Comments on: Aggregators vs Producers: Introducing findingDulcinea, Mahalo, and others to come

By: What you absolutely must know about linking before you launch an aggregator — Eat Sleep Publish

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:03:29 +0000

[...] even know if they’ve been there or not. But slowly, they’re waking up to the fact that aggregating content can be a powerful way to drive traffic and ad [...]

By: Editors or Algorythms: The new push for meta-journalism — Eat Sleep Publish

Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:17:08 +0000

[...] posted a while ago about the opportunity for newspapers in aggregating content, whether that happens because staff pick stories or because the crowd votes things up or down. But [...]

By: Things that were Not Invented Here are OK. Really. : Eat Sleep Publish

Things that were Not Invented Here are OK. Really. : Eat Sleep Publish — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:45:47 +0000

[...] Aggregators vs Producers: Introducing findingDulcinea, Mahalo, and others to come [...]

By: Jason Preston

Jason Preston — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 06:39:39 +0000

Thanks Curt, I feel like the post is still a little jumbled, mostly because these thoughts are all a little jumbled in my head still.

I would love to see the P-I pursue an aggregation strategy (most new orgs seem very reluctant to link out to other domains—i have a post or two about this in the hopper) and take that space for the northwest and own it.

I think I’ll poke around at the history of TV to see if I can find good parallels and or insights about the change that’s happening in the newspaper world now.

I didn’t know that when TV first showed up, people thought paying for it was a ridiculous idea, but if that’s the case, that does lend some weight to the idea of offering premium content (read: cable) for a membership fee.

By: Curt M.

Curt M. — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 06:01:34 +0000

This is a very good post. Lots to ponder here.

You’ve hit on something that newspapers and other papers do have that a zillion bloggers and citizen journalists don’t (yet): credibility. You know with a trusted news organization that you can … er, trust them. That what they publish is generally accurate. There’s a history to the New York Times or the Washington Post or the Seattle P-I that is important and valuable.

Your idea to combine that credibility with an aggregator is smart. Sort of like a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval: If this was aggregated by the NYTimes, it must be worth reading. That’s something that news organizations of long-standing should consider as part of their future publishing plans (are you listening, guys?).

I still think that at some point (not soon but eventually) we’ll be paying for more stuff online. When TV was new, people thought that the idea of paying for it was ridiculous. Now, there aren’t many people who don’t pay for their TV in some way.