List of friends and ability to see who's onlineImage via WikipediaAs the growth of the social web accelerates, I keep hearing of efforts that will bring our social graphs into one united place, and I find myself increasingly questioning why that will be the case.

From the mass community sites like MySpace and Facebook, and associated connectivity apps (Twitter, Friendfeed, etc), as I connect with increasing numbers of people, I lose any ability to have meaningful conversations or relationships with any of them. Deep conversations about specific subjects are not of interest to the masses, and I find that attention spent on the mass sites drives the conversation to the lowest common denominator, which tends to be giggly not serious.

I’ve become a big fan of linkedin as an entrepreneur– the business focus keeps me more productive, and less prone to the distractions that come from the mass social sites with their glittery or seductive appeal.

Generalizing it out, I think we’ll see a growth of “channels” relevant to different parts of our lives over the next few years, and that each of these will have different (but somewhat overlapping) friends, colleagues, and community bents. Just as you expect different things from shopping at WalMart, Bloomingdale’s, H&M, and Victoria’s Secret, why would we present the same recommendations and discussions to all of our friends? While we filter these heavily in offline life, online life hasn’t yet caught up. This would contradict the approach taken by OpenSocial and other “friend aggregators”, as they assume your group of contacts and friends as applicable to any situation.

Where today, major aggregators are losing the signal to noise battle (due to legitimate differences in people’s opinions and interests in addition to spam), vertical channels providing relevant context will be the norm. We’re seeing some evidence of this in the growth of news amplifiers (from tech focused Digg to other communities like Reddit, StumbleUpon, NewsVine, etc). Ning is enabling deep conversations in various interest communities, and blog conversations are increasingly creating communities around topics. The next gen of search will be figuring out how to find these vertical winners– which may mean platforms will have to splinter their databases and engines to optimize around smaller contextual units.

In our offline lives, relevance is associated with channels, and few go to the general store or mainstreet– instead we have rich retail experiences in grocery, electronics, movies, etc through specialized stores. At the end of the day, massive choice needs to be directed at solving particular jobs, and we want the best solution for a pressing problem, not the best solution on average for anything (else we all would carry swiss army knives).

It’ll be interesting to see when the ad agencies, the bigger corporations, and the VCs begin to understand this– its not about owning the most users or sign-ins, but creating deep engagement highly relevant to small groups of individuals at a time. Mastering these deep conversations and helping others looking for this increasingly relevant content will be the next wave in the constant battle of signal vs. noise in a world of limitless distribution.

Zemanta Pixie
Tagged with:
 

Cutting through the clutter– the rebirth of relevance

Just came back from the StartupLA conference, where there was some interesting storytelling from Jason Calacanis and Mark Jeffrey (kudos to Mark and Jason for being very frank and entertaining speakers)– both now of Mahalo. It really highlights how the overwhelming amount of “free” content on the web has left us surrounded by mounds of advertising and commercially-biased “crap” and that the pendulum is swinging back to use of humans in organizing information. Mahalo I think creates a great mass market bridge by providing rich, edited content in key subject areas– but I think the true winners will be those that can mass-customize the information to be contextually relevant to the individual in addition to better addressing the content results for keywords inputted into search (more on that later)

Jeremy Liew of Lightspeed wrote a great post on Meaning = Data + Structure and highlights how user-generated content is often less helpful because it lacks structure. I would say that the argument could be extended further by adding context in 2 ways: cutting through the clutter and improving the contextual relevance. Both have great analogies in retail branding, as retail brands allow you to immediately select something with an appropriately targeted value proposition, making the choices relevant to immediate needs and reducing choice to a manageable subset for selection. Extending the analogy, paid professional selection is an important filter in markets with virtually unlimited selection.

It used to be that content was the limiting factor– and now that has changed to time and attention. The information product is increasingly becoming a service of providing relevant information– and the business models of information distribution will change to reflect the new currency.

Its interesting how the business model for search has changed as content has exploded over the web. As the video shows, the web itself has changed how we see information in its seemingly unlimited growth and distribution utilizing the “free” reach of the web (again via Jeremy).

Early models in search relied on finding what little content was good– and the indexing structures of dmoz, Yahoo, and Craigslist created real value for users by creating simple structure and populating it with relevant links.

Google and the mechanized web crawlers rode the wave of exploding content, realizing that it was too much work to index and store using the information hierarchies– and simplifying the categorization to a keyword match–information was everywhere and this was now the easiest way to find it.

As the volume of information has risen further, the mechanized results are becoming increasingly polluted and commercially skewed. It would appear that ways of increasing relevance now have less to do with breadth and more to do with filters: through trusted sources (social networks–Linkedin, facebook, Web 2.0–Digg), through professional editorial work (Mahalo, blogs), and through micro-targeting of deep content (e.g., vertically specialized sites like HealthShoppr).

It appears the next set of wars will be about relevance and context. It’ll be interesting to see which players rise to serve consumer needs– or if the fragmentation of properties will be used to drive context– and the web becomes about being the big fish in an ever-widening array of pools. Even more interesting will be what the combo of the cross-platform ad sites (with cookie data collected from across the web) with the existing search engines will create. Will Google be able to move past the privacy folks to utilize the terrabytes of data collected on its userbase to create automated segmented, personalized search results? We shall see…the battle for relevant information is just getting started.

Tagged with:
 

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!