It has been long weeks since I promised that I would publish my short interview with a Wired Magazine reporter. So finally, here it is:

Opening Question

Are sites like Digg and Netscape threatening the job of editors the way blogs have threatened reporters?

These are most definitely a threat. Anyone who denies that is, well….. in denial. Academically-speaking, peer-reviewed content suffers in quite the same way, primarily due to CiteSeer et al (publication farms) and the “just Google it” culture. I have had elaborate discussions with colleagues about this…

Interview

First, can I get some background on you. How old are you, where do you live and what do you do? One thing I want to convey is the every-dayness of contributors. I want readers to understand that people in their 20’s are able to manipulate as much web traffic as the New York Times’ editor.

I am a 24-year-old Ph.D. student from Manchester University. I have been studying here since I was 18 and I am amidst graduation (the viva). My daily routine has changed significantly in the past year. From being a (or “just another”) blogger I soon became a highly involved contributer in forums (technical newsgroups and mailing lists in particular). As time went by I found myself infatuated. A new phenomenon emerged, which offered access to a large audience. That was the point when I joined Digg. I was soon heavily (albeit not always happily) entangled. The longer I was there, the more influence I had. I was able to drive traffic to articles that appealed to me. I was even contacted by people whose site I had ‘Dugg’. The loveaffair continued as the momentum was there; there was something charming and addictive about it.

I am going to talk to some people about how they approach Digging, but I wanted to ask you more about how you approach being a Netscape Navigator. I, of course, am unfamiliar with your duties. How is it different from when you were a free contributor to Digg? Does it feel different because you are getting paid?

So… I shall assume that your input from Diggers obviates the need for me to deliver information about that side of the fence.

In Netscape, our duties involve the delivery of at least 5 submissions per day (on average). I personally exceed that by a factor of ~6, which means that votes, owing to their distributions, get ‘diluted’. Beyond the contribution of content, there are no commitments or responsibilities that are mandated with an iron fist. In fact, the atmosphere is very nice as the bosses are lenient. The ambition comes from within rather than from above. Commitment for the site is a driving force. We have some lively mailing lists ‘at the back’ and we attempt to find and intercept spam submissions using some rudimentary tools. There is an increasing number of so-called ‘clans’ or ’sock puppets’ that try to game the system.

More importantly — social bookmarking in total (digg, redit, netscape etc,): Do you feel your role as a “Top Digger” or “Netscape Navigator” give you a certain amount of power over web traffic? Is that a safe power for anyone to have? How do you think that relates to the control of a traditional newspaper editor?

As a Navigator, there is definitely a certain power that comes from the number and quality of one’s submissions. Recognition helps too and Navigators have the advantage of having their avatars appear in many places. And that certainly gives additional control over Web traffic. I hope this addresses your question.

The power is safe to have as long as the user/contributer (mind the subtle difference in terminology) can be trusted. Bear in mind that people’s submissions reflect on their passions and beliefs. In a political context this has led to some friction. I can’t attest to the experience of an editor in the press. However, be aware that there is no master mind (editor in chief), neither do we have real moderation or balancing mechanism (an ongoing issue to address). Supervisions appears to be minimal or very sporadic/selective.

Important point to add: social networks are driven by votes, so prominent content is being determined by the minds of the readers, whether it’s correct or not, whether it’s balanced or not. Social networks should always raise skepticism, so an outsider must never trust them. Social networks can be clannish and they can repel a certain crown while being a magnet to another. Digg, for example, is being transformed into an Apple turf, among other topics for which member have a passion.

Followup questions

1. Do you consider social bookmarking a new type of profesion? If so, how do you define it, what skills are involved?

Social bookmarking is, judging by my own perception, a contribution that enjoys a symbiotic relationship with one’s passion and interests. In many cases it can be a residue of one’s browsing habits; it has a (financial) reward bound to it as well.

The skills involved are few and the ‘entry barrier’ is, in general, very low. This does not necessarily indicate that there is motivation for dumbing-down of content. As short snippets bound to links are no longer a sin per se, there is this danger that journalism, attributions, and sources will be redefined.

2. Have you or anybody else ever recieved offers to get paid to submit a specific link? I’m getting the impression that this is not unheard of.

No, I was never approached with such an offer. I have, on the other, recently become aware of sites that encourage manipulation of content. This is worrisome.

3. Is this a good way for people to get their news: Is it as informative as a regular newspaper?

As I previously said, social networks and sites that represent a certain clique are bound to have bias. It’s seems inevitable that corruption and spamming will become more widespread and less detectable, too. That said, newspaper are no exception, albeit they are more closely regulated and artificially-balanced/moderated. Take the following as an example.

Bill Gates lends cash to buy newspapers

$350 million to MediaNews

Gates involvement has been very behind the scenes. In fact many of those involved in the deal didn’teven know he was one of the investors. It was carried out through the Gates Foundation, the world’s largest philanthropy outfit.

Source

E have probably all become familiar with Open Source software. The Open Source concept has extended its reach to what can only be described as remotely sensible areas of life. Take, for example, Open Source beer, an Open Source Cola drink recipe (PDF warning) and… Open Source journalism.

Inevitably, journalism will go online. Nobody denies this fact. The press as we know it must evolve to take advantage of new informartion delivery systems—those which facilitate collaboration. Yes, with the Internet, collaboration is finally facilitated and feedback can be obtained and made public in real time. Blogs exemplify this whilst their rising popularity (readership) makes traditional publishers nervous.

An article I read on the WSJ over a year ago stated something like “Journalists and newspaper publishers come to realisethat all rivers run dry”. This was said in reference to advertisements, audience, classifieds, etc. The quote to stress here is: “evolve or die”. Open Source journalism is about adaptation to change, which keeps things competitive and gains avid readers. These readers usuaully appreciate the added value of comments and TalkBacks (like the ones you would find in ZDNet and C|Net). There’s a two-way pipe that prevents the reader from being muted.

I have a little announcement to make: I joined NewAssignment.net a couple of weeks ago. This site is committed to leading the way as it explores a new paradigm for journalism. Trailblazer it might not necessarily be, but many eyes are watching the concept of Open Source journalism as it stands in practice. My active (and visible) participation appears imminent and I truly look froward to it. I don’t know yet if I’ll be premitted to dump copies of the material submitted there onto my blog (much like Matt Asay, whose writeups on Open Source I always enjoy, does in InfoWorld. I noticed that he also changes the title for SEO-related advantages).

My heavy involvement in social bookmarking sites such as Digg.com and Netscape.com seems to have paid off. Social bookmarking is one thing that enriched my life tremendously. My participation in Netscape has had people sign up merely to leave a comment on something I had submitted. Mailing lists as a form of communication is another thing which, along with newsgroups, has opened many doors. I recently received a thank-you from Red Hat for defending them in the Microsoft/Novell mess.

S time goes by, occupations evolve. It was under 3 months ago that I made a move towards Netscape. My absence in Digg was noticed by a few friends including Stacy Doss (also known as 3monkeys) and linnerd.

Some time ago I did an interview with a Netscape colleague. It is yet to be published, but below is a copy.

1. When you were first approached about the offer, what was your first reaction? (Taking into account your standing on Digg at that time, and possible backlash from the Digg community)

Understandable reaction from the Digg community was by all means a cause for concern. And yet, its impact was by far surpassed by woes over neglect of my principles. I perceived my role in the community as one who promotes not-for-profit causes, which led to a clash of ideologies. The reaction was thus a mixture of confusion, a sense of self-betrayal, and fear of the outcome. It was a tough decision to make and, being a self-funded student, I needed support which, in turn, would enable me to evangelise values I believe it, principally Open Source.

2. How long did it take you to decide, what factors did you take into account, and what made you finally decide to make the switch? (Was it the money, the networking opportunities, both, or something completely different?)

In hindsight, I would have handled things differently. I was very hesitant and self-critical, to the point of losing the ability to focus. At first, I began by making isolated submissions to Netscape, as means of ‘testing the waters’. I was a Digger in heart and soul at the time. From a usability point-of-view, I become critical of both sites. Each had its strengths.

As weeks went by, a few top Diggers were recruited. Prominent examples are Derek and Henry. They wrote about it and discussed it. With discussions, thoughts began springing to mind and another perspective — from a Digg’s mentality — was laid out. Ultimately, my inclination to relocate involved a mixture of factors: joining ex-Diggers whom I knew, being able to make ends meet, and seeking a change. Yes, just for the sake of change. *smile* We all need that sometimes. My early involvement in Netscape was the fruit of curiosity rather than desire to be hired.

3. How has it been at Netscape so far? (Interaction with the users, other navigators, anchors, devs, and so on)

There is going to be a snag here. Communication from a contributer’s point-of-view slightly differs from most, especially when a Navigator role is involved. Putting myself in the shoes I (metaphorically of course) wore at the start, interaction among users goes beyond IM. But at the end of the day, the scope and goal of both sites is slightly different, so there is no clear basis for comparison.

4. Are you still contributing to your old community? (Digg)

Yes, in a sense. Several times a day I read through hundreds of Digg submissions. I probably spend a couple of hours per day reading Digg alone, yet I limit my active (as opposed to passive) contribution, i.e. participation. I very much enjoy seeing what friends are up to, as well as what they share with the rest of the community. It’s an educational experience, which is what such sites (can be?) are all about.

5. What was your friends’ reaction to you making the move? Did you feel like you were abandoning them? Did they have such feelings?

I have clear memories of particular reactions. In general, there were not many flames as I preferred to keep off the limelight and never dive too deep into the controversies. I particularly appreciated the supportive words from “George W (no relation)”. I truly wish that people can be /happy/ for others, as adverse to logic and ego as it may be. It’s important to understand that a lot of effort and time (including long nights) is spent working for the benefit of the community. And it’s all about sharing /happiness/ and bringing /happiness/ to others. Isn’t that the raison detre of social bookmarking?

6. What has been your most fruitful experience at Netscape so far?

This would definitely have to be the formation of cliques. I am not speaking about cliques that mutually benefit members by votes, but rather a bunch of people who share thoughts and opinions on- and off-site.

7. Where do you see Netscape in another 6 months?

Where would I want to see it? Or where do I think it will be? Frankly, the two intersect. I have kept tabs on Alexa and Netcraft traffic ranks, apart from various statistics that are visible on the site. They seem encouraging as there is a gradual elevation, which follows a long decline that predates New Netscape.

Anything else you would like to say?

If you enjoy Digg, then Digg on. If you seek something different, cat least consider Netscape. Each has its merits. And, as I always say in the context of GNU/Linux, it’s all about choice!

HE way knowledge is shared among and between people keeps changing–or put positively–evolving . Take for example stories and personal journals that are released under a Creative Commons (e.g. Attrib-NonCommerical-No Derivs 2.5) license. These come to show that content becomes a very ‘fluid’ thing where information is increasingly reused to improve existing knowledgebases. But it goes beyond that.

Many people are openly sharing information about themselves. They make it searchable online. Keywords and unique identifiers definitely help as well. Indexing makes streams of written consciousness easier to locate. Passively perhaps, I am among people who can organise personal data owing to searching technologies in a vast pool of informational context–the World Wide Web. I did not choose the path of anonymity. It was either a wise or a dumb choice, depending on who’s to judge. By collecting and piecing together over 20,000 UseNet posts of mine (a screenshot of my newsreader is shown on the right hand side), one could reproduce some of my life’s history and, potentially, highlight more controversial opinions, too.

There are less flattering pieces of information of the Web, including the defamation of one’s name and dignity. Sadly, there are some people who take advantage of indexing. The best method of evading nasty consequences is never to engage in conversations with those who shoot from the lip. Hopefully it becomes reciprocal, as in “if you want to discard my messages, then just killfile me”. In other cases, however, the coronation of stupidity takes over logic. Sick-minded (and often anonymous) people carry on with inane one-liners and personal attacks. Yesterday I confroned a Digg stalker. Yes, there is some crazy stalker on Digg who is a sworn Microsoft fan that systematically mods my comments down.

All in all, despite a little bit of negative publicity, I am fairly pleased with what I have contributed over the Web. I guess that every valuable thing with a noble cause, however benign, must have a cost.

As a side note and an off-topic discussion, I recently began using Google Groups. The local newsgroups server has been problems-ridden for a week, so I haven’t much choice. Here’s an observation: in Google Groups’ beta, I am rather surprised to find that Google makes ad revenue out of UseNet. It even appends “Copyright 2006 Google” to pages although the content is in fact contributed by various people without any connection to Google. A well-deserved reward for their service (UseNet gateway)? Probably. But the mind still boggles.

Personally, I only keep copies of messages and threads in which I am involved, whereas Google does this at a far larger scale. It also digs archives that are published without people’s awareness and consent. This leaves a few fuming non-anonymised posters from the nineties and eighties. One of them, for example, has demonstrated loudly and caused disruption to the Webmasters newsgroup. Constant harassment and floods carries on for a few months before cessation. My feelings remain mixed as far as Google’s involvement in public forums is concerned.

Come Monday, I should have the content of my thesis in a fairly complete state. Then, the text should be ripe for serious improvements, proofreading, and further work on layout. The deadline for a first draft is August 31^st and final submission is due by September 30th.

Frankly, I have had some serious issues coping with temptation to procrastinate. I never had these issues before, so it’s rather odd and worrisome. It was never worth letting laziness take over as I lost some sleep over this. It also gives me less control of my schedule as I continue to pace myself rather than just get it done with. I could truly need a motivational boost, rather than pressure and fear. Judging by some resources I have read, what I am going through is common. I am definitely past the stage of doubt, but I just wish I could spend more than an hour per day writing. I just dread the thought of going through the same text over and over again. I suspect that pressure will ultimately take its toll and wake me up so that I can comfortably comply with some preset deadlines. I am worried and optimistic at the same time.

Black hat forgery had me victimised

few weeks ago I was reminded why signing (or even encryption) one’s mail is very important. I mentioned this issue twice in the past. Having warned someone about an imposter, I recently found myself waring the same shoe. I have identified an imposter/forger… of my own.

In this case, the forger ridiculed Linux while using my full name. Needless to say, I did not write this. Describing Ubuntu as “Bison” dung while using my full name? I think not, but it remains archived on the Web, which can rarely be trusted nowadays (think Wikipedia). This was part of character assassination attempts, which appear to have escaped UseNet and spread to the World Wide Web.

have always said that I would never write blog content while drunk or even tipsy. I think I made the exception only once. Today I have a compelling reason to make an exception, too.

I have just returned from the night club and, on my way back, I witnessed a violent scene (although I did not see it frontally or directly). An innocent Northern Irish man was assaulted by three bullies and then left lying unconscious on the ground, having had his mobile phone stolen. His head was visibly injured. I saw him lying there without moving while other witnesses fled the scene. Soon afterwards I had the ambulance and the police come to assist. I spent about an hour with them, providing evidence.and rough description of the criminals. I am yet to be contacted for further information by the police (or at least that’s I was told by the officer).

But here comes the scary part: as I was leaving the police vehicle I was yelled at by a bunch of guys whose appearance resembled the criminals. I walked back home through an alternative route watching my back like a paranoid. I don’t expect to sleep well tonight. It’s 3 AM and I need to wake up early for work. Quite unnerving. The policemen said that they had captured those three who assaulted, but I begin to doubt it. They could have lied to find reassurance. In fact, now that I think about it, I will go downstairs immediately and phone the police, again. They could not have found the criminals as quickly as they arrived at the scene of the incident.

UPDATE (after phonecall): it seems possible that they only captured one or two of the criminals (probably one).