Comments on: Communitisable http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/ a blog by the digital team at Pan Macmillan Tue, 15 May 2012 05:14:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Gavin Bell http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-411 Gavin Bell Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:13:52 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-411 Two points, I didn't say that community should be the priority for publishers, they should continue to focus on high quality content, as this is what drives their business. More that they should recognise that the audience is now widely represented online and likely to respond. So publishers should recognise that and make use of this relationship. Throwing out your content to the wind and hoping that it catches is a fine policy, one that several publishers are trying, however what I proposed in the talk http://www.slideshare.net/gavin/gavin-bell-from-readers-of-books-to-a-community-of-readers-oreilly-toc08 was that you can harvest the discussion on the wider internet and show it to the readers who come to your own site. There are multiple options here in how to do this, but if you have a solid range of content in a subject area or niche, then drawing in the content from elsewhere on the internet and encouraging conversation around the areas you publish in will result in increased traffic coming to your site. A set of terms and conditions stating that the content will not be sold, as we have on Nature Network will appease many people's fears. The aim is to become a place that people come to for information and contact around a subject. Becoming a hub rather than a spoke. Facebook et al are losing out partly down to a lack of focus and noise on their site. Two points, I didn’t say that community should be the priority for publishers, they should continue to focus on high quality content, as this is what drives their business. More that they should recognise that the audience is now widely represented online and likely to respond. So publishers should recognise that and make use of this relationship.

Throwing out your content to the wind and hoping that it catches is a fine policy, one that several publishers are trying, however what I proposed in the talk http://www.slideshare.net/gavin/gavin-bell-from-readers-of-books-to-a-community-of-readers-oreilly-toc08 was that you can harvest the discussion on the wider internet and show it to the readers who come to your own site.

There are multiple options here in how to do this, but if you have a solid range of content in a subject area or niche, then drawing in the content from elsewhere on the internet and encouraging conversation around the areas you publish in will result in increased traffic coming to your site. A set of terms and conditions stating that the content will not be sold, as we have on Nature Network will appease many people’s fears.

The aim is to become a place that people come to for information and contact around a subject. Becoming a hub rather than a spoke. Facebook et al are losing out partly down to a lack of focus and noise on their site.

]]> By: thedigitalist.net » The Literary Internet http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-394 thedigitalist.net » The Literary Internet Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:59:34 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-394 [...] roughly equal measure. Page is to be applauded, not least because his sentiments echo some recent posts here on the [...] [...] roughly equal measure. Page is to be applauded, not least because his sentiments echo some recent posts here on the [...]

]]> By: Sara Lloyd http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-389 Sara Lloyd Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:09:32 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-389 I couldn't agree more with Adam Hodgkin who has blogged about the same subject at http://exacteditions.blogspot.com/2008/03/tools-of-change.html and has linked to your post, Michael. I couldn’t agree more with Adam Hodgkin who has blogged about the same subject at http://exacteditions.blogspot.com/2008/03/tools-of-change.html and has linked to your post, Michael.

]]> By: Eoin Purcell http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-388 Eoin Purcell Wed, 05 Mar 2008 12:45:00 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-388 Michael, I see your point there and I guess I think you are right too. It does worry me though. It's almost as if you have produce the content, set it free and hope it catches, the flow being very much out of our hands. I suppose that's only a problem if what you are working from is a structure that needs a certain degree of certainty to operate and finance itself! Eoin PS I KNOW rather than suspect the marketing people will try to be more aggressive! Michael,

I see your point there and I guess I think you are right too. It does worry me though. It’s almost as if you have produce the content, set it free and hope it catches, the flow being very much out of our hands.

I suppose that’s only a problem if what you are working from is a structure that needs a certain degree of certainty to operate and finance itself!

Eoin
PS I KNOW rather than suspect the marketing people will try to be more aggressive!

]]> By: Michael Bhaskar http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-386 Michael Bhaskar Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:32:26 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-386 Eoin- its a difficult one. I think you can approach a community if you bring something that is useful, or exclusive. Even then though, the web allows people to create their own useful things and so this isn't really that much of an advantage. What I think I am getting is that we should be aiming for a point where we offer people the capability to do what they want to do; its not so much about approaching as being flexible enough to become embeddable. So it's more about facilitating processes on the web than instigating them. However this is looking at things from a specifically publishing perspective and I suspect marketing would favour more direct methods. Eoin- its a difficult one. I think you can approach a community if you bring something that is useful, or exclusive. Even then though, the web allows people to create their own useful things and so this isn’t really that much of an advantage. What I think I am getting is that we should be aiming for a point where we offer people the capability to do what they want to do; its not so much about approaching as being flexible enough to become embeddable. So it’s more about facilitating processes on the web than instigating them. However this is looking at things from a specifically publishing perspective and I suspect marketing would favour more direct methods.

]]> By: Adam Hodgkin http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-385 Adam Hodgkin Wed, 05 Mar 2008 09:19:35 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-385 http://exacteditions.blogspot.com/2008/03/tools-of-change.html .......Publishers still need to concentrate on presenting content in the right way. Priority number one. The 'right way' includes with the appropriate access networks; and the right meta-data. Maybe that is all -- and communities may be another story. Michael Bhaskar at thedigtalist is hitting the right notes...... http://exacteditions.blogspot.com/2008/03/tools-of-change.html
…….Publishers still need to concentrate on presenting content in the right way. Priority number one. The ‘right way’ includes with the appropriate access networks; and the right meta-data. Maybe that is all — and communities may be another story. Michael Bhaskar at thedigtalist is hitting the right notes……

]]> By: Links of Interest (At Least to Me) 04/03/2008 « Eoin Purcell’s Blog http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-384 Links of Interest (At Least to Me) 04/03/2008 « Eoin Purcell’s Blog Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:51:13 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-384 [...] Communities. Warning: a dash of cold water and some common sense. Here [...] [...] Communities. Warning: a dash of cold water and some common sense. Here [...]

]]> By: Eoin Purcell http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-383 Eoin Purcell Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:44:11 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-383 Michael, I've been mulling this one all day. I think you are right, it is clearly not necessary for publishers to be the hub and owner of the community, though in some cases this is both desirable and helpful for the community. One query I would have is how a publisher approaches those communities it can benefit from without appearing too much like a parasite of some description? Eoin Michael,

I’ve been mulling this one all day.

I think you are right, it is clearly not necessary for publishers to be the hub and owner of the community, though in some cases this is both desirable and helpful for the community.

One query I would have is how a publisher approaches those communities it can benefit from without appearing too much like a parasite of some description?

Eoin

]]> By: Jack Macdonald http://thedigitalist.net/2008/03/communitisable/comment-page-1/#comment-381 Jack Macdonald Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:38:35 +0000 http://thedigitalist.net/?p=99#comment-381 I'm trying, too desperately perhaps, to come up with a better neologism that communitisable... Two others that need re-thinking: the blidget (a blog widget) the blook (blog to book, book to blog) I agree though, publishers need to start giving people something to work with online, for free. Perhaps the fact that most people wouldn't want to read a whole book online, even if it's freely available, could be used to publishers' advantage? I’m trying, too desperately perhaps, to come up with a better neologism that communitisable…

Two others that need re-thinking:
the blidget (a blog widget)
the blook (blog to book, book to blog)

I agree though, publishers need to start giving people something to work with online, for free. Perhaps the fact that most people wouldn’t want to read a whole book online, even if it’s freely available, could be used to publishers’ advantage?

]]>