I recommend the same essays about the web over and over again. Essays like 1000 True Fans or The Next Economy of Ideas are both informative and inspiring, and convey fundamental ideas about how the web works.
When I say “how the web works”, I’m not talking about DNS or HTTP. I’m referring to the profound impact that the web is having on community, commerce, communications and so many other parts of our lives. It’s these big ideas that are difficult to absorb, and I find the essays help.
James does the same thing, and he came up with the idea of curating a book (maybe it’s electronic, maybe hard copy, maybe both) that showcases a bunch of the best essays. In short, a toolkit for getting the web.
We were at a business retreat up in Tofino this weekend, and we hashed out the idea a little. Following the best advice of Ze Frank (rude words ahead), we started implementing the idea on the spot. Hence, GettheWeb.org. For now it’s just a Google Sites page with a Google Docs form and a YouTube video (owned by Google) explaining the project.
At this stage, we’re just looking for recommendations for “great essays about how the web works–socially, behaviorally, philosophically”. Plus we made a 78-second video discussing the project (thanks to Jay from Giant Ant for being our two-elbow duopod):
Have you got an essay about the web that you love? Submit it.
As you’ve probably heard, Google Knol launched publicly today. It’s considered a more or less direct competitor to Wikipedia, as it permits anybody to author an article on pretty much anything. It doesn’t have the same degree of ‘wiki’ collaboration as Wikipedia, though–it’s more about individual experts. From the Google blog:
The key principle behind Knol is authorship. Every knol will have an author (or group of authors) who put their name behind their content. It’s their knol, their voice, their opinion. We expect that there will be multiple knols on the same subject, and we think that is good.
With Knol, we are introducing a new method for authors to work together that we call “moderated collaboration.” With this feature, any reader can make suggested edits to a knol which the author may then choose to accept, reject, or modify before these contributions become visible to the public. This allows authors to accept suggestions from everyone in the world while remaining in control of their content. After all, their name is associated with it!
What’s the marketing angle? In the coming days, I anticipate a great land grab as people author ‘knols’ on topics that matter to them. They’re going to permit multiple knols, but I anticipate something of a first-mover advantage. If Google Knol takes off (and odds are that it will), then it’s probably a good idea to write a knol on a topic in which you’re an expert. Knols may not be direct traffic drivers, but they may help cement your expertise in the space.
Julie and I put together a knol on social media marketing. It needs work, but I think it’s a satisfactory start. If you have the time, please consider rating, reviewing, editing or commenting on it.
I read Ron Rosenbaum’s piece about the ubiquitous celebrity profile with a mixture of shame and rapture. Rapture because he was expressing everything that’s wrong with the fawning puff pieces that populate GQ, Details and Esquire. Shame because I read those magazines (shaking my head at every ebullient adjective) pretty much every time I take a plane, train or ferry.
It surprises me that I’ve never read such a critique before now:
No, the piece is a serious profile, and there are serious reasons for running it. There are serious issues raised, there are profound questions about The Way We Live Now to be discussed. The result is a meretricious prose whose pretense at arch sophistication has become a schlock art form, the written equivalent of a Leroy Neiman nude.
This reminded me of another recent Slate article. Christopher Hitchens wrote an erudite piece about Paris Hilton and ‘the creepy populism surrounding high-profile defendants’. I didn’t agree with much of it, but it’s worth reading for the prose alone.
