I'm so tired of Jeff Jarvis claiming to be a huge expert on blogging. What has Jeff done to become such a huge expert on bloggging? Sure, he runs a decent personal blog, and has done so for a long time? However, Jeff is tapped as this expert on the business of blogging and he's never made any money from blogging (except maybe what About.com paid him).
Anyway, today's latest Jarvis-ism is "the Internet kills networks." (you can read the last one) Now, Jeff has always restated this to say that the Internet kills *closed* networks. Which is just as wrong.
If the Internet kills closed networks why hasn't the Internet killed IGN, Gawker, CNET, or Weblogs, Inc? If the Internet kills closed networks why are MySpace, and LinkedIn doing so well?
People like *controlled* networks. The whole word closed is loaded. Jeff's website is "open" but Gawker and WIN are closed? How so? Why, because we are a group of sites that create more content and get more traffic then you do?
Now, for background: It was reported for a long time that Jeff was going to launch a blog network and compete with Nick and I. In fact, Nick used to always try and pump me for info on Jeff and his plans (I never had any). Ever since Jeff gave up his dream of starting his own blog network company he's been player hating the established networks and talking about how there is a better model, yada, yada, yada.
Jeff: the truth is both models work. You can be Gawker/WIN or you can be indie blog and use Adsense/AdBrite. Soon you'll be able to be somewhere inbetween with Federated Media (another "closed" network).
Also, I wish you would stop being such a player hater. You've sat around for almost three years now telling everyone how to run their companies and giving the press sound bites about how things should be. It's really getting old dude. If you want to talk smack then you should suit up and get in the game. I got no respect for people who tell the working man how to work... especially when it's from their ivory tower.
Let's go Jeff... get off the bench and let's see if you still got game! Start a company and show us all how brilliant you are--or stop talking smack.
Update #1: Jeff says he wasn't talking about Gawker or WIN in the NPR story about blog network when he said the Internet kills network (yeah right... way to backtrack!). Give me a break Jeff! Just admit you were talking smack in your "I've got a gray beard and I've been doing this 14 months and 3 weeks longer than you so I know everything" voice.
Update #2: Some folks have corrected me on all the amazing things Jeff has done in the blogosphere in the past three years: 1. he consulted About.com about how to be involved in the blogosphere (About.com has become such a huge force in the blogosphere of course), 2. at some point Jeff built a local blog network for Advance.net/Conde Nast (which has become such a huge force in the blogosphere, really sticking it to Gothamist and MetBlogs), and 3. Called into Howard Stern. Thanks so much for that update TKTK TKTKTKTKTKT--you made my day.
The Internet Kills Networks? The latest Jarvis-ism.
Reader Comments
(Page 1 of 2)2. I love it! WWE meets blogging ... "What cha' gonna do, brother, when the biggest traffic-generator in blogosphere has his arms around your neck?!!" (To be read ah la Hulk Hogan) Way to call the guy out. Gutsy move.
Posted at 12:18PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Jeff Jordan
3. The business of getting attention requires extreme positions and outrageous statements: It's controversy, mayhem and intrigue, not fair and balanced, that dominates the front page. Both you and Jeff know this. The difference, in this case, is that while Jeff is often righteous and makes plenty of outrageous statements that people disagree with, I don't ever recall him getting as personal as you have in your attack against him. While you have a valid disagreement with Jeff's statement, I, unlike others who've left comments here, am not impressed. I believe you owe him an apology. You might do well to remember that, regardless of who you are or what you've achieved, you only get respect if you show respect.
Posted at 2:04PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Chas. Porter
4. To Jason, with Chas: Regardless of what Jeff is saying these days, he sure is saying it different-like. Jeff's turn has been strange and well-storied in the blogosphere -- from conversational to unidirectional, if not didactic. Seems to me that Jeff has a tonality decision to make: Keep with the original soul of blogging (ie keep it open & conversational); Or, spout opinions without measured discourse.
Posted at 2:12PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Michael
5. Chas, Oh please... did hurt little Jeff's feelings?!?! Ohhh... I'm sooooo sorry! Give me a break... the guy sits up in an ivory tower telling the world how things are and need to be and no one calls him out on the dumb stuff he says?!?! I need to sugar coat it??! I'll do that when stops telling people what to do. Also, I don't expect people to sugar coat it when they come after me for my statements and positions--BRING IT ON! I love it... let's debate it, let's fight it out... that's how business/society/people move forward. I'll debate any one, any time... and if I lose the debate I'm a winner because I've learned something. That's really how I think... if I'm being an idiot and someone can prove it, well, good for both of us! Jeff's got this "I know better than anyone" attitude and all I'm doing is a) pointing out how wrong he is, b) how he's always fishing for new consulting clients, and c) how he really shouldn't be looked at as some huge expert on the subject since he has done very little in terms of the business of blogging.
6. This industry is relatively new, but i've been noticing a trend. Self styled experts are setting up "blogs" for various highly competitive industries. They say they are a impartial industry expert but the "blogs" are really just ways of getting consulting gigs, and a way for reporters to find them. The media then goes to these self styled experts thinking they are legit and they will just push whatever agenda a company that has hired them wants. As you get more and more blog networks up and competition increases you will see more and more of these "experts" show up and start pushing their secret employeers agenda's
7. Jason, you just earned a bookmark in my browser. Anyone who writes "Also, I don't expect people to sugar coat it when they come after me for my statements and positions--BRING IT ON! I love it... let's debate it, let's fight it out... that's how business/society/people move forward. I'll debate any one, any time... and if I lose the debate I'm a winner because I've learned something. That's really how I think... if I'm being an idiot and someone can prove it, well, good for both of us!" is a very rare find. I amped about reading you.
Posted at 4:11PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by laurence haughton
8. T.S. Eliot knew the Jarvises better than the Jarvises know themselves: No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be; Am an attendant lord, one that will do To swell a progress, start a scene or two, Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool, Deferential, glad to be of use, 115 Politic, cautious, and meticulous; Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse; At times, indeed, almost ridiculous— Almost, at times, the Fool.
9. Wow Joe, way to cite precedent ;) Jason, you're spot on here. About.com, while full of useful links and tidbits, has long been a sort of joke. And did I mention the boatload of pop-ups? As for "getting personal"... what? Has political correctness invaded the blogosphere? Where can we go for real opinions now? Guess it's back to tagging the overpass for me! I think what we're actually seeing here is a sort of myopia that comes from squinting down on us commoners from way up in that ivory tower. It's a common thing. We used to call it academentia back in college. You see, when one confronts something new, complex, and not entirely understandable, the tendency is to try and conform it to our preconceived models of perception. It's as natural as breathing. I think Jeff is sort of projecting something onto the net that isn't there... The internet is a neutral, destroying nothing really, but enabling and extending many things. I also believe his comment was in the heat of discussion, and possibly not entirely what he meant. Production companies? Come on. I walked away from a TV production company years ago and have never been happier. There's a reason why I blog for Weblogs, and it has NOTHING to do with working for a production company. Ack.
Posted at 4:26PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Victor Agreda, Jr.
10. While I agree with Jason's basic premise in this post, what he and Jim Kukral's comment are complaining about with Jarvis not being valid because he lacks credibility, is showing the same kind of "ivory tower" arrogance you are complaining about, no?
Posted at 6:37PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Pat McCarthy
11. >> While I agree with Jason's basic >> premise in this post, what he and >> Jim Kukral's comment are complaining >> about with Jarvis not being valid >> because he lacks credibility, is >> showing the same kind of "ivory >> tower" arrogance you are >> complaining about, no? Well, I'm not saying that I know everything... far from it. However, Jeff makes these crazy claims and gets picked up in all kinds of MSM as a "blog expert." I think the point we're both trying to make is the guy hasn't done anything of note... so, if he wants to talk smack about everyone it would be nice if he would do something himself.
12. Victor, "Getting personal" and political correctness aren't the same thing. Political correctness is the stifling of public discourse on important issues by making certain words taboo. "Getting personal", on the other hand, is going beyond what's at issue and vilifying a person. Is my suggesting we treat each other with respect and humility really such a bad thing? Have respect and humility become taboo? If you want real opinions and Jason wants debate, great, let's "bring it on", but what's going on here isn't debate, it's name-calling. Let's get at the truth, let's share our honest opinions, but let's do it without starting a vendetta. I'll go first: my honest opinion is we get nowhere when we treat each other like shit. Jason, I've never seen any good come from getting personal and I've lived to regret every argument when I've gone where you're going. Unfortunately, I've been there many times. Take my advice in the spirit in which it's sent: peace.
Posted at 7:11PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Chas. Porter
14. What do I do about blogging? I blog. That's sufficient. Time for the meds, friend. Your paranoia is showing. I think Weblogs Inc. is a production company, not a network. Does that inspire you: Quoth the raven, "nevermind"?
Posted at 7:31PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Jeff Jarvis
15. And I'm dying to know, Jason: What do AOL and Time Warner executives think about you speaking for them? Having worked there, I have to imagine they're getting rashes.
Posted at 7:35PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Jeff Jarvis
16. Every time Jason speaks, an AOL exec loses his wings. ;-) What's the difference between a "production company" and a "network"? Of course, there's a difference in structure: one employs the bloggers directly (WIN/Gawker), while the other brings the bloggers together in an "affiliation" model (OS- er, sorry, Pajamas Media). That's a very important difference in how you model your business, but makes little difference to the external user. However you structure it on the back-end, and however you pay the writers, it's still a network: the blogs are linked together, the talent shares ideas and resources amongst themselves, and the network brand stands or falls on the quality of the individual blogs. They're just different ways to build a network.
17. Jason is right. Jarvis is the Howard Stern of the Blogosphere, except without the actual credibility or talent.
Posted at 8:33PM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Jim Kukral
18. "Well, I'm not saying that I know everything... far from it. However, Jeff makes these crazy claims and gets picked up in all kinds of MSM as a blog expert." I'm not sure you should blame Jeff for the mainstream media's perception of him. "I think the point we're both trying to make is the guy hasn't done anything of note... so, if he wants to talk smack about everyone it would be nice if he would do something himself." I think it's fine and great if you want to call him crazy and disagree with his points (and I agree with your side of the argument). But show us why you're right and he's wrong, instead of just attacking his credibility and how he's perceived by others, which is something he can't control. Your argument would be made stronger by just telling us why Jeff is wrong, instead of deeming him "not worthy" of being able to comment on blogging. It just looks petty, show us why you're more knowledgeable on the subject, as you probably are.
Posted at 12:48AM on Dec 3rd 2005 by Pat McCarthy
19. "It was reported for a long time that Jeff was going to launch a blog network and compete with Nick and I." That should be "Nick and me." (Fixing the Internet, one blog entry at a time....)
Posted at 11:57PM on Dec 5th 2005 by Viveka Blaise
20. Jason, I think it's interesting that your pet is a bulldog. Seems appropriate somehow. A pitbull might have been a better choice. :-)
Posted at 2:05PM on Dec 6th 2005 by Paul Chaney
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry: inappropriate or purely promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
1. Jason, You make some great points and I am really glad that you have spoken up about this. I enjoy Jeff's blog immensely, but he certainly comes across as way too righteous sometimes. To be honest, who really has the sole right to carte blanche prognosticate or critique about such a fledgling and diverse entity as blogging. Although, you and Nick are certainly in a much stronger position to offer opinion than most. :-)
Posted at 8:37AM on Dec 2nd 2005 by Peter Brady