Don't know +Mark Traphagen
. Schaefer found the weakness in the math. I think it will be easier than you think to create multi-author, multi-thread content for #lawyers #realtors #accountants #webdesignagencies
because these and many other examples have natural content networks that arise from their clients.
Profiling those clients provides a valuable source of User Generated Content since they will maintain the page for the value of the link. That truth underscores why THEIR content is always more valuable on YOUR website and it is at the core of Schaefer's realization.
Schaefer realized the economics of #contentshock
. He discovered Barabasi's "rich get richer" mathematical destiny of all content networks discussed in LINKED: How Everything Is Connected To Everything Else. Since the fabric of the new #SEO
depends on an engine capable of generating ever increasing amounts of User Generated Content ( #UGC
) and confirming social shares Schaefer simply realized few will be able to get THERE from HERE.
When I was a Director of Ecommerce we had a multi-author, multi-thread tool called a forum that, for a long time, was a valuable contributor to the site's SEO. Spam made what was once a winning idea untenable and Huffington took the forum and branded it much better.
I also think you are missing the real engine inside of Huffington, BuzzWorthy, Digg et al and that is UGC. +Phil Buckley
and I met with a regular contributor of art content to Huffington the other day and sometimes his content wins top placements, sometimes it doesn't. The HuffPost algorithm is curating his content based on its social reception.
Huffington isn't a "publisher" as much as they are a SEO engine much like TechCrunch, Mashable or what Curatti will become. These engines trade their content and SEO density for free content.
I wrote for Technorati for a bit under this same contract. I provided free content and they decided what to blow up based on their experience. Sometimes they "blew up" content way before there was sufficient behavioral data indicating predictive analytics. That model isn't "publishing" as much as #contentcuration
as +Guillaume Decugis
pointed out in his post.
I would argue that any commercial digital marketer has NO CHOICE but to create the content authority Google seeks. Content authority comes from an increasing amount of social shares, QDF (Quality Deserves Freshness) content with high "ping rates" creating an ever widening content "net" and thus forming a HUB.
What Schaefer discovered was any PR4 or less website is unlikely to be able to afford the freight in such a zero sum game because content marketing math, the math covered in LINKED, favors existing hubs.
"Existing hubs" such as HuffPost, Mashable, (on the publisher side) and Digg, BuzzFeed and UpWorhty on the content engine side must scale "beyond the breakers" a journey many will attempt and few will succeed since building community is about the hardest thing to do in the world.
Finally, sorry but I disagree with your "stand out content" note.
Every piece of content I've had get out beyond the breakers (go mega-viral) did so because of powerful support from "rich uncles" such as +Scoop.it
, friends at +Paper.li
or a combination of other benevolent sources (you for instance) making Schaefer's point - content only "stands out" with help and that help will become increasingly difficult for little guys (PR4 or below) to count on, orchestrate or develop.
If ROI depends on winning the lottery creating "standout content" is a hobby not a business and, as I noted in Content Shock vs. Curation, every creator of "standout content" will be dependent on an arbitrage curation mashup tool (Scoop.it), "rich uncles" like HuffPost, Technorati, TechCrunch, or vox populi voting machines such as Digg, UpWorthy or BuzzFeed. I could argue HuffPost is exactly that - a vox populi voting machine since their backend algorithms function much the same but we can leave that very complex math for another time :).
For many reasons I hope YOU are right and Schaefer and I are wrong. Your vision is more democratic and fun. Problem is if web marketing was a casino the odds are with the house and that fact becomes more and more true daily forcing IMers to either ape "the house" by creating a Curatti-like "branded forum" or hope they win the lottery. M