Whatever Happened to Blog Networks?
Paul Scrivens has posted on the topic “Why blog networks failed” over at Wisdump.com.
Do you remember those things that we called Blog Networks? You might have paid attention or you might have gone about your life like nothing changed and that’s one of the reasons why they failed. ‘Failed’ might be a harsh term to use, but of the hundreds of blog networks that started in 2005 and 2006 which ones are thriving and by ‘thriving’ I don’t mean staying above surface?
His line of reasoning, which is mostly sound, follows the Calacanis line that atomized blogs are less effective revenue earners than major titles, like Engadget or Boing Boing.
Readers of Syntagma may recall we’ve been considering this proposition for up to a year. The reason we’ve amalgamated our 50 domains into three network magazines, and pruned a great many others, is our recognition that the model was not flexible or attractive enough to make the breakthrough in revenue terms.
I believe “blogging” as content provision peaked possibly as far back as a year ago. Other, more traditional or hybrid, models have more to offer, I believe, in connecting with a technology-and-information-bemused audience. Blog networks are fading as Web 2.0 is slowly sinking into a rosy sunset.
But I also think Scrivs underestimates the amount of time it takes to get a content business going. Even Weblogs Inc took 18-24 months to build a site to a decent readership. That takes staying power as well as trust in the model.
What has happened is that following the success of a few sites which grew rapidly in a market with little competition, thousands of copycat operations have appeared like mushrooms in a damp forest.
We have saturation point in gadgets, autos, gaming, and gossip. The failure of many blog networks is largely one of imagination and genuine innovation. Just look at the derivative stuff out there.
As for the model, it can evolve, adapt and morph into newer forms. But, as we well know, it takes an immense and constant effort to accomplish this. It’s not for the fainthearted or the easily discouraged.
Content as a business is not synonymous with “blog networks”. There are some great content sites out there that are not blogs or networks.
I agree with Scrivs that the blog network model has failed as a road to easy riches. But, if you’re in it for the longer term, and innovate while bringing in traditional publishing skills, there may yet be solid achievement round the corner.
Bottom line : There will always be a need for good, informative, well-researched content with commentary while search engines expand and refine their techniques. How that content is presented is important but less so than its usability by the audience.
The only constraining factor is excessive competition squeezing out some operators. But then, that’s always been the case in every industry since wheelwrights started up in the Stone Age.
John, I agree with the gist of what you’re saying, particularly the need to stick things out, but disagree on Web 2.0 fading (although notably I too believe that blogging has peaked, at least in English speaking markets). We’re seeing signs of Web 2.0 maturing, but I don’t think necessarily it’s peaked, it’s only peaked when people run out of ideas, and surprisingly I’m still seeing new ideas coming forward, sure, there’s a tonne of rubbish clone sites, but look beyond that and there’s still some amazing ideas coming forward, and I’d suggest that there is still more to come.
By Duncan on February 22nd, 2007 at 11:26 am
Well, you’re more in touch with that than I am, Duncan, so I won’t disagree with you. But where are the IPOs and the big sales? After the Youtube sale to Google there’s been a great deflation of expectations in the Web 2.0 and blogging fields. You can sense it across the space.
I also agree with your thoughts about management on your own blog. Management is the toughest part of all, which is why I write about it so much here.
By John Evans on February 22nd, 2007 at 11:37 am
I don’t think IPO’s are a good way to measure the space, very Web 1.0 dare I say
but it’s only been a month or two since Yahoo acquired MyBlogLog. I don’t think necessarily that expectations have been deflated, but I would agree that realism has finally hit the Web 2.0 market, and despite firms still being funded often with dubious ideas and business plans, there still is some substance behind it all, sure, there’s a lot of fluff, or bubble activity (I’ve called it froth) there, but I still don’t think that we’ve gotten to the point that we’ve exhausted new ideas, and new ideas after all are the cornerstone of Web 2.0.
By Duncan on February 22nd, 2007 at 12:02 pm
You mean to say you’re seeing a backlash against all these web2.0ish things? That people might want to step back a little and start consuming their media at a more easier pace.
Sounds okay to me.
On Blog Networks: well they basically suck, are boring and have sameness written all over them. When I hook up to a new blog I don’t care whether it’s in a network or not – I care if it gives me what I want.
Therefore, for me a successful network is one of 10 or so highly branded sites/blogs in a decent niche – the Gawker model rather than the JCal model.
By Martin Neumann on February 22nd, 2007 at 12:15 pm
The “decent niche” is the problem, Martin, they were mostly taken early on. So you have to be innovative in other ways, not necessarily technologically, in my opinion.
As for Web 2.0, it’s been overhyped as usual. I’ve no objection to bits of Ajax here and there and a few socializing sites for teenagers, but we do need something more grownup now.
By John Evans on February 22nd, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Those new ideas could also be the starting point of Web 3.0, Duncan. Anything that expands connectibility according to the users needs is surely part of the Semantic Web. I’m seeing a lot of good stuff from Google which goes well beyond blog networks and what we think of as Web 2.0.
By John Evans on February 22nd, 2007 at 12:35 pm
I feel sick just reading the phrase “semantic web”. Let’s just deal with Web 2.0 for now. I don’t believe there will be a real Web 3.0 until there’s a really large change in the tech background of it all. Web 2.0 realised the challenges of Web 1.0 due to what we now all call Broadband, a phrase which is flawed in itself, the UK like the US and Australia all have caps on real broadband (1.5mps etc..), where as South Korea has 10 and even 100mps connections. When we get to that speed then we’re talking Web 3.0, because the scope of possibilities changes dramatically.
By Duncan on February 22nd, 2007 at 1:06 pm
True John. With most “decent niches” already taken or saturated it’s how you differentiate that will get you to the top.
Give us your thoughts, John on how you’d innovate in a niche to rise above the pack – I’m interested in your thoughts … and don’t tell me to wait for the book!
And something for the grownups – now we’re talking.
By Martin Neumann on February 22nd, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Duncan, I’ve got 8 MB/s out in the sticks in Devon. The UK is in Web 3.0 right now.
In any sector only 5% ever really succeed, so it’s not surprising that many blog networks are failing. It’s normal.
Those that succeed will innovate and stick with it to the end. That’s not something new. The problem with BNs is that the people who rushed in wanted a goldrush but the mines were all worked out before they got there.
By John Evans on February 22nd, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Martin, I’ll do a post on that tomorrow — or you can preorder the book.
By John Evans on February 22nd, 2007 at 1:26 pm
8mb is borderline at best, the top of ADSL 2+, and really the stretch of Web 2.0. That speed is borderline on the bandwidth required for the next gen, although having said that I’m typing this on 2mb Cable
By Duncan on February 22nd, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Well, the 8MB/s is part of a 12MB/s system, which we’ll probably get at some stage. But as Cringely says, if everbody suddenly used it all at once, that bandwidth would shrink considerably. Video is the danger in 2007, never mind Webs 2 or 3.
By John Evans on February 22nd, 2007 at 1:31 pm
[...] [the commercial blogsphere] about the saturation of blogging as a topic. [Here, here and here] My own belief is that metablogging peaked as a useful activity around a year ago and continues [...]
By SYNTAGMA » Is Writing about Blogging Overdone? on February 25th, 2007 at 2:58 pm