will be of interest to different people. Why not provide tools that let people do their own edits of ScobleShow videos, and share them?
Why might that be useful in your quest for links? Well, for example, it might mean that sites like Engadget would feel that the portion of your video from 23 minutes to 24 minutes was newsworthy and of interest to their readers, but the whole video was not.
Just a suggestion…
January 28th, 2007 at 9:46 am
i’m not linking to any of this bullshit.
January 28th, 2007 at 9:47 am
Dave, you always make me smile. Said the same thing that John Welch just did, but you said it in eight words.
January 28th, 2007 at 10:00 am
[...] are duking it out online. And we wonder if Scoble has, indeed, thrown himself under a bus. Is it narcissism ? Do big(ger) blogs have an obligation to smaller or newer ones to link to them? A Z-lister [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 10:02 am
[...] the context of the Scoble scandal (I am a sucker for alliterations), Mike Arrington [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 10:03 am
Jaysus. Is this still going on?! Give it a bleeding rest! If they don’t link, they don’t frigging link! Their loss, or yours. Who the eff cares?!
January 28th, 2007 at 10:05 am
[...] Scoble (se non lo sapete, uno dei blogger più influenti della terra), si incazza perché non lo linkano… [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 10:08 am
It’s not just about finding the best story on time, it’s also how you tell it.
January 28th, 2007 at 10:20 am
With respect, seems to me the tone of your posts sometimes indicates head swell. Hopefully you’ll get over it, and keep posting interesting things sans so much ego.
January 28th, 2007 at 10:35 am
[...] Scoble got a bit upset today about people not linking to him. My humble opinion, and one that perhaps only pertains to me, is that video is rarely the best way to initially present information. Scoble had a video about Intel’s plant and their new chips but after waiting 5 minutes for it to load and then getting through all the introductory bits I closed the window and went in search of the New York Times article instead. A minute later I had found it and read most of it, skimming the paragraphs that were not interesting to me and focusing in on the ones that mattered. [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 10:39 am
[...] getting some real-world perspective, let’s visit blogger Robert Scoble who got into some hot water because he noted that engadget wasn’t linking to his blog regarding his story about [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 10:39 am
Wow, what a whinny geek you are. You need to seriously get a life.
January 28th, 2007 at 10:41 am
I think the problem is that you’re comparing apples and oranges here. The NY Times article got linked a lot becuase it presented the information in a very straightforward, easy to digest manner. Your video might have had all that same info, and even earlier than the Times story, but because it’s in video format it’s a lot harder to process into a blog post.
Besides, a trip to a chip fab is interesting, but only up to a certain point, so I can see why not even one is into it.
But even beyond that, isn’t it up to each individual site to decide for themselves what they want to write about? Isn’t that the point of the blogging, that you write about you want to write about and I write about what I want to write about? I think you’re being a little unfair here, you need to respect other people’s decisions, even if they seem unfair, just like you’d want other people to respect your decisions about what you write about.
In fact, that’s why I read your blog and watch your videos, because I like what you find interesting.
January 28th, 2007 at 10:52 am
I know you’re not pissed for yourself in particular, you’re pissed for blogging. I’m guilty of linking directly to the source instead of the blogger myself some times. Maybe I need to rethink that. But how do you find the first blogger? With everyone bypassing her, there’s really no practical way to know is there?
January 28th, 2007 at 10:55 am
You have a bully pulpit and you’re utilizing it for the good of other bloggers. As a ‘Z-list’ blogger, I appreciate it.
Thanks, Robert.
January 28th, 2007 at 11:00 am
Robert: That’s what I was trying to say, but you did it much better. :-)
January 28th, 2007 at 11:01 am
Doug: Got confused. That post “Robert: That’s what I was trying to say, but you did it much better.” was a reply to yours.
January 28th, 2007 at 11:03 am
>OK, OK, I see I’m going to have to throw myself on the ground sobbing about every cancer survivor now.
Or you could just not assume it only effects one person… your choice.
>My mom died last year. I understand the shit that families go through with illness very well and very intimately. Want to look back on my blogging about her and her death? I guess not.
No, I haven’t read your posts about your Mother and frankly I don’t think an encyclopedic knowledge of your entire life and blog topics is a pre-requisite to commenting on something you said about cancer.
>But if you think that one person dying in a hospital is news, let me break it to you. It’s not. There are thousands of hospitals with millions of people dying RIGHT NOW. My heart breaks, just like it broke when my mom died last year.
But it’s not news.
It not being news to you isn’t up for debate here - my point is that your comment about cancer only effecting one person while Intel helps millions is purely ignorant and somewhat delusional. I know as well as you do that cancer and illness happens so often that it has lost it’s news value, but to suggest that a technological advancement to make my computer run faster can be compared in any way to any kind of illness is bizarre.
- Look, I know you weren’t saying cancer is irrelevant to Intel in your post, but your comments following it showed a level of ignorance and self-importance.
I’m not going to hammer at the cancer issue anymore because I’m sure you know how serious it is, and we can both agree that it isn’t news worthy when someone dies of cancer anymore.
That said, the rule of thumb for news is the extraordinary happening to the ordinary or the ordinary happening to the extraordinary… the xbox cancer story fits the former quite well, even if it isn’t hard hitting news or important to you.
>It’s obvious you didn’t watch the video. If you had, my dad worked in microelectronics his entire career. I +knew+ just how hard it is to build a 45nm chip. It is a major fing story. It took one of the world’s biggest corporations three freaking years to do it. Billions of dollars of the world’s resources.
Too right I didn’t - because an extra long video press release by intel doesn’t interest me in the slightest.
As has been pointed out already, your hardly going to entice many people, even the most tech-headed, with long, meandering videos about a new product… The reason people linked to the NYT is because they gave all the facts in a concise manner, so people could find out what was going on in less than 1/2 hours.
>And the chip that they are producing might just cure cancer.
And it might not. If you manage to break the story where the chip actually does cure cancer, you’ve got my interest (but I still won’t want to have to sit through long videos to get the information)
>Which, makes it BIG news for the world and certainly for Engadget and Gizmodo and Slashdot readers who depend on the chips that come out of that factory for probably a majority of the gadgets they’ll be reading about over the next two years.
It’s their decision to put a story forward for their readers, and if they get it wrong, they’ll suffer the consequences.
You still haven’t answered my question - did you post the videos in order to to inform people of an important new product or was it to get recognition for having a story before anyone else?
January 28th, 2007 at 11:11 am
Most of Engigets readers are eather 15 or a bot.
January 28th, 2007 at 11:22 am
Yes, in the eyes of some people you have become less interesting. Not hard to figure it out. Why? You’re not the MS evangelists who blogs his heart out anymore, and so although you ARE doing more interesting stuff, you are less interesting for them - a lot less. Doesn’t it make sense?
PS: Not to me, though :-)
January 28th, 2007 at 11:32 am
[...] an interesting debate heating up over at the Scobleizer. Scoble took some people (Engadget specifically) to task for not [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 11:39 am
How Not To Throw Yourself Under a Bus:
If you think there’s a story here, ask someone else to read/investigate it, or use someone else / a company you aren’t affiliated with as the example.
Using yourself as the example is always going to come across as naval-gazing / self-obsessed on some level and will put an immediate negative spin on what may be a valid issue.
January 28th, 2007 at 11:41 am
Robert, not that as a double-Z-list blogger you care what I link to, but I pretty much never link to videos.
I’ve linked to one, and it was over this past weekend. Why did I link to it? First, it was a weekend, so I watched something that came highly recommended. Second, it wasn’t merely interesting; it completely blew me away. Third, I wanted to find out if everyone else had really seen it already, as the blog I found it in implied. (Yes, apparently everyone has.) And finally, I got to talk about pirates and ninjas.
It’s not your fault that I never watch videos. The problem is, I very rarely watch videos. I can’t watch videos at work, for one thing, because of the audio. And most videos are too damned long for me to watch any time: if I’ve got forty minutes, I’ll read a magazine or write an article or something, not watch video of something that marginally interests me.
Not that I’m only marginally interested in Intel’s chip fab news — I think it’s a big deal. I’m extremely interested — but the thing is I’m extremely interested only in a very shallow way. I’m really interested to the extent that I can learn about it in five minutes and get back to whatever else I’m doing. I’m not interested in watching something as long as your typical network TV show.
So the size of the commitment is one thing, as is the ability that I can’t edge video watching in at work. (Heck, I can’t even watch the videos that my job has produced that impact me — and for all of the same reasons I don’t watch your videos.) So is information density: I can read a lot more in five minutes than anyone is likely to speak intelligibly.
None of which is to say that I don’t like video — only that I rarely watch it, and that because I don’t watch it, I don’t link to it. I suspect that many others have approximately the same experience I do…
January 28th, 2007 at 11:43 am
Might be too late to this thread to get notice, but Robert, for whatever it’s worth, and for whatever Intel blogger cred I have, I linked to you:
http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2007/01/penryn-at-45-nanometers-is-intels-latest-breakthrough-scoble-has-the-goods/
Know why I did it? You were the only person I read in all the 45nm news that had first person information on the topic, rather than just rehashing what was in a press release or a newswire story somewhere else.
I’d much rather get my news and information from the source. Commentary and opinons (good ones) can be found all over the blogosphere, but this is news, and I want my news from the source.
January 28th, 2007 at 11:55 am
You’re being a complete a-hole. (maybe that’s what the A in A-List stands for).
Intel making a faster chip might be a big deal in your little microcosm, but it sure can’t be considered a bigger deal than a terminal illness.
You need to get out more, and realise that people with fast computers (and the $ to buy faster ones) are a MINORITY in this world.
I guess your next big theory will be that HDTV news is more important than an AIDS cure.
January 28th, 2007 at 11:55 am
Adam:
>did you post the videos in order to to inform people of an important new product or was it to get recognition for having a story before anyone else?
Both. This is a competitive business. The ones who get the news first (and get the links first) get the traffic.
Which is why I raised a stink. This was a clear-cut case where I got the best “from the horse’s mouth” story (and I did it in BOTH text and video, to answer J. Laser’s claim above) and I wasn’t getting the links. At least I wasn’t on Saturday morning.
January 28th, 2007 at 11:55 am
[...] Pissing off the blogosphere… « Scobleizer - Tech Geek Blogger via CrunchNotes » Wow, Scoble Just Threw Himself Under a Bus [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 11:56 am
[...] of Scoble, he seems to have gone off the deep end because people are not linking to him (which of course has resulted in a flurry of links). I [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 11:58 am
smee: >>Intel making a faster chip might be a big deal in your little microcosm, but it sure can’t be considered a bigger deal than a terminal illness.
Wrong. Go back to journalism school.
Look at what the New York Times puts on its front page. Someone dying in a hospital doesn’t get on the front page unless there’s some other news angle. Intel doing the most important semiconductor redesign in 20 years (according to Moore himself) is front page news.
Now, to the person dying? Of course the illness is more important. But you keep changing what we’re talking about here. I’m not talking about what’s important to an individual, I’m talking about what’s important to the audience. In this case Engadget’s audience is tens of millions of people who care about gadgets. Not someone dying of cancer.
January 28th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
>Both. This is a competitive business. The ones who get the news first (and get the links first) get the traffic.
OK - so in the realm of informing people, you should be happy that people know what’s going on, even if it didn’t come from you.
As for it being a competitive business, what business do you see yourself in exactly? If you’re looking to be a tech news outlet that breaks new stories, then why do you expect your apparent rivals to give you hits in this “competitive business”?
>Which is why I raised a stink. This was a clear-cut case where I got the best “from the horse’s mouth” story (and I did it in BOTH text and video, to answer J. Laser’s claim above) and I wasn’t getting the links. At least I wasn’t on Saturday morning.
I would say that you may have gotten the best story, but you didn’t present it in an easily digestible way and so it was to much for most readers to be bothered to sit through.
Your posts on the videos are either guides to the videos (or it’s the very first post on the subject, which is just a quick run down of an intel press release)
As for getting the links, but the looks of the multiple trackbacks in these comments alone, you seem to have gotten your way in the end.
January 28th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Considering you’re probably in a bad mood, this is a question, not an accusation.
Were you paid to produce the video?
January 28th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Sorry, that should be:
“Were you paid by Intel to produce the video?”
January 28th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
seriously, this is like rich people bitching about their name not being on a building. and trying to spin this over into caring about the little guy bloggers makes you sound even more patronizing…
January 28th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
> Ahh, so you’re of the “I must point out another person’s sins by doing those same sins myself, albeit 10 times worse” school of thought? How does that work for you? Gain lots of friends that way? Influence lots of people? OK, OK, I see I’m going to have to throw myself on the ground sobbing about every cancer survivor now.
January 28th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Did a whole bunch of comments and trackbacks just get deleted?
January 28th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Nope, nevermind… must be caching. ;)
January 28th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Great. Your stupid comments box completely swallowed my comment.
January 28th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Dominic: Intel paid us a fee for the “professional” video — they don’t sponsor the ScobleShow. So far only Seagate sponsors my show. I would have done this video either way. Intel is a corporate client of ours.
January 28th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
i’m pretty new to the whole blogwhoring thing, but i suspect all the nytimes linking nonsense has to do with links at the bottom of the nytime piece - maybe linking to Technocrapi and stuff?
i like Arrington’s description, though. it’s can be taken as coming off so casual. “hey, check that - scoble just threw himself under a bus. damn, these are some good waffles.” the phrase is great, to begin with, but the casual distance is classic.
why does anyone read that crappy gadget site, anyway? and what the heck am i doing on scoble? blah.
January 28th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Sorry, but that’s just pathetic. Whine, whine, whine…
January 28th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Out of these 77 comments, I think Aaron’s is the one you should seriously considering following up. A 30 second teaser (whether on YouTube or on your site) isn’t a bad idea for some of your videos:
> My suggestion: If you really want to get linked by the other blogs, provide your content in a way that’s accessible to them — a 30-second YouTube clip with the best stuff from your long video, then “deep tease” to the long video.
January 28th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
[...] Sunday, January 28th, 2007 in Annoyances, Stupidity Blogging fame must be getting to his head. [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
[...] His latest rant is about the lack of influential bloggers backlinking to other blogs and instead linking to MSM publications that in many cases have little or no respect for bloggers. Like most of his rants Robert has shot from the hip and then spent the following days cleaning up and correcting himself if he has been pointed out to be wrong. [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Scoble - considering the fact that Intel paid you to make a video showing off their product (which you’ve only revealed now) just makes this whole hissy fit of yours even more rediculous.
Basically, you’re actions are akin to a PR company having a go at a news outlet for not featuring the product they press released about.
In fact, it’s the exact same, but your press release is a video rather than a short little text-based email etc.
How you even thought it was a good idea to criticise people for not linking to your paid-for press release is beyond me,
And as for your comments on this being a competitive business, I think I understand now… basically your press release didn’t get much direct coverage from the media so now you’re worried that Intel won’t pay you to produce a future “professional” video, right?
January 28th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Nice summary Adam.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Interesting observation Adam…
January 28th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Wait, they paid you to do the video? And you wonder why someone might link the NYT over a press release on Intel from Podtech? LOL, talk about a lack of transparency. This is just as bad about reviewing free laptops without revealing that they are free.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Focus more on who reads your blog, not who links to it. It makes life simple.
Mark
January 28th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Robert,
Sorry, but you really sound like an A-lister baby here. I expect this kind of whining from the C and D’s
On a sort of related note, I won one of those Vloggie awards that Podtech presented for best travel vlog and no one from your group bothered to even let me know, congratulate me or anything, much less offer to send me that little trophy the other winners got. (I got one email before the event asking me if I was coming, but nothing more).
But, did I make an attempted link-bait’esque stink in the blogsphere calling you guys names? Nah why bother, I’ll just keep concentrating on making the best content I can. So, instead of you getting all wussy about not getting links on external sites, maybe Podtech should work to better follow through on some of your own internal projects.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
Rule #1 of Blogging: Don’t blog while angry.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
When you were creating video at Microsoft it had a direct bearing on my job. It was common after viewing a channel 9 video to think wow that product could really be helpful to my shop on a project. Most of your videos you currently create are more in the line of entertainment. If your video was about what products Intel has that are currently shipping and what problems they can solve in the work domain I would have made time to watch the video. When a video is entertainment it gets queued behind family time which basically means I will never get to it.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
By your own admission your not getting links to ScobleShow.
I think you have some good videos on ScobleShow, but I think most of them are boring, they drag out and are uninteresting to me, at least.
You keep bringing up the video from the Zune team. Honestly I found that video pretty lame. The questions were not that good; and from time to time you were wrapped up in your own sense of humor (which is strange); and you either are being rude to your host or asking uninteresting questions.
And when you get a video with Bill Gates, you screw up the video, it’s all over the place. And the questions you ask. Those were the worst. You get an almost exclusive with Gates and you ask him about CPU heat and global warming. Geez. It was obvious that no one in that interview did their homework on Bill.
If you produce something worth watching people won’t have a choice but to link to you.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Robert, thanks for the explanation. I’d take those facts into account when deciding if I should link to something or how to do it. I do think that for a geek audience, your video is interesting and has value.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
There seems to be a bit of a blur with this. Intel are not a sponsor but *are* a client? Money is being exchanged with Intel either directly or indirectly. Only in the comments has it been mentioned they are a client of some description. I’m honestly surprised as you normally are excellent with disclaimers. I think you should have had some kind of message saying your employer has an existing financial relationship with them.
I agree with Adam, (disclaimer: I know him) this video promotion is akin to the work of a PR company.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
What’s happening to the comments? Some seem to be missing…
January 28th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Casting my 2 cents into the ocean…
I read several articles about Intel’s 45nm process yesterday, and watched your very interesting video too… well very interesting except for the bunny suit part which was rather silly. It was interesting to hear an old-timer high-up Intel manager (I bet he does more management than pencil to paper engineering these days) give an overview of the industry from the Intel perspective. Whole thing might have been just as interesting with him sitting at his desk though. I got the impression the whole bunny suit idea wasn’t your idea, but, whatever.
But really, what was new about yesterday/ Intel has been talking about 45nm for months. AMD has been responding with their schedule (which is obviously behind Intels, but not by a lot).
Here is all I heard yesterday that I hadn’t heard (or remembered) from before: The word “Hafnium”. It made me think of a joke: One Intel Engineer to another: “Hey Ed, how about we try using Hafnium… maybe we can make the circuits HAF the size they were before. Get it? Hafium, “Haf” the size, HAHA.”
Anyway, the other news was that IBM and Intel jointly patented this process. Which means AMD will have as much access to it as Intel, it will show up in PowerPCs and just about anywhere else that uses either Intel or IBM to fab their chips. Money in the bank for these two companies and probably no big technology advantage for any company in the long run. Competition will be on who rolls out the process fastest, most cost effectively.
So now go interview someone over at IBM and see what they have to say, and while your at it, figure out which Pacific Rim country they are probably all buying this fab equipment from and see if a lot of this technology isn’t in the hands of IBM or Intel at all any more.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Both. This is a competitive business. The ones who get the news first (and get the links first) get the traffic.
Or the ones that whine the loudest.
January 28th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
Hi Robert,
At Data Center Knowledge we linked to the New York Times in our initial writeup, but also promptly posted your comment, including the link. Your video really added to the understanding of the story for the data center crowd (that’s why we linked the Intel PR video as well).
As for the NYT issue, I get it at home and thus it was the first thing I read Saturday morning, even before booting up. I’ve been noticing lately that the NYT gets an outsized helping of MSM links from blogs, especially when compared to the Washington Post.
January 28th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
[...] linking to Scoble, because come on, he deserves a link or three. Plus, he linked to me the other [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
While I think Scoble is being a bit whiny (that’s more in presentation), I think he has a point. More scary is the fact that Engadget IS “Big Media” now. They’re simply a tiny part of AOL, which is part of the Time-Warner media machine. They’re also in a very real way your competition (far more than the NYT).
So, maybe it’s no surprise that they aren’t linking to you.
January 28th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
Oy, Robert. I think you are trying to do too many things at once.
In Scoble Show, you are documenting startup companies mostly in Silicon Valley at this moment in time. That’s valuable.
But it’s not the same type of valuable as a sneak peek into an Intel fab. That’s the province of MSM. Not often do you get breaking news from a Fortune 100 on Scoble show.
Many people didn’t even know you got that sneak peek, because those people were expecting just another video of a web 2.0 company, or don’t watch Scoble Show because they are silicon geeks. Did engadget even know you were out there with your video?
I think you have unreasonable expectations of yourself. You have 112 friggin comments on this post, and I’m lucky if I ever get one. Count your blessings.
January 28th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
“My suggestion: If you really want to get linked by the other blogs, provide your content in a way that’s accessible to them — a 30-second YouTube clip with the best stuff from your long video, then “deep tease” to the long video.”
That’s a great suggestion by Aaron. Part of the success of YouTube is that the bulk of the clips are really short & easy to digest.
January 28th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
[...] Scoble has raised a ruckus in a corner of the blogosphere this weekend (and here and here) by complaining about the lack of “credit links” among some [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
People who do not link to the blogs (or other sites) where they found the inspiration for their own posts are just takers. Sadly the world is full of takers. I talked with a blogger who felt if he linked to blogs where he got ideas, that he would not appear as smart. Oh please.
You are correct on this topic.
Keep up the good work. I like the controversial Robert. Stirring up the pot like this makes you blog even better to read.
thom
January 28th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
“UPDATE: TechCrunch’s Mike Arrington writes “Wow, Scoble just threw himself under a bus.””
This is amusing. Arrington has a tendency to throw himself under buses every other day.
And on his blog post about this he ends with “Good drama.” We know Arrington loves good drama. That’s what CrunchNotes is. CrunchNotes, good drama… all the time. :) It’s something about the person which attracts those sorts of comments and drama. Good for a laugh though. :)
January 28th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
[...] target on his own back with these rants. I typed a 6 paragraph response to his most recent, “Pissing off the blogosphere…“, but I deleted it thinking to myself, “Why bother”. That brings me to something [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
Scoble, your videos are too long!
I want a concise 8 minute or shorter film on a subject that I’m interested in (and occassionally a longer well edited peice on a topic that Really interests me).
Bloggers shouldn’t have to sit through a 45 minute clip to find out if it will be interesting to their audience or not. Perhaps you could make the longer peice available to those who are interested but come on 30 minute films are way too long.
I’d feel like a hypocrate linking to something I didn’t sit through so if I were a blogger in this case I couldn’t link to your content cause I don’t know whether or not its relevant.
Perhaps you should post fewer films if it means better editing. Compare the time it takes to read a relevant news article to the time it takes to view one of your clips. (Yes I know you have many that clock under 10 minutes but over half of them don’t)
January 28th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
“At Microsoft I helped build Channel 9 into a site that had 4.3-million unique visitors a month. How did we do that? By showing long videos with engineers discussing stuff that probably has more detail than you’re interested in (I did 700 interviews, most of which were longer than 30 minutes and most of which most people on earth would find incredibly boring).”
- I think you’ll look back on this thread as a great learning experience. You’ve got to recognize you’re dealing with a completely different audience now. Your primary audience isn’t the tech community that needs your information to do their jobs better. Your primary audience now is the techcrunch, news.com, engadget, gizmodo crowd.
Those that have passing interest in technology and digest most of their news online because its quick. Videos longer than 5 minutes really offset the added benifit that video does has.
January 28th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Mikal: I wonder if TV stations get email saying that their hour-long programs (with 20 minutes of ads) are too long. :-)
January 28th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
[...] read more | digg story [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
[...] read more | digg story [...]
January 28th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Adam: I haven’t deleted any comments in this thread. It’s possible that Akismet (my comment spam filter) removed some, though. I’ll see if I can find them (probably not, I’m getting thousands blocked per hour).
January 28th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
@82
According to your wikipedia entry, you didn’t finish journalism school yourself - so why lecture others?
Anyways - despite what you think, you’re not a journalist. you’re a sensationalist &/or observer.
if you were to be a successful journalist you would have a bigger sense of reality…
January 28th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Scoble,
Seriously, welcome to what it’s like to be the other 55 million bloggers online. THIS HAPPENS EVERY DAY to almost ALL of us. We’ve all either been ripped off, not linked to, stepped over or other things by other (typically larger) blogs.
I want to say that it’s almost somewhat offensive that you’re throwing a fit when the rest of us just deal with it in a more adult matter.
I’m all for helping people, but it’s every man for thems