Darn it all, techno utopians are so cute. Nevertheless, structured blogging — the over-ballyhooed idea that people will post to their blogs using different forms depending on what they’re posting — is going to be a flop.
It’s the usual three reasons I trot out repeatedly to technologists with utopian visions who want to change the world on the back of altered user behavior:
- People are lazy
- People are lazy
- People are lazy
There is simply not enough benefit to the average blogger to compensate for the added irritation of having to pull up a separate form for each type of content you post. It’s a little like the reason why the average Outlook user has around 2,000 emails in their inbox at any time: The cognitive effort of classification is enough to keep people from bothering. The same logic holds for structured blogging.
The intelligence belongs in the network and in the algorithms. The same way that Gmail is increasingly successful at parsing addresses and UPS data from my email, and the same way that Flickr users are fond of tagging one another’s photos, is the only effective way to make blog data become more coherent. Relying on users to do the heavy lifting — however intellectually appealing — is not going to work in the real world of lazy users who see little in it for them.
Related posts:
this looks like microformats redux, a DOA effort that was long past its “sell date” many months ago.
once again, the web2.0 crowd hasn’t accepted the commodity status of most internet services yet. they’re modern dadaists – so concerned with only the newness of something that they contrive up crap like this just so they can point at it and say to each other “this will be huge”.
tagging, microformats, geotagged data, etc so far has had zero impact on the 99.9999% of users.
Agree 100%
This is sad, and ridiculous.
Honestly, you’d think these folks had better things to do with their time, but they’re all so busy congratulating eachother on how clever they are that they fail to grasp some of the most fundemental points about people and technology entirely.
I feel just a little embarrassed for them. Not much, but a little…
Dammit, and I was so excited about it.
I agree that people are lazy. Or, I should say, I’m too lazy to disagree. Anyway, using multiple forms is not really feasible. But,
Imagine there was a magic way for the blog to be intelligent enough to figure out what you’re saying and put it in the right form. Or, that we were somehow smart enough to have just one form represent everything. Would that be an interesting world? I don’t think you’re arguing against microformats, but rather the method of producing microformats in this particular proposal.
The key thing you’re saying is that there’s not enough benefit to the average user to justify the effort. So we just need to lower the effort and provide a benefit. Then we’re in an interesting place.
I felt the same way about tags – that the effort would not justify the benefit for the average user. That’s still true – the average user doesn’t tag – but enough people do to have very interesting things fall out of it.
Spot on post, Paul…thanks.
Amen. Remember SGML? Same story. Nobody wanted to semantically structure their documents.
Paul,
I actually think that structured blogging is a good thing, but I partly agree with you that bloggers won’t bother to add structure to their posts. The Outlook comparison is a good one.
However, there are some cases in which putting up a structured post might be less cognitive effort than creating an unstructured one. Imagine blogging a book review – it would actually be less cognitive effort to fill in a form with fields like title, review and rating than it would be to write it in an unstructured way. The form itself is reminding you what to write. What’s more, the form could auto-populate itself with information about the book.
I tend to agree with you that structured blogging won’t take off right now – too much effort, not enough reward for the blogger. We need to decrease the effort and increase the benefit – that might involve algorithms or a community-based solution. Either way, it seems inevitable that blog posts will become more structured – and we should aim to do that without modifying user behaviour.
Well said Paul, with one caveat. Bloggers [or users in the broader sense] certainly ARE fans of structure. It’s the development of blogging platforms [e.g., Blogger, Six Apart [Movable Type]] which has allowed blogging growth to explode.
But users love structure WHEN IT MAKES THINGS EASIER FOR THEM. In other words…when structure automates processes, thus making it easier for the user to get straight into his end goal [whether that be sending an email or in this case, writing a blog post], it works. But when structure ADDS TO THE COMPLEXITY of a task, it’s going to be hard to achieve mass market acceptance much less help further it.
My $0.02
This article appears to confuse the average user with the person who blogs. The average user does not blog. Those that do, care enough to do the extra click to categorize their content. It’s got to be easy of course.
If they don’t, it’s probably not worth finding their content anyway.
Paul, Jason makes a great point regarding bloggers liking structure and using it already. I’d add the following to his views:
Point 1: Note that millions of users go to eBay and fill out endless fields of information.. or Autotrader, or Monster… because it’s worth it to them (and they pay for the privilege!). What we’re suggesting is that they do the same on their blogs and retain ownership of that data and hopefully get the same utility for free.
Point 2: We released a proof-of-concept plugin for WordPress a few months ago… thousands of people are using it without even realizing they’re doing it (see http://ennova.se/wp/2005/12/13/if-you-could-choose-to-live-forever-would-you/ for an example). Why are they doing it? Because it looks nicer on their blogs. Much nicer. this is exactly the behaviour we’re hoping for
Laziness implies a lack of usability. The key is finding a balance between the utility of SB and the extra work to fill out all those fields. One could have a fantastic restaurant review by filling out 45 fields, but of course no one would do that. If however, you ask for comments and three simple drop downs for service/food/decor, it actually becomes easier for the user. There are three key benefits for users: 1) it looks nicer, 2) it’ll get found more easily, and 3) they retain ownership of the data. We’re finding that such a combination does indeed provide more than enough incentive to users – we just have to continue making it that easy.
Blog Post are already stuctured, thats why its so easy to create RSS,ATOM,RDF feeds. Without structure blogs would not be consumed as nearly as much as they are. More structurte is good. Yes make it easy for the user nothing new there.
“intelligence belongs in the network and in the algorithms”. Its not a bad idea to give hints along the way and help the networks and algorithms.
We’re supporting structured blogging, because…well, what our system does is NOT blogging: it already has support for events, images, reviews, etc. etc. As Jason Wood points out here in the comments, people will fill it out if it makes things easier for them.
Events are a simple example. If you fill out the date, then it will get added to a calendar for you automatically.
Structured data for the sake of structured data? Nope, not at all. But if big aggregator X will crawl around and aggregate reviews, or image metadata, or whatever, then there is probably incentive from both the toolmakers and the publishers to support a common machine readable structure, since it means increased traffic.
Are people too lazy to fill out a form on ebay or craigslist?
Yeah! I just started an Opera blog and it’s annoying to have Opera tell you to ‘tag’ things. Phooey on that! Tagging is Dead! why tag when you can let Google do the sorting and collating and tracking.
Opera’s blogging app is really polished; I don’t use Opera anymore. I confess; I do it all with Firefox. but I used to be an Opera fanatic.
It’s about value. Don’t tell me I need to structure my data for you – just not going to happen. Make it easy for me to add value on my work, chances are then it might make a difference. As Boris said, “Structured data for the sake of structured data? Nope, not at all.”
One of the big problems I have with current proposed structured blogging/microformats is the value proposition is backwards – the only ones to benefit in are PubSub, Technorati, Google and the likes.
It’s not a bad idea, but will require a few iterations before we get to something really useable. IMO – relying on “intelligence in the network and algorithms” will never amount to much with essentially dumb (for a reason) networks.
That’s like saying people are too lazy to tag their photos. Thousands of Flikr users would disagree.
However, as Bryan Rieger wrote, I need to obtain value from adding structure. It can’t be just to make someone else’s search engine work better.
I agree that people are lazy and therefore they will not go through the trouble of entering data EXCEPT if they are getting explicit value out of it.
And there are some cases where the economic or social value is such that it will make sense to go through that trouble.
Echoing Pete, Jason, Boris – yes, it’s actually easier to publish certain types of things using the SB plugin than using a plain entry form. If you want to review a book, for example, you can type in the name, hit ‘lookup’, and get the author, ISBN etc filled out for you. You also don’t need to worry about the formatting too much, as the plugin does that for you.
“I’m lazy too” – you’ll be happy to know that the SB plugin doesn’t REQUIRE you to fill out any of the fields. So even though you CAN publish pretty detailed structured data, you don’t HAVE to.
Bryan – yes and no… the search/data mining companies will definitely benefit by being the “middle men” between the publishers (bloggers) and the consumers (aggregators – decentralised ebay clones etc), there’s value all the way through. Bloggers get to collect all their stuff together – they can review movies on their own blogs, that they can control, rather than having to go to another site. Aggregators suddenly are possible.
Phillip – I probably should have stated ‘in the short-term’, regardless as it stands today there isn’t an immediate and direct value to bloggers. The structure is there, but it’s not necessarily (easily) malleable within the existing tools. Sure they get aggregated, but that was somewhat happening already (in a limited way) via feeds.
The value for the end-users/bloggers will really become apparent as the tools evolve and they can better manage, aggregate, remix and republish their content based on the underlying structure.
Lastly, on the fact that “the SB plugin doesn’t REQUIRE you to fill out any fields”… IEEE LOM/Dublin Core and the eLearning crowd went down this road before and merely ended up with a different looking mess. The auto-lookup/completion stuff is a really good start, but I think for structured blogging to really be useful to average users the data entry task has to feel less like a task.
Well, users may have a benefit, depending on the case. What if the user is SELLING something? Just put a post using the “I’m selling this” form and search engines will pick it up. Or, maybe the user is looking for something (ex. “I collect old computers” or “I’m looking for a house for 3 months in Athens, Greece”). Or even a personal resume, posted in such a way that future employers could do a search using certain criteria.
Finally! I have been ranting the same thing in private for a long time now. I just dont *get* structured blogging.
I have some structured elements in my Drupal blog and they absolutely drive me crazy. Perhaps if I had just one blog I could take the time to tag through everything so I can keep writing, but I need flow. I write on 16 blogs.
Structure will reduce my creativity.
“Structure will reduce my creativity”
That’s not true for everyone. Haikus have a strict structure yet they actually breed creativity, not hinder it.
I totally agree not only are people lazy but people are also used to to what they always done and it is very difficult to change a habit – the biggest enemy or resistance to change is habit.
Net
When the blogging applications integrate it into the interface to make it easy, more people will do it. Heck, people specify categories for their posts now. And most people who blog have already made a commitment to do some work. True, not everybody will do it, but when it’s a simple one-step process that quickly becomes a habit, it’ll become more commonplace than it will be at first.
“Structure will reduce my creativity”
Most creative people (even if they won’t admit it) produce better work under some constraint. Hasim’s comment to Haikus is very apt, but also think about essays, reports, animation, film, books – these are all only possible because of some defined structure.
In general, I couldn’t agree more. Even with tool support, I find it difficult to think of a user interface for something like MovableType or even MarsEdit that would make entering all the tags a quick and easy process. Even in a professional environment, such as a newsroom, it is incredibly hard to get people to insert metadata in a sensible and consistent manner.
However, if a company like Google said, “hey let’s dump GoogleBase and use microformats for building directories”, such microformats would gain a lot more traction. There would at least be reward for using them – making it easier to find your stuff. Job ads would be a good start. Nothing to do with blogs, but amenable to the microformat+search treatment and something that people want to expose to the maximum number of searchers.
Without a reward for doing it, structured blogging and microformats will founder. Some electronic component databooks already use a dialect of XML for structuring content. The problem was that there was no compelling case for everybody doing it – so the whole exercise largely ran into the sand.
I agree that some structure is necessary and productive for us to refine our ideas, but let’s get back to structure as it relates to blogging. This “type” of structure does not work well with those haiku or essay structures referred.
Those structures are to help refine thought to fit standard parameters. However, they can be limiting. I’ve had some teachers who like only essays that 100% follow xyz format. I would yank out my hair and do exactly what they wanted, but it was horrible and dull. Whereas, those that were willing to let me throw some contraints out the window got my best pieces ever.
So, let’s be more specific about creativity in relation to structured blogging. I’m saying that if I had to put this comment into different comment boxes depending on what it was saying, and then if I wanted to re-read and edit, my work would be hindered. Obviously, structured blogging will not be for comments, but you get he point.
While I really like the idea of structured content, I personally am not sold on the current structured blogging initiative – as mentioned the value to the user and the actual interface will probably be the biggest factors influencing adoption.
Also, I believe that structured content needs to be freeform and adaptable to fit the users needs and workflow. One workflow will not work for everybody. The way you might choose to define a comment compared to my method could be completely different – but the output (rendering) of that input could be similar enough.
I think the point I’m trying to make is that structured content needs to add value to the author, to not hinder their creativity and support their continued content management and publishing needs. Structure for the sake of structure (100% xyz format) provides no value. The workflow and the user experience will be critical for adoption.
“Note that millions of users go to eBay and fill out endless fields of information.. or Autotrader, or Monster”
Thanks for bringing this up but reality is the opposite. eBay has reduced online shopping down to one, free-form body of content. Same with job listing sites. Autotrader’s structured data pales compared to Craigslist’s unstructured data.
Boris Mann couldn’t be more correct when he says: “Structured data for the sake of structured data? Nope, not at all.” Unfortunately, virtually everyone who has argued for structure in publishing in the past seems to have argued for it simply for its own sake. (e.g. “semantic web” or “microformats” advocates.) But, that’s not what is being done at StructuredBlogging.org. Our focus in on the immediate benefit to publishers.
By introducing structure to the publishing process, we’ve enabled sites like http://incredibooks.com to build compelling, visually appealing presentations of book reviews. We’ve done this not by focusing on the formats but by focusing on delivering value to the publisher in the form of new and easy to use tools for generating content. By providing form into which data is typed, we’ve made it easy to build templated blog postings that are type specific and easy to read. This is massively easier than trying to hand-build tagged XHTML…
Because the structured data is included in the blog entry, it makes it possible for us to easily pull the data back into the form fields so that authors can correct mistakes or re-edit their posts after they published. It also makes it easier for aggregators and search engines to understand the publisher’s meaning and intent and thus for the tools to make discovery of the posts much easier.
Structured Blogging is an activity — it isn’t a kind of “structured data.” You can do “Structured Blogging” using all sorts of formats — RDF, XML, XHTML, microformats, whatever… This very key distinction is what sets Structured Blogging apart from past efforts to get people to do structured publishing of one form or another. The focus isn’t on the data formats — the focus is on helping publishers do better and more easily the things that they want to do.
We’ve provided open-source, freely deployed and modified extensions to Moveable Type and WordPress. We’re think they are easy to use. If anyone disagrees then I hope that they will either tell us how to make our tools better or that they will just do the work themselves! The source is there and its open. If you can do a better job, then: “Use the source, Luke…”
bob wyman
Structured Blogging podcast with Marc Canter and Joe Reger
You might have heard of the Structured Blogging initiative announced earlier this week by Marc Canter and…
Internal enteprise blogging is going to live and die by microformats and structured blogging.
That being said, I think that way they have implemented the user experience is not ideal.
I don’t want to write a review. I want to write a blog entry and drop a review into my entry. And as much as possible, I don’t want to fill out something that feels like a tax return to do it.
Structured blogging should extend the current user experience, instead of trying to replace it.
Let me give you more is always better than let me replace what you have.
The experience also needs to be far sexier than the current implementation – though that shouldn’t be a dig on their efforts so far.
Imagine for a book review, if you start with a regular blog post, and then drag and drop an review icon onto the page. That should give a quick AJAX powered form, which asks me to search for and identify the book, with a call to amazon. All the microformat requirements could be dropped in behind the scenes, a picture of the book could come up and I would be ready to grade the thing and write my review.
Will this particular initiative succeed. Dunno. Will blogging have structure. I say it already does. Full reasons at http://blame.ca/dick/?p=79
(when are you going to add http://sxore.com to your blog so that I can post links?
Blogs will flop. No way will any significant number of people change their behaviour to go typing stuff about their cats for strangers to read (or even typing comments in other people’s blogs). People are far too lazy.
Structured blogging
Belated congratulations to the Structured Blogging folks on their announcement this month and all the buzz. I think this is…
“Amen. Remember SGML? Same story. Nobody wanted to semantically structure their documents.”
Umm.. not so. SGML for documents that required precise input, precise references, easy transformation, etc., succeeded. Those are not the kinds of things one often published on the web.
Structured systems fail for lazy input. If the publication type (including most blogging, a sort of free form expression natively) is lazy, then the editor should be as well. If the publication type is rigorous, the editor should be as well.
All types in publish/subscribe pipes are not blogs. This is another ‘we have a hammer’ argument.
The market drives the evolution of technology; not the programmer.
I like your site.
Blogs with comments windows that you have to click to open keep the dialogue under wraps. Blogs like this one which string comments out in the open are much more proactive about sparking dialogue.
I hpoe people are not so lazy…
Some interesting points (lazy, lazy, lazy) but if we all were that lazy nothing would happen in the world. Your approach is a little bit short sighted. You are right in one point: We have to distinguish who’s going to publish structured information in HTML pages and what the tools for that are going to look like.
How about the Firefox plugin for extracting Microformats directly into your desktop application? How much time does it take to copy & paste some information into your application from HTML pages compared to clicking on the microcontent in the sidebar and importing it?
Better try for yourself. Probably have a lot learn…
Not sure if this is a right place… We have growing electronic newsletter mailing list, and I’m desperate to find decent, reasonably priced software or shareware for list management and distribution. We’ve been using Outlook and ACT and they’re not working well. I was found bulk email software for sending newsletter. Are there other good options to help save my sanity? Does anyone know of any good hosting company that can handle bulk email? We need to send newsletters to about 900 customers without the hassle of restrictions. Thanks!
This sounds like a categorical error though. Users are lazy, but are bloggers users? Obviously they are the users of blogging software, but in some sense they’re already being proactive about what they’re doing. Asking a casual user (i.e. user of email) to categorize something is asking a lot, I agree. Asking someone who sits down to write every day to tag and/or categorize what they are doing is not asking a lot at all.
I agree with len above. It really depends on the application. I have put together an application for teachers to share lesson plans and they dutifully put their lesson plans into a standardized microformat without complaint because they know what benefits they’ll reap (e.g. examination of the plan, commentary, and trade).
Universal declarations (“Users are lazy”) are never right (unless they’re this one).
Investment information of all Canadian public companies. Market Activity, US Markets, Canadian Markets Pure Trading Announces Launch Date. Canada Stock Exchange became Worlds’s sole exchange for the trading of senior equities.
http://www.CanadaStockExchange.Biz