Skip to main content

JPG Magazine: Brave New Photography

[via the excellent Publishing 2.0]

My, how I like this business!

So – it’s a photography site where “pro-am” photographers can upload images on the current theme. So, it’s “social” and “web2.0” since other website users get to vote on the images they like best. And it’s multichannel because the “winning” photos are printed into a tasty-looking art-mag which is then for sale. The photographers also get paid if their images are printed: not masses, but hey – we’re ‘pro-ams’ and our mums will finally see us ‘in print’.

The site saith:

JPG Magazine is for people who love imagemaking without attitude. It’s about the kind of photography you get when you love the moment more than the camera. It’s for photographers who, like us, have found themselves online, sharing their work, and would like to see that work in print.

JPG is a magazine. It’s published 6 times a year by 8020 Publishing. Check out the back issues. The photos in the magazine come from you!

JPG is a website. Here any photographer can join and upload photos to their member page. You can also submit your photos to issues and themes for consideration in the magazine.

JPG is a community. JPG exists because of, and exclusively for, photographers like you. Without you, we’re nothing.

.

Nice.

I’m going to file this under “ideas I wish I’d had and acted upon”.

InternetRetailing appoints award-winning Editor

[Announcement] InternetRetailing appoints award-winning Editor

Really pleased to announce that we have a new, full time, excellent Editor for IR, meaning that my “Launch Editor” role can be retired in favour of ‘Editor in Chief’ (or non-exec). The best suggestion so far has been “UnEditor”. Nice.

We had a gratifyingly strong field of applicants and expect to work with many of the shortlist as contributors in the future. However Emma’s experience in retail, launch experience and writing credentials really got us excited and I can’t wait to see the results of her work in the November edition of the magazine.

Press release after the jump.

Continue reading

InternetRetailer is now InternetRetailing

We’ve decided to change the title of InternetRetailer.info to InternetRetailing.net.

Although we liked the focus on the retailer rather than the verb, we found that too many of our advertisers were confused as to whether we were the ‘UK branch of InternetRetailer.com‘ (we’re not!).

In sales you only have a few seconds to make a sale and so any distractions or confusion are just a waste of time and revenues. So, on that note, welcome to our new name!

Job Vacancy: Editor for InternetRetailer magazine and portal

InternetRetailer has been growing very well and, with the launch of the print magazine gearing up for November, it’s time for us to get a dedicated Editor.

You’ll remember I’m sure (!) the pre-launch announcement of Internet Retailer, as well as the uncloaking. Since then subscribers have grown well (it’s free, so that helps!) and advertiser response has been uniformly positive.

The magazine will launch initially as a bimonthly publication, but indications are that we’ll be at a monthly frequency within the first six publications.

My role was that of ‘Launch Editor’, and – while I’ll continue to write analysis pieces we’re now looking for someone to take the reins and manage the newsgathering, newsletters, portal improvements and the print magazine.

The job description is available as a pdf here. Please feel free both to forward to any interested parties and to get in touch with any questions.

This title (with its portal, conference and magazine) is the only one in the UK focused upon internet retail and as such this is chance for an ambitious journalist to make a name for herself in this high profile business area.

We expect that the Editor will work under a freelance contract initially but we’re totally flexible as to structure, location etc.

“Mum’s the word” for Mumsnet and a heavy-handed Gina Ford

Dear oh dear oh dear. Gina Ford, one of the most high-profile and controversial parenting gurus has gone all “cease and desisty’ on Mumsnet, a community mother-run bulleting board that, in the past, she contributed to.

For those of you without kids, or who have only heard of Doctor Spock’s advice then the rest won’t matter. For the bulk of late-parenting, middle class Britain though there can be few people who haven’t come across Gina. You’ll either love her, loathe her or – realistically – both.

We were Gina fans for our twins – the strict, routine-based certainty kept us sane and worked for the twins. For ‘tertius’ we’ve more mellow and have a middle path – the Baby Whisperer.

Anyway, the issue here is whether a bulletin board can be fully responsible for all comments made. Are they a ‘common carrier’ or a publisher?

I won’t go into the details since the community owners have done a great summary here.

I sympathise with them in their predicament which seems to me to lack the essential component of compromise on Ms Ford’s part – goodwill.

Having been involved with football forums (language you wouldn’t believe!), youth forums (language you can’t understand) and business advice forums (language you can’t afford to get wrong) I know the issues are real and important. Technology can help with alerting scripts, filters, user flags, warnings etc. Ultimately, however, the two pillars of bulleting boards are:

* good behaviour
* freedom of speech (given the above).

Good behaviour includes forum rules, netiquette, the law…

It’s sad that a combination of apparent determination to bloody someone’s nose, a misunderstanding about the operation of the internet, and a refusal to accept good moderating practice (prompt removal following complaints etc) is endangering this operation.

I’m sure that there must be a US host that’d take over the business…?? 😉

In the meantime I’m reminded of a probably apocryphal tale of Apple’s naming conventions where Carl Sagan objected to his name being used internally as a code name. The Apple guys changed the codename to “BHA” (butt-headed astronomer). Sagan sued again and lost. Story on Wikipedia (must be true then):

BBC “on-demand Creative Future”

The BBC has announced a wide-ranging change in responsibilities at BBC Towers to fulfil the promises of its Creative Future review under the Director General, Mark Thompson.

People outside the BBC will no doubt either boggle at the number of people at the top table or wonder what the fuss is about: both views are valid.

The announcement seeks to streamline the responsibilities for content, commissioning and the technological and organisational resources to deliver. For “new media” business (used to seeing all content as digital from the outset, and by definition multi-use and multi-media) then this will seem sensible and belated. For people used to working in either focused business or highly matrixed businesses then the allocation of responsibilities will also seem like a no-brainer.

For people who’ve worked at the BBC (disclosure: I was Head of Online Operations back in the prehistoric days of 1998+), or people who work closely with the BBC then the sound of tectonic plates moving painfully will be clearly discernable.

The BBC was structured (despite its many restructurings) along the lines of people who owned the channel, people who made stuff, people who had money to get people to make stuff and people who owned the technology to allow the stuff that was made to get to people people who paid for it – ie viewers and listeners (and now ‘mousers and clickers’). Along the route the fiefdoms of News, Sport, Radio and TV guarded their content jealously. Latterly, while many of the silos were cracked and ostensibly working together, there remained a shortfall in achievement mainly due to lack of co-ordination, integration and systems to allow teams to work together, and others to access material created elsewhere.

This change signals from the highest level that the Corporation is now focused on putting money, resources, processes and ideas into delivering eduction, entertainment and information to the customer – across all channels.

The challenge (apart from the not inconsiderable cultural and operational ones) will be to retain the distinctive voices of the BBC channels via the Channel Controllers and exploit the capabilities of each medium. This is what the BBC has been doing for years, though, and a structure that provides improved visibility, direction and cohesion has to be welcomed.

The overall feeling though is a ‘so what?’. This reorganisation is no more than one would expect from a modern business, focusing (at last) upon the customer. That the BBC is responding to ‘web2.0’, social networking phenomena etc is commendable, but to what extent is the BBC driving these initiatives or indeed what has it to contribute?

There’s no need for the BBC to become the “myspace” of Middle England (although Gather.com is an interesting new network in the US – a sort of Myspace for adults who like public radio – you can imagine this in the UK as a sort of space for Radio 4 listeners!). They certainly have a role in bringing the late majority to understand and use technological developments, but to be fair the late majority would arrive eventually.

Ultimately, the BBC’s uniqueness is its compelling content – hence the excitement over its promises to open its archives. I can’t help feeling that further efforts in this area would be to our (customers’) best advantage, while a great openness to commercial and third party partnerships would deliver the social networking, web2.0, innovation benefits without the angst of navel gazing, structure reviews and continual worrying over the commercial:government:funded interface.

To the extent that the new structure can deliver a freer way of working I welcome it. Other than that this is one for historians of the Corporation, or who are writing PhDs on organisational structures.

Internet Retailer editorial

Internet Retailer is now uncloaked and is gradually taking on its own life. It’s remarkably exciting seeing the subscriber numbers notch up and the press releases and leads start arriving at the ever-open editor’s inbox.

Selectivity is an issue since many of the releases I’m getting are just “something to do with the internet or technology” and don’t really address the specific concerns of ‘internet retailers’ or etailers. There are already some excellent forums and publications which focus on individual specialisms (eg retail technology, or fashion, or catalogue retail, or online security…). Internet Retailer though is focusing on the intersection of these skills and interests.

I’ve also published the first editorial – I’ve reproduced it in full after the jump – but it’s interesting to see from a catchup of my RSS subscriptions that there are very different interpretations of Google’s new Checkout and its impact on etail. My view is that it’ll be welcomed by consumers (who don’t trust retailers for the most part) and it’ll pose a challenge to the survival of weak retail brands as Google become the shop front for the digital consumer. It’s worth having a look at the comment on Techcrunch to see a totally different view.

In the meantime let me know what you think of Internet Retailer, good or bad. Oh, and don’t forget to mail me with any tips, leads and suggestions.

Continue reading

Scoopt Words: we blog, they sell

Scoopt Words – sell your blog content to the media…

Interesting development here by the Scoopt folk. Best known as an aggregator of ‘citizen journalism’ (ie you send them your MMS ‘scoops’ and they’ll sell them). They now offer a service which links bloggers’ content with editors’ desire for content.

This is less “pop will eat itself” than “media will feed itself”. Ideal for journalist wishes to fill space, balance debates and troll for ideas, and also for the quirky, excellent, knowledgeable and hip to get an even wider circulation for their wordage.

This marks another turn of the wheel in the age-old (dis)intermediation debate: no sooner is mainstream media exploded into the atoms of user-generated content sources than a ‘new aggregator’ arises – whether a rating system (eg Technorati) or a marketplace/exchange.

Nowadays, we may all be authors and digital media producers, but every author needs both a publisher and an audience. Even in the land of ‘content/publishing/web/other 2.0’.