Comments on: The 1% rule http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/ by Jeff Jarvis Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:43:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Article Database » Blog Archive » The Blogosphere Is Standing Still http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-369024 Article Database » Blog Archive » The Blogosphere Is Standing Still Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:39:03 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-369024 [...] think Jeff Jarvis correctly captured the essence of the situation, A common misconception about interactivity is that [...] [...] think Jeff Jarvis correctly captured the essence of the situation, A common misconception about interactivity is that [...]

]]> By: Si fa presto a dire partecipazione… « work in progress http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-361842 Si fa presto a dire partecipazione… « work in progress Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:48:54 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-361842 [...] 4) Ma davvero serve tutta questa partecipazione? Ribaltando il punto di vista di Mayfield, diversi analisti pensano che la diseguaglianza non solo è inevitabile (c’è in tutte le comunità offline, è una storia già vista con le Bbs e i forum) ma è anche desiderabile. “Una piena partecipazione renderebbe la moderazione impossibile ed economicamente impraticabile” dice Suw Charman (consiglio la lettura di questo suo articolo). E con lei è d’accordo anche Jeff Jarvis. [...] [...] 4) Ma davvero serve tutta questa partecipazione? Ribaltando il punto di vista di Mayfield, diversi analisti pensano che la diseguaglianza non solo è inevitabile (c’è in tutte le comunità offline, è una storia già vista con le Bbs e i forum) ma è anche desiderabile. “Una piena partecipazione renderebbe la moderazione impossibile ed economicamente impraticabile” dice Suw Charman (consiglio la lettura di questo suo articolo). E con lei è d’accordo anche Jeff Jarvis. [...]

]]> By: The Blogosphere Is Standing Still | Internet Marketing Blog http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-349202 The Blogosphere Is Standing Still | Internet Marketing Blog Wed, 02 May 2007 21:55:42 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-349202 [...] think Jeff Jarvis correctly captured the essence of the situation, A common misconception about interactivity is that [...] [...] think Jeff Jarvis correctly captured the essence of the situation, A common misconception about interactivity is that [...]

]]> By: Michael Wagner http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-345178 Michael Wagner Sun, 18 Mar 2007 04:45:17 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-345178 All my school teachers seemed to think we all had to participate. I wish I had this argument then. Actually it makes sense to me - thanks for extending this conversation. Keep creating, Mike All my school teachers seemed to think we all had to participate. I wish I had this argument then.

Actually it makes sense to me - thanks for extending this conversation.

Keep creating,
Mike

]]> By: techbee http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-49401 techbee Thu, 18 May 2006 21:21:16 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-49401 B. Horowitz of Yahoo Research had a crystal clear diagram about this on his blog, some weeks or monthes ago: http://www.elatable.com/blog/?p=5 B. Horowitz of Yahoo Research had a crystal clear diagram about this on his blog, some weeks or monthes ago:
http://www.elatable.com/blog/?p=5

]]> By: Alfonso Frachelle http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48843 Alfonso Frachelle Wed, 17 May 2006 00:40:03 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48843 Interesting post. I've read about similar things in the past, but this time you revived the issue with data I ignored. I'll even refer to your post on a paper I'm working on about political campaigns and their use of the Internet. By the way, it would be helpful (and the right thing to do, actually) if you always made a reference to the original texts you quote. Interesting post. I’ve read about similar things in the past, but this time you revived the issue with data I ignored. I’ll even refer to your post on a paper I’m working on about political campaigns and their use of the Internet.

By the way, it would be helpful (and the right thing to do, actually) if you always made a reference to the original texts you quote.

]]> By: kenji mori http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48666 kenji mori Tue, 16 May 2006 07:29:12 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48666 please ignore the above comment i made. now i realized usually audiance is not a contributor. please ignore the above comment i made. now i realized usually audiance is not a contributor.

]]> By: kenji mori http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48663 kenji mori Tue, 16 May 2006 06:28:53 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48663 interesting observation. Another way of looking at it is that "yes" 1% is <i>small</i> but , is probably way too greater than creator/audiance ratio for the traditional media such as TV. interesting observation. Another way of looking at it is that “yes” 1% is small but , is probably way too greater than creator/audiance ratio for the traditional media such as TV.

]]> By: Robert Andrews http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48603 Robert Andrews Mon, 15 May 2006 22:47:23 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48603 Yeah, I'd been <a href="http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/story1853.shtml" rel="nofollow">thinking about this earlier today</a>. I guess, in social news organisation, this is acutely significant - it's just that 1% that becomes the new editors. There would be a fascinating study on just *who* the 1% *is*, and why they contribute (and whether they're spinmeisters trying to game the system). Yeah, I’d been thinking about this earlier today. I guess, in social news organisation, this is acutely significant - it’s just that 1% that becomes the new editors. There would be a fascinating study on just *who* the 1% *is*, and why they contribute (and whether they’re spinmeisters trying to game the system).

]]> By: Robert Feinman http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48596 Robert Feinman Mon, 15 May 2006 21:54:45 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48596 And only 1% of those who contribute actually have anything original to say... And only 1% of those who contribute actually have anything original to say…

]]> By: Jed Leland http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48585 Jed Leland Mon, 15 May 2006 21:00:20 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48585 That's amazing... so I suppose all I have to do is to keep <a href="http://coldstew.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">WRITING</a> and crawl my way up to that 1.8% bracket, and people will eventually come? Nah, I don't beleive it, I think it's just that under 2% of the population are competent with the pen and can achieve the creative state enough to actually produce. Other's just give up whatever emotional state they're in and dump their blog/wiki/porn subscription. J That’s amazing… so I suppose all I have to do is to keep WRITING and crawl my way up to that 1.8% bracket, and people will eventually come?

Nah, I don’t beleive it, I think it’s just that under 2% of the population are competent with the pen and can achieve the creative state enough to actually produce. Other’s just give up whatever emotional state they’re in and dump their blog/wiki/porn subscription.

J

]]> By: David Martin http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48569 David Martin Mon, 15 May 2006 19:37:15 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48569 Interesting post Jeff - bravo! The first such single digit "rule" from electronic media appears to be an observation first made by Lew Hill, the founder of Pacifica radio. Hill reasoned that it was possible for his enterprise - the first listener sponsored radio operation - to go forward expecting no more than 2% to be active contributors or patrons of his stations. While 2% remained an unrealized goal of his for many years Hill was still able to grow his venture attracting funds from a bit more than 1%. Interesting post Jeff - bravo! The first such single digit “rule” from electronic media appears to be an observation first made by Lew Hill, the founder of Pacifica radio. Hill reasoned that it was possible for his enterprise - the first listener sponsored radio operation - to go forward expecting no more than 2% to be active contributors or patrons of his stations. While 2% remained an unrealized goal of his for many years Hill was still able to grow his venture attracting funds from a bit more than 1%.

]]> By: Tom Devine http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48567 Tom Devine Mon, 15 May 2006 19:29:38 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/05/15/the-1-rule/#comment-48567 The same applies to other media. In talk radio we go by the ratio that less than five percent of our listeners, even those who have listenend for years, will EVER call-in. The other 95% plus participate strictly by listening. In the same way most people in online communities participate by reading, viewing or listening to what is on the site, but not contributing anything of their own. The power of the audiece comes from their ability to destroy a site by abandoning it if its credibility is damaged or the site does not offer what they want. And just because most don't use the interactive features, don't think they don't value them. Try to take them away and this silent majority will roar! The same applies to other media. In talk radio we go by the ratio that less than five percent of our listeners, even those who have listenend for years, will EVER call-in. The other 95% plus participate strictly by listening. In the same way most people in online communities participate by reading, viewing or listening to what is on the site, but not contributing anything of their own.

The power of the audiece comes from their ability to destroy a site by abandoning it if its credibility is damaged or the site does not offer what they want. And just because most don’t use the interactive features, don’t think they don’t value them. Try to take them away and this silent majority will roar!

]]>