Posts with tag aol
NYT says new AOL chief has long view... I hope so. (and some free advice for what it's worth)

I don't know Randy Falco or Ron Grant, but I wish them luck. The NYT says they have a long view of AOL, everything I read says AOL's is going to be cleaned up and sold.
My advice to both men: start blogging today. AOL was a very closed culture when we got there a year ago, and blogging is what really pulled the company into the Web world. There are dozens of important folks in the company having honest discussions on blogs and the best way for you two to build AOL is to embrace the culture of honesty, transparency, and debate. Blogging is the best medium for this. Take a page from Microsoft and let all your team members blog, and even pay some folks to be company bloggers. Let it all hang out, let the marketplace tell you where to go, and be open about everything--the good and the bad.
Even though I was at AOL for only a year it felt like home. ~50 members of "my team" are still rocking it out at Netscape, WeblogsInc, and Blogsmith, and I really hope the new guys recognize the amazing potential those groups have and continue to invest in them.
Weblogs, Inc. has grown into an eight figure business at AOL over the past year and I think it could be a nine figure business if they keep investing in it. Easily.
Netscape has continued to advance and grow since the bottom out in October. It takes 2-3 years to build an online community like Netscape, not three to six months. Social news is the future and Netscape is in first or second position on every important factor in that race (along with digg). To give up now would be such a wasted opportunity (especially since there are 500 folks trying to get into the top five slots right now!). I mean, Conde Nast just bought reddit--a distant 3rd or 4th to Netscape and digg.
Blogsmith is a fantastic platform that could rival TypePad and WordPress in the market place if AOL put some muscle behind it. Brian is a genius and AOL should really pull him in to the senior management team--guys like him don't wind up in big companies often.
Anyway, I've got to get back to my day job... I don't work for AOL anymore but I still spend 2-3 hours a day thinking about and talking to the folks who run those businesses. Giving them advice (solicited and unsolicited), and participating in and using those fine services and products.
Randy & Ron: If you every need any free advice on them or want to grab lunch you know how to reach me. Good luck and please take care of my babies. :-)
Valleywag reporting Bankoff, Conroy, Redling, and McKinley out at AOL
If this is true it's beyond stunning news.
Frankly, I don't think it's possible to let go of four top guys like that after losing Miller and Leonsis.
I'm putting this in the NFW file.
Frankly, I don't think it's possible to let go of four top guys like that after losing Miller and Leonsis.
I'm putting this in the NFW file.
CalacanisCast Beta 5
CalacanisCast Beta Five... if you have feedback please send me an MP3 or WAV file.
No show notes--ever!
Here is the MP3 file
If you want to subscribe go into iTunes and hit "Advanced -- Subscribe to Podcast" add this feed:
http://podcast.calacanis.com/rss.xml
No show notes--ever!
Here is the MP3 file
If you want to subscribe go into iTunes and hit "Advanced -- Subscribe to Podcast" add this feed:
http://podcast.calacanis.com/rss.xml
Yes, it's true... I'm leaving AOL.
TechCrunch broke the story (less than two hours after I told everyone here), and the New York Times confirmed it with me by phone this afternoon.
I've got a lot to say, but I'm thinking that I'll just talk about it on the final episode of the Gillmor Gang podcast--which we happen to be doing tomorrow (crazy coincidence I know).
Your pal,
Jason
PS - Thanks to everyone sending emails, IMing, and calling.
Update: Fun times from Hugh... and my partner Brian Alvey always has quip ready to go!

I've got a lot to say, but I'm thinking that I'll just talk about it on the final episode of the Gillmor Gang podcast--which we happen to be doing tomorrow (crazy coincidence I know).
Your pal,
Jason
PS - Thanks to everyone sending emails, IMing, and calling.
Update: Fun times from Hugh... and my partner Brian Alvey always has quip ready to go!
CalacanisCast Beta 4 (or JasonNation Beta 4--your choice).
Did a quick podcast last night to talk about how I'm feeling. I've got a bad cold, so excuse my coughing/hacking.
CalacanisCast Beta Four... MP3 file.
If you want to subscribe go into iTunes and hit "Advanced -- Subscribe to Podcast" add this feed:
http://podcast.calacanis.com/rss.xml
CalacanisCast Beta Four... MP3 file.
If you want to subscribe go into iTunes and hit "Advanced -- Subscribe to Podcast" add this feed:
http://podcast.calacanis.com/rss.xml
AIM Light (or "AOL is a brand for elite users... not just your mom")
One thing I've been pushing for at AOL since I got here almost a year ago (wow, has it been that long?!??!) is a light version of AIM. Ted Leonsis, Jim Bankoff, and Jon Miller and I have had countless discussions about the issue and we've made huge progress.... this is really the future of AOL: light, fast, free products that compliment our bigger, more feature-rich products.
Elite folks don't want all the features in our mass market products--we know that.
Now that we're 1,000% focused on being an audience-based business (as opposed to an *access* business) there is no debate anymore. We have to make light, fast products for the A-listers. AOL has been a brand has been for the mass market, and it will still be, but we're ALSO going to have products for the elite users. Netscape, Light AIM, XDRIVE, and Weblogs, Inc's blogs are for elite users (as well as the mass market).
Over at the Greehouse they are now playing with "Light AIM" or "AIM Light" --or whatever we wind up calling this bad boy. I've had it for a while and it ROCKS. If your mom is on a three year old machine and the new feature-rich AIM Client is grinding her machine to a halt (not our fault!) go download AIM ES here: http://greenhouse.aol.com/prod.jsp?prod_id=27
AIM Light has no ads, no VOIP, no file-transfer, and a TINY footprint... in fact, I think it is the lightest IM client you run on your machine. This is something you could run on OLPC level machine (yes, I know it's a Windows product right now, but you get the idea).
Drop everything and go play with it... this is the future of AOL: light, open, cutting-edge, and elite AS WELL AS mass market.
Elite folks don't want all the features in our mass market products--we know that.
Now that we're 1,000% focused on being an audience-based business (as opposed to an *access* business) there is no debate anymore. We have to make light, fast products for the A-listers. AOL has been a brand has been for the mass market, and it will still be, but we're ALSO going to have products for the elite users. Netscape, Light AIM, XDRIVE, and Weblogs, Inc's blogs are for elite users (as well as the mass market).
Over at the Greehouse they are now playing with "Light AIM" or "AIM Light" --or whatever we wind up calling this bad boy. I've had it for a while and it ROCKS. If your mom is on a three year old machine and the new feature-rich AIM Client is grinding her machine to a halt (not our fault!) go download AIM ES here: http://greenhouse.aol.com/prod.jsp?prod_id=27
AIM Light has no ads, no VOIP, no file-transfer, and a TINY footprint... in fact, I think it is the lightest IM client you run on your machine. This is something you could run on OLPC level machine (yes, I know it's a Windows product right now, but you get the idea).
Drop everything and go play with it... this is the future of AOL: light, open, cutting-edge, and elite AS WELL AS mass market.
Netscape Update (the internal memo)
I sent this internal note to a bunch of folks at AOL earlier today... sort of an update on the state of Netscape and what we've learned about the 1, 19, and 80%. After thinking about it for 27 seconds I realized that this is the kind of stuff I used to post to my blog and i figured I would share with y'all.
I have to keep reminding myself that the best feedback we got at Weblogs, Inc. was when we talked about our company publicly on my blog. When you get to a big company you tend to be more closed because people smack you down just because your big. I've been getting smacked down since I've gotten to AOL as a "sellout" or "big company guy," but I'm not going to let that change how I run my businesses. I beleive in transparency and the fact that the more you put out there the more you get back.
Sure, some folks will spin what I say as "AOL senior exec says BLAH BLAH BLAH," but frankly that's a small price to pay for gaining the trust of the community and the good advice they give you when you open up to them.
best j
Team AOL,
For those of you not watching the drama unfold in the social news space for the past couple of days, there has a been a big shift in people's thinking about us paying the top social bookmarkers for the 1-3 hours a day they put into sites like digg, delicious, and Netscape. Two months ago we were "destroying the space" by paying the top 1% of the user base, now we're considered the savvy ones who recognized that there is a real difference between the 1%, 19%, and 80% of the user populations (creatives, contributors, and consumers).
At its most basic what we've learned is that the top 1% of these community members deserve to get compensated for their time, and if you do compensate them they will be 1,000% more active and appreciative. Paying them isn't about the money as much as it is the recognition, and they are so psyched to be recognized that they will really go overboard in thanking you with very high-quality work. The Netscape Navigators are doing a phenomenal job of not only putting in good stories, but also of building a community. They talk to the users via site mail and explain to them how to participate. They let them know when they've made a mistake and how to fix it. They are mentors and leaders in the best sense of those words.
The 1% brings in the 19%, and that 20% bring in the masses/consumption class (the 80%).
Of course, Netscape was an established brand when we converted it. So, we had the the consuming masses (the 80%) and we hired the 1% (the creatives). What we're really working on right now is training and inspiring the middle class: the 19% we call the contributors. The folks who vote, comment, add friends, and send messages on the site. These folks are the most active portion of the masses and they are new to the social news process in many cases. We have about 1/3rd of those folks trained and we should build out our "middle-class" by the end of the year from what I can see.
I suspect this process will be the case for many of AOL's (and Yahoo's) user-driven projects. You'll have the masses by default, but not the creative and contributing classes. Those are the two you'll have to build.
So, I'm wondering if the folks on AIM pages or Uncut are seeing something similar and if similar strategies might work. Maybe Uncut should hire the top 20 video producers on YouTube to work for us? Maybe AIM Pages should hire the top 20 folks on MySpace to be part of our "leadership program" (or something like that). Have them train the user base and give feedback to the developers.
Some folks claim it's desperate to have to pay the 1%. That's pure *spin* by people who don't want to pay other people for their hard work. These folks are the life-blood of these systems and paying them isn't desperate--it's smart. Also, paying them does not stop other folks from want to get involved from getting involved. The folks being paid have obligations they have to meet, and the other 99% can come and go as they please.
The 1% are not getting paid for exactly the same things as the 99%--which was Yochi Benkler's big complaint about our Navigator program (he said it made the other 99% of folks into suckers). It turns out that the public understands that the Navigators have more to do than an average user (i.e. killing spam, getting rid of duplicate stories, helping users), and that they are obligated to show up for "work" every day. That last part sets the difference--the 1% we pay are obligated and the 99% are not obligated.
Anyway, just some thoughts for a Sunday.
best j
ps - here is the latest story giving us credit... i knew the tide would turn.
ps2 - votes and stories submitted broke records every 2-3 days over the last two weeks--and Netscape's web pages are growing again. Mission *almost* accomplished. (the mission for me is to double Netscape's traffic from the bottom out weeks of late August/ early September (when we lost the email users).
I have to keep reminding myself that the best feedback we got at Weblogs, Inc. was when we talked about our company publicly on my blog. When you get to a big company you tend to be more closed because people smack you down just because your big. I've been getting smacked down since I've gotten to AOL as a "sellout" or "big company guy," but I'm not going to let that change how I run my businesses. I beleive in transparency and the fact that the more you put out there the more you get back.
Sure, some folks will spin what I say as "AOL senior exec says BLAH BLAH BLAH," but frankly that's a small price to pay for gaining the trust of the community and the good advice they give you when you open up to them.
best j
Team AOL,
For those of you not watching the drama unfold in the social news space for the past couple of days, there has a been a big shift in people's thinking about us paying the top social bookmarkers for the 1-3 hours a day they put into sites like digg, delicious, and Netscape. Two months ago we were "destroying the space" by paying the top 1% of the user base, now we're considered the savvy ones who recognized that there is a real difference between the 1%, 19%, and 80% of the user populations (creatives, contributors, and consumers).
At its most basic what we've learned is that the top 1% of these community members deserve to get compensated for their time, and if you do compensate them they will be 1,000% more active and appreciative. Paying them isn't about the money as much as it is the recognition, and they are so psyched to be recognized that they will really go overboard in thanking you with very high-quality work. The Netscape Navigators are doing a phenomenal job of not only putting in good stories, but also of building a community. They talk to the users via site mail and explain to them how to participate. They let them know when they've made a mistake and how to fix it. They are mentors and leaders in the best sense of those words.
The 1% brings in the 19%, and that 20% bring in the masses/consumption class (the 80%).
Of course, Netscape was an established brand when we converted it. So, we had the the consuming masses (the 80%) and we hired the 1% (the creatives). What we're really working on right now is training and inspiring the middle class: the 19% we call the contributors. The folks who vote, comment, add friends, and send messages on the site. These folks are the most active portion of the masses and they are new to the social news process in many cases. We have about 1/3rd of those folks trained and we should build out our "middle-class" by the end of the year from what I can see.
I suspect this process will be the case for many of AOL's (and Yahoo's) user-driven projects. You'll have the masses by default, but not the creative and contributing classes. Those are the two you'll have to build.
So, I'm wondering if the folks on AIM pages or Uncut are seeing something similar and if similar strategies might work. Maybe Uncut should hire the top 20 video producers on YouTube to work for us? Maybe AIM Pages should hire the top 20 folks on MySpace to be part of our "leadership program" (or something like that). Have them train the user base and give feedback to the developers.
Some folks claim it's desperate to have to pay the 1%. That's pure *spin* by people who don't want to pay other people for their hard work. These folks are the life-blood of these systems and paying them isn't desperate--it's smart. Also, paying them does not stop other folks from want to get involved from getting involved. The folks being paid have obligations they have to meet, and the other 99% can come and go as they please.
The 1% are not getting paid for exactly the same things as the 99%--which was Yochi Benkler's big complaint about our Navigator program (he said it made the other 99% of folks into suckers). It turns out that the public understands that the Navigators have more to do than an average user (i.e. killing spam, getting rid of duplicate stories, helping users), and that they are obligated to show up for "work" every day. That last part sets the difference--the 1% we pay are obligated and the 99% are not obligated.
Anyway, just some thoughts for a Sunday.
best j
ps - here is the latest story giving us credit... i knew the tide would turn.
ps2 - votes and stories submitted broke records every 2-3 days over the last two weeks--and Netscape's web pages are growing again. Mission *almost* accomplished. (the mission for me is to double Netscape's traffic from the bottom out weeks of late August/ early September (when we lost the email users).
Delicious the new digg/Netscape (or why competition works for everyone)

In case you missed it Delicious redesigned (see above) and they took a page from both Netscape and digg.
From digg they borrowed the prominent number of votes/bookmarks, and from Netscape they borrowed the thumbnail image with each story.
The irony of course is that digg was inspired by the delicious bookmark, and Netscape was inspired by both netscape, digg, and reddit (which doesn't get enough credit in my book--their services is really great). Of course, when we launched everyone was like "you stole digg's idea!" I found this very entertaining since Kevin at digg is always a standup guy and credit Josh at delicious with the entire idea for digg!
The bottom line is that no one has any ownership over the concept of voting and social news--we're all standing on the shoulders of the first wave of slashdot, furl, and fark.
The thing I love about this industry, and the competition in it, is that we all make each other better. digg, Netscape, delicious, and reddit are all innovating at a faster rate, and a huge company like TimeWarner/AOL coming into the space with the new Netscape does nothing but validate the space.
Folks used to make a big deal about Nick Denton and I being in competition with each other back in the Weblogs, Inc. vs. Gawker days. The truth is that Weblogs, Inc. made Nick get more focused, and both teams built the space. Almost every advertisers that Nick convinced to advertise on Gizmodo wound up on Engadget and vica versa. Today media buyers frequently do an Engadget/Gizmodo buy.
That's the next phase of the "battle" between the social news sites: convincing advertisers to come into the space. I've started making the rounds and explaining the opportunity to media buyers. Every time I explain Netscape to them I'm paving the way digg, reddit, and delicious to get the same advertiser--and that's great. I'm sure John Battelle is out there pitching digg, and every time someone makes a buy on digg they are primed to understand and buy on Netscape and reddit.
It's a beautiful, beautiful thing...
Happy Days: AOL buys Userplane!
Updates: More at http://www.userplane.com/aol/ and an interview with Userplane's CEO at Downloadsquad:
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2006/08/14/userplane-ceo-michael-jones-download-squad-interview/
Userplane was one of our first advertisers at Weblogs, Inc. They make great communication software and I'm really excited that AOL bought the company today!
This is gonna be a really great shot in the arm for us... I can't wait to start working with them. Welcome aboard team Userplane!!
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2006/08/14/userplane-ceo-michael-jones-download-squad-interview/
Userplane was one of our first advertisers at Weblogs, Inc. They make great communication software and I'm really excited that AOL bought the company today!
This is gonna be a really great shot in the arm for us... I can't wait to start working with them. Welcome aboard team Userplane!!
Smart people are talking about AOL; let's pay them back by listening.
I'm still seething and I'm reticent to blog about my feeling right now for fear I'll say something I regret.
However, there are a lot of smart folks out there talking about us (AOL) and I'm going to highlight them here (note: I'm not going to respond to everything they are saying--I want to, but I'm in my "cool off" period right now and I'm gonna try and stick to it). I've been discussing what these smart people are saying about us with anyone and everyone at AOL who will listen to me. I'm thinking about planning a corporate retreat where we bring these folks in and have them just vent on us and point out all the problems we have. It would be brutal, but as they say "the truth shall make you free." Also, the first step in sucking less, is knowing you suck.
Here are three blogs/podcasts that everyone at AOL need to listen to right now. So, drop what you're doing and listen/read these.
However, there are a lot of smart folks out there talking about us (AOL) and I'm going to highlight them here (note: I'm not going to respond to everything they are saying--I want to, but I'm in my "cool off" period right now and I'm gonna try and stick to it). I've been discussing what these smart people are saying about us with anyone and everyone at AOL who will listen to me. I'm thinking about planning a corporate retreat where we bring these folks in and have them just vent on us and point out all the problems we have. It would be brutal, but as they say "the truth shall make you free." Also, the first step in sucking less, is knowing you suck.
Here are three blogs/podcasts that everyone at AOL need to listen to right now. So, drop what you're doing and listen/read these.
- David Strom is a very smart guy who's been thinking and writing about software and the Internet for a couple of decades. He has a great blog post about AOL software on his blog. It's a very harsh post from a very smart person--he has some great points.
- Molly Wood, Veronica Belmont, and Tom Merrit do a great podcast that I listen to every single day at CNET called Buzz Outloud. They also have a great conversation about AOL software. They are also very harsh on AOL--but again, these are very smart people. Everyone at AOL should stop what they're doing right now (tell your boss I said it's OK), and listen to this podcast. At 3:46 in they are talking about how great it is that we are giving away free anti-virus software (we're the first major company to do it). They are so excited about it UNTIL they bring up the recent privacy issues with AOL and the ability to uninstall our software. They say: "if you've ever installed AIM you know how hard it is to get rid of" and "it gets it clutches deep within your computer--is this antivirus gonna be the same way?"
- Danny Sullivan is a brilliant guy and he does an amazing podcast called the Daily SearchCast. I listen to it every single day. He did a special edition yesterday where he interviews Eric Schmidt and asks him about my proposal for search engines to not keep search data (7:45 in).
Hard times at AOL right now.
Ted checks in on what people are calling the "data Valdez." It so nice having Ted blogging, sometimes I feel like I'm alone on the front lines. I wish other senior executives would start blogging at AOL (hint, hint)--or at least commenting (you guys know you can post a comment to Ted's blog or my blog right?).
I have to be honest with y'all: it's hard times at AOL right now, that's for sure.
Every couple of steps we take going forward (Netscape, TMZ, Live8, moving to the free model, AIM Pro, AIM Pages, free five gigs of backup, 40% growth of advertising for Q2--beating Yahoo, MapQuests API, AOL Uncut Video), we seem to get hit back by something horrible like "the call" or "the data Valdez." The truth is the company is moving forward, but these things create a horrible perception problem, and it has a real world impact in that it de-motivates my teams and it makes it so much harder to get new people into the company. Smart folks ask me about stuff like "the call" when I try to recruit them for AOL, and I have to assure them it isn't gonna happen again. It's not easy, and I wish I could tell you I always win that fight--but I don't.
I was so angry today that I had to get off my computer and do a three-mile run. I'm back at my desk but I'm still seething--how could this happen?! Everyone is working so hard to get AOL on the right track, and it all gets forgotten when this kind of thing happens.
I think I'm gonna take the rest of the week off from blogging as a "cool down"period. I don't want to say something I regret, and I don't want to become the spokesperson for the entire company--that's not my job and it's not my desire. I just want to build cool stuff with cool people I respect.
To my team (and everyone at AOL), keep fighting the good fight. Put your anger into your game and stay focused. The darkest hour is the one before the dawn. We're gonna get through this.
[Note: AOL staffers can feel free to post their comments below--anonymous or on the record. I'll turn them on for you if you use a fake email. ]
I have to be honest with y'all: it's hard times at AOL right now, that's for sure.
Every couple of steps we take going forward (Netscape, TMZ, Live8, moving to the free model, AIM Pro, AIM Pages, free five gigs of backup, 40% growth of advertising for Q2--beating Yahoo, MapQuests API, AOL Uncut Video), we seem to get hit back by something horrible like "the call" or "the data Valdez." The truth is the company is moving forward, but these things create a horrible perception problem, and it has a real world impact in that it de-motivates my teams and it makes it so much harder to get new people into the company. Smart folks ask me about stuff like "the call" when I try to recruit them for AOL, and I have to assure them it isn't gonna happen again. It's not easy, and I wish I could tell you I always win that fight--but I don't.
I was so angry today that I had to get off my computer and do a three-mile run. I'm back at my desk but I'm still seething--how could this happen?! Everyone is working so hard to get AOL on the right track, and it all gets forgotten when this kind of thing happens.
I think I'm gonna take the rest of the week off from blogging as a "cool down"period. I don't want to say something I regret, and I don't want to become the spokesperson for the entire company--that's not my job and it's not my desire. I just want to build cool stuff with cool people I respect.
To my team (and everyone at AOL), keep fighting the good fight. Put your anger into your game and stay focused. The darkest hour is the one before the dawn. We're gonna get through this.
[Note: AOL staffers can feel free to post their comments below--anonymous or on the record. I'll turn them on for you if you use a fake email. ]
Old vs. New Netscape (or "if you could change GeoCities into MySpace in 2002 would you have?")
There is a short story in the NYT today about a small, but vocal, group of Netscape users who don't like the new, more interactive, Netscape. The story explains that a petition has been started to change the new Netscape back to the old Netscape where we (AOL) programmed the experience.
There is one piece of misinformation in the story: that we tried to silence the folks doing the petition by not letting them vote up negative Netscape stories on the new Netscape--that's simply not true. We've had a dozen negative stories about Netscape on the home page--just like DIGG has--and we understand that part of running a social news site is that your user base will use the site itself to talk to you. In fact, any negative story on AOL, Netscape, or myself immediatly goes to the number one position.
That's the price you pay for letting folks take control--they actually do it!
I think some folks don't understand that there is a window in which a story can remain on the homepage (just over a day). We do this so the news stays fresh (i.e. when you come back 24 hours later it's not the same self-propogating list stuck at the top level).
I respect the fact that a group of folks liked the original home page better, and they don't want to participate in the new social news site--it's not for everyone. However, this is a very small percentage of the over millions of unique users who come to Netscape, and for AOL there is a very strategic reason for evolving Netscape.com. That reason is we already have a professionally programmed portal in AOL.COM! Also, we told the users about the change for a month, but some folks I think ignored or missed the messaging. That's a big take away here: over communicate with your members (oh wait, I put this in a recent post--I guess I need to take more of my own advice). If I were to do this again I would put a message that blocked users from visiting the site until they had read a note about the upcoming changes. Live and learn.
Additionally, the fact was that the majority of users were not sticking with the old Netscape. A quick look at the stats (not Alexia please--it doesn't count the Netscape browser--where a large percentage of our traffic comes from) shows that Netscape lost 1/3rd of its audience over the past year.
So, we lost a third of the audience by not changing the site, and now by changing we're going to lose a very small percentage, but be back on a growth path.
Look at it this way: if Geocities could change itself to MySpace before losing it's marketshare to MySpace you would do that right?
Same thing here, we're in the middle of paradigm shift from top-down control to bottom-up participation, and when you make a radical change like that you're gonna get pushback. In fact, I'm really excited to see the pushback because it let's me know we are on the right track.
Any new service is gonna get folks who don't like it. The more radical or forward looking an idea is the more folks are gonna be shocked by it--and this is a radical (but soon-to-be established) concept.
We anticipated in our projections that a large percentage of the audience might not like the new portal (double digits) and we're well below that (single digits)--so, I think we did a good job. When you change the menu at your restaurant some folks are gonna like the old menu better... we understand that and we're sorry we can't maintain two versions of the site forever--but this is a business and we have to grow it. For those folks the AOL.COM portal is still providing the classic portal experience with a massive amount of new stuff including a ton of video and programmed news.
It is ironic, of course, that some folks are voting for *less* interactivity and control, but I understand it. I don't want the New York Times to be a social news site... I think.
There is one piece of misinformation in the story: that we tried to silence the folks doing the petition by not letting them vote up negative Netscape stories on the new Netscape--that's simply not true. We've had a dozen negative stories about Netscape on the home page--just like DIGG has--and we understand that part of running a social news site is that your user base will use the site itself to talk to you. In fact, any negative story on AOL, Netscape, or myself immediatly goes to the number one position.
That's the price you pay for letting folks take control--they actually do it!
I think some folks don't understand that there is a window in which a story can remain on the homepage (just over a day). We do this so the news stays fresh (i.e. when you come back 24 hours later it's not the same self-propogating list stuck at the top level).
I respect the fact that a group of folks liked the original home page better, and they don't want to participate in the new social news site--it's not for everyone. However, this is a very small percentage of the over millions of unique users who come to Netscape, and for AOL there is a very strategic reason for evolving Netscape.com. That reason is we already have a professionally programmed portal in AOL.COM! Also, we told the users about the change for a month, but some folks I think ignored or missed the messaging. That's a big take away here: over communicate with your members (oh wait, I put this in a recent post--I guess I need to take more of my own advice). If I were to do this again I would put a message that blocked users from visiting the site until they had read a note about the upcoming changes. Live and learn.
Additionally, the fact was that the majority of users were not sticking with the old Netscape. A quick look at the stats (not Alexia please--it doesn't count the Netscape browser--where a large percentage of our traffic comes from) shows that Netscape lost 1/3rd of its audience over the past year.
So, we lost a third of the audience by not changing the site, and now by changing we're going to lose a very small percentage, but be back on a growth path.
Look at it this way: if Geocities could change itself to MySpace before losing it's marketshare to MySpace you would do that right?
Same thing here, we're in the middle of paradigm shift from top-down control to bottom-up participation, and when you make a radical change like that you're gonna get pushback. In fact, I'm really excited to see the pushback because it let's me know we are on the right track.
Any new service is gonna get folks who don't like it. The more radical or forward looking an idea is the more folks are gonna be shocked by it--and this is a radical (but soon-to-be established) concept.
We anticipated in our projections that a large percentage of the audience might not like the new portal (double digits) and we're well below that (single digits)--so, I think we did a good job. When you change the menu at your restaurant some folks are gonna like the old menu better... we understand that and we're sorry we can't maintain two versions of the site forever--but this is a business and we have to grow it. For those folks the AOL.COM portal is still providing the classic portal experience with a massive amount of new stuff including a ton of video and programmed news.
It is ironic, of course, that some folks are voting for *less* interactivity and control, but I understand it. I don't want the New York Times to be a social news site... I think.
High and Low (or "How to love members... shall I count the ways?")
We're up, we're down... we gotta keep getting better. Fankly, this is very simple: we must worship our users. We have to love them more than Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft.
How do you show love in our world? Let me count the ways:
How do you show love in our world? Let me count the ways:
- More disk space
- Better screen real estate
- Faster servers
- Better editorial
- More features
- More support
- Better design
- Less ads
- Less annoying ads
- Less obnoxious ads
- More targeted ads
- Take that which is paid and make it free
- Anticipate members needs and fill them
- Surprise members with fun, new experiences
- Communicate with members open and freely
- Listen to members--then listen to them some more
- Treat members how you would like to be treated
- Be honest with members--always
- Don't do anything sneaky because a) members are smart and will bust you, b) life is so short--why would you want to be a sneak?, and c) this is a long-term business, the short term is meaningless.
- Respect your members wishes above all else. If they don't love you any more that is their choice, and it's an opportunity for you to reflect on why they don't love you (consider it a free focus group)
- Let people consume your product on their terms with their software, browser, device, hardware or operating system (this is also known as the "don't be Microsoft rule").


