Do you think that this is a kind of system that would work well with news sites, too?
I am a big believer in gaming mechanics in general. I think that we’re going to see more of this kind of thing, just like we’ve seen social media take off. My hunch is that a lot more companies are going to figure out that gaming mechanics are an interesting and fun way to engage and reward users. Whether it’s news or anything else, I would place a bet that this will become the next interesting frenzy around media.
Will it be as big as Twitter, as Facebook? I can’t say. But as it relates to a news outlet, all media companies want repeat visitors, we all want people to engage in the content, to comment, to ask questions. There is logic to it. For sure, there are other kinds of properties, properties like mine and properties for hobbyists, where there’s just a real sense of passion. But when you look at The Huffington Post, for example, they obviously have their super users. People are being rewarded, and I imagine that it has contributed to their success in getting certain people to come back and continue to really participate on the site. Even The New York Times wants people to Tweet and share. If you’re getting “credit” to do that, if you’re incentivized to do that, is there a better chance that you may do it? I think so.
Yes, sites like YourTango are becoming more common on the internet, and as a reader, I do not feel obliged to "get used to it". Of course they will not get complaints, because most people won’t waste their time and will move on to other sources. A few curmudgeons like myself will post a comment like this: complaining, but on a different site entirely.
High-quality branded content? I just finished reading some articles on YourTango, and "high-quality" was not what I'd use to describe them. Miller's statement about "...a gap in the market that we could really exploit" says it all -- YourTango is just another advertising site that puts quasi-journalism to work as marketing's whore.
It's obvious from the material I read on YourTango and the statements by Miller in this article that the readership are regarded as little more than stupid sheep to keep corralled for fleecing. Seriously, earning points to win badges? And the sad part is, Miller is right. There are people who get sucked into winning some sort of electronic status, as if it were something with a valuable and tangible existence offline. However, the down side is that quantity is routinely rewarded over quality in those schemes, and quality goes down as users post garbage to raise their numbers and status. Actually, the badge scheme could explain the lousy articles I just read at YourTango, roughly six months now since this article was written. I’ve seen ratings systems put in place on some sites along with similar status schemes, but high ratings invariably go to articles, posts and comments the user agrees with, not those that are informative, well-written, and take care to minimize bias.
If we’re lucky, advertising sites like YourTango will continue to the downward slide into low quality and evolve themselves out of existence. I’m afraid the more likely scenario is that users will live down to advertisers’ low expectations of their audience, and instead of a once venerable institution in its own right, journalism will become just another technique in marketing’s bag of tricks.
#1 Posted by TR, CJR on Fri 25 Nov 2011 at 09:19 PM