idiomag

Just realised that I never made a post about our redesign… It went live a while ago, and if you like or loathe it, please let us know so we can keep improving it. Based on feedback and traffic stats, we could see that the interaction buttons weren’t entirely useful or understandable previously, so we have cleaned everything up a bit. Hopefully it is easier to use now!

We also added in loads of new contributors, and more content types such as the funky photogalleries. idiomag is now running about 6000 articles a month!  And growing…

Well, a lot has happened since we last posted here. The big players have been buying up the online advertising market, Facebook has allowed external apps in its social network, and last.fm has finally been bought by CBS (last.fm: please don’t change - we love you as you are!).

We have some very exciting developments in the pipeline for this month. We have been working hard on tweaking idiomag’s algorithms and content-base, as well as making the magazine more readable. Also, at some point in the next month or so, we will jump on the (very appealing) bandwagon and create some groovy Facebook applications.

We have had a good range of new contributors come on board, including JunkMedia, Ground Up Hip Hop, Losing Today and Chronic Magazine. This will really help deepen our content-base, enabling us to deliver a more relevant and interesting magazine. In addition, we are now broadening the content beyond gig and album reviews, to include interactive competitions, feature articles and some podcast-style sections.

One major improvement that we are just completing, is that readers will soon be able to join idiomag using their last.fm, iLike, MOG, or MyStrands username. From this we can immediately create a very relevant magazine, from their past listening habits. Much simpler and quicker.

Its also nice to see that idiomag is still picking up some great press, with recent mentions in WebUser magazine and Precision Marketing magazine.

Well thats about it for the moment. As usual, let us know your thoughts and suggestions.

Google can track our ideas and interests from conception (search patterns) to conversation (gmail) to commerce (google checkout). All great products… and I congratulate Google for lining up such a deep range of products that compete well as stand-alone services, but also can collect such valuable advertising information.

They have conquered contextual ads, they have moved into TV and radio adverts, and now bought DoubleClick’s superb technology and client base. DoubleClick’s reporting systems will certainly be useful as formats become larger and more rich-media focused - especially as TV and online continue to merge in terms of formats, targeting and reporting.

Tim O’Reilly seems confident that Google doesn’t pose much of a risk to privacy, and states that Google is being held to a higher standard than other information owners. Well, as a certain wise man once said, “To whom much is given, from him much will be required.”

The Register/Tech Digest have listed idiomag on a run-down of UK startups. We are alongside some great companies, including last.fm and DropSend.

The list is very diverse, with some really interesting companies being mentioned. It is great to see that the UK startup scene is alive and kicking.

I just came across a great article by Olivia Hemmings, a post-graduate at Cardiff University. Entitled “Mags online: It’s getting personal“, Olivia explains that the public has a short attention span online and yet is demanding ever more quality content. She then summarises the movement towards personalised online publishing by the large publishing houses, in order to try and meet this demand.

The article contrasts what idiomag is doing with what IPC Media is trying to build into NME: myNME, a feature for registered users of NME.com, asks users for their favourite bands and then fills the myNME page with relevant content. The ‘personalisation’ system seems to be quite simple, just displaying the most recent articles that include the user’s favourite bands name as a keyword. Therefore it doesn’t contain the learning ability of idiomag, or the discovery aspect (where content is suggested based on specific genre interests rather than just band names). However, it certainly is a great step in the right direction.

The article contains a good quote about idiomag from Kim Hollamby, head of electronic media at IPC Media:

“I like the idea (of Idio); IPC is building this technology at the moment, although there’s no business plan for it yet. Magazines work because they have a focus, but I’m aware that our readers have mixed interests. In essence I think this concept could take over but ultimately that will be dictated by the user.”

Although I am admittedly biased, I believe that the true innovation in this area will have to come from startups like idiomag - simply because we don’t have to worry about continuing to please millions of existing readers, whilst coordinating the integrated development of a myriad of leading national titles. In the same way that TV production/distribution companies stood seemingly powerless whilst YouTube advanced into their domain, many digital publishing startups have been moving into the glossy magazine domain - the best of which are innovating in at least one area, whether it be personalisation, community, interactivity or media blend.

Sramana Mitra’s post at Read/Write Web got me thinking about how idiomag fits in with her ‘Web 3.0 formula’ that predicts the direction of the web.

So first the formula: Web 3.0 = Content, Community, Commerce and Context + Personalisation + Vertical Search

Sramana’s main point seems to be that the web is moving into a phase where services (Content, Community and Commerce) will be bunched around contexts, with the context providing a value-added foundation to the other C’s. And as a summary that describes the biggest players, I wouldn’t disagree. The large ‘Web 1.0′ companies do need to work hard to meet the very varied needs of their mass of users. The underlying value of content, commerce and community is inherent to its context, as it is this that draws together relevant content, a focused community, and related commerce.

As Yahoo is finding out to its cost, a lack of clear context causes revenues (advertising in particular) to be constrained. On the other hand, within a given context, personalisation and vertical search are both means of providing users with relevant (and therefore more valuable) content, commerce and community, also enabling relevant (and therefore more highly-priced) advertising.

With less mature services, the formula seems more descriptive than predictive. Most of the more recent offerings are built specifically for a context (e.g. LinkedIn is built around networking specifically for business gain, and Last.fm is built around personalised music for music lovers), or have not developed to the point at which content, commerce and community have overtaken context. It will surely be the natural progression for many of the successful ‘Web 2.0′ startups to mature into a position of providing all of the formula’s elements.

I am not sure that Sramana’s formula defines Web 3.0, but instead it seems to put a good framework on the immediate progression within ‘Web 2.0’. My comment being really that the next phase of the web, as described by the formula, does not seem different enough to be a next phase!

Now I will use it to explain what idiomag is doing…

idiomag = 4C + P + VS

Context:
idiomag’s context is the personalised magazine. It is for creative people who regularly read music magazines and have specific likes and dislikes.

Content:
Being a magazine, idiomag’s content is fundamental to the service. It is a range of text articles, videos and audio that analyses, describes and comments upon subjects relevant to each reader.

Commerce:
The methods of commerce will be more clearly defined in our v1 launch in March than they have been previously. Firstly, we enable advertisers to target very specific segments, based on their interests as well as their demographics. Through their rich-media formats, advertisers can choose to seek the response they most desire from relevant readers, whether that is a direct sale, a click-through, or brand recognition being built. In addition to advertising, idiomag’s initial focus on music content will allow users to buy the tracks they are listening to (or reading about), and concert tickets, with more commerce options opening as the content subject areas expand.

Community:
Although it won’t be available for everyone immediately, idiomag can connect readers based on their likes and dislikes, geography and demography. This will allow networks of readers to be created, allowing readers to publish pages to their network on an opt-in basis.

Personalisation:
I am glad Sramana mentioned this, and not just because it is idiomag’s strong point! In order for users to use more of, and make better sense of, the incredible resources on the web, companies will start to use more effective methods of personalisation. This will make using the web radically more efficient, and more useful for more people, because searching/browsing time will be dramatically reduced. Of course, idiomag delivers personalised content and advertising to every reader – with the magazine becoming increasing relevant over time as readers rate the content they view.

Vertical Search:
This is an interesting one, because idiomag’s initial premise is that our system delivers such personalised content that readers do not need to search for it. However, we realise that even when personalisation has effectively reduced the need for search, that functionality must be there. So in v2 (don’t even ask me when that will go live…) we are aiming to integrate some ‘vertical-search-like’ options for the more proactive users. For example, we are working to identify the functional classifications of articles, so the content type and structure is identified. For example, some readers will prefer shorter newsy content, where as other prefer a more in-depth analysis. And some don’t mind what structure the content follows, as long as it is written with a sarcastic/comedic edge.

So there we go… an interesting exercise!

Read/Write Web has recently published an article explaining how niche technology services, such as digg and del.icio.us, are now being recognised by the mainstream media. For example, the New York Times and Time Magazine have digg and del.icio.us buttons beside their online content. As Alex Iskold rightly point out, this has huge implications for the usage of these sites - and therefore their value to advertisers and potential buyers.

The fact that traditional publishers are essential to the mainstream adoption of online services (and that this dependency seems odd) epitomises the current state-of-play in the media industry. We are nearing the tipping point, when online becomes the new offline and when traditional publishers must go beyond simply using “Web 2.0″ services, and actually become them. And of course, Web 2.0 publishers (and their VCs) are betting that the payback will be swift, as advertising money follows the masses onto these services.

We’d just like to say a quick congratulations to Jon, for a brilliant feature of FormatPixel at TechCrunch. FormatPixel allows you to create your own online magazines, fanzines, brochures, catalogues, portfolios and much more. Jon does the development for FormatPixel in his spare time, but for his day job works as the main developer for our Flash magazine interface!

Read/Write Web have an interesting article focusing on Flixter, which ends up discussing the future of social networking.

It seems quite clear that many commentators are starting to draw a distinction between networking-for-pleasure and networking-for-purpose. In one way, this is absolutely true: There are now a few large networks that have no real function other than facilitating social interaction. But on the other hand, surely its very Web 1.0 (I hear the groans) to separate out the social from the purposeful, especially when the sheer volume of ‘Myspacers’ and ‘Facebookers’ prove that there is a purpose (albeit a non-commercial one) in interacting online.

Just as the large “generic” social networks are meeting a need, a host of new networks are growing to meet more tangible and specific needs. Linkedin is the place to network for business. Change.org is the place to discuss and plan social activism. And as more organisations build in networking aspects that add to their services (rather than just surrounding their services), it will be seen as a vital part of commercial and personal activity.

A prime example of this is seen in product reviews. I would not consider buying a new camera without reading online reviews of the product. In fact (and here’s the killer point), I would probably go to the internet with no fixed make/model in mind, but just open to what the millions of other consumers recommend. And (some would say unfortunately) this is the basis of most effective and sustainable networks: A clear and robust revenue model. As networks start meeting specific needs more effectively, and start to become more closely linked with action, we will start to see a range of profitable services-with-networks, rather than the current abundance of networks-with-slightly-relevant-services-tagged-on.

Here is a great post by Jeremiah Owyang which identifies and classifies the types of online marketing. It reads like a marketing textbook (reminiscent of my University days) but does a great job of structuring how marketers should think about their online strategy.