Interesting Stuff 2008-06-09
The Â鶹Éç's Pete Clifton discusses in an article at paidContent called :
Sometimes, the journalists are in a hurry and just don't do it. But we have to be really serious about this going forward, we have to be willing to put this out to the local media to show we're not monopolising coverage.
Sometime Â鶹Éç Senior Development Producer Martin Belam has about the Â鶹Éç Trust review with a look at search, illustrated with Lego users of bbc.co.uk:
Now, of course, there are lies, damned lies, statistics and then web metrics, but I'm unclear that you can argue how 'good' or 'useful' a site search is from these figures.
The /topics beta as introduced by Matthew McDonnell last week has been getting reaction on blogs [ | ], including and :
One of the criticisms levelled at the Â鶹Éç website is that it doesn't return enough to the wider internet, be that by just linking out more to other sites.
Well its new Â鶹Éç Topics offering could be the perfect vehicle for doing just that.
Janko Roettgers at NewTeeVee writes about , looking at the Beeb's recent editorial guidelines:
It's part practical how-to for Â鶹Éç producers, part Star Trek-like Prime Directive, complete with warnings to "be sensitive to the expectations of existing users of the specific site."
Media Guardian reports that .
There's a on the Â鶹Éç Backstage mailing list on "proxy support in Â鶹Éç iPlayer download client".
bednboard uses the bbc.co.uk message boards to propose closing some bbc.co.uk message boards.
Paul Canning that "[no-one] seems to be picking up " about the Â鶹Éç Trust's findings on embedding [some mildly NSFW language]:
One thing they couldn't get more wrong is that they think the Beeb shouldn't get embedding happening, as is planned.
And now someone has. [See also this comment; more embedding news as it comes.]
Alan Connor is co-editor, Â鶹Éç Internet Blog.
Comment number 1.
At 9th Jun 2008, paulcanning wrote:Merci.
Mild! It's 'racy', I'll have you know!
Nick Reynolds commented on my post that:
"If embedded Â鶹Éç content implies that the Â鶹Éç is saying "you can trust this site" then maybe.
But it may not actually drive more traffic from bbc.co.uk to other sites. "
Two quickies (owh, matron):
1. Embedding would open up access to areas like the archives, where you have layer upon layer of compelling content — I used the example of the Titanic audio.
2. With news, Â鶹Éç content is already 'out there on youtube etc. As is happening with MSNBC and others, allowing embedding would help the blogosphere, enhance the brand ('trust' if you like') and help reach audiences, i.e. youth sharing content.
I don't get Nick's last point.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 10th Jun 2008, Mike Nolan wrote:There's a certain irony that Martin Belam's latest post ( is about linking to external sites yet you don't link to his website or the post you quote from, instead linking to his page on the Â鶹Éç Internet blog and leaving the reader to find the source of the quote themselves
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 10th Jun 2008, Nick Reynolds wrote:My point is that embedding may be good for other reasons, but it doesn't necessarily support the idea of bbc.co.uk being a trusted guide to the rest of the internet or make it easier for people to find other internet content from bbc.co.uk.
Which (I think) is what the Trust are saying.
Nick Reynolds (editor, Â鶹Éç Internet blog)
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 10th Jun 2008, Alan Connor wrote:Congratulations, @Mike (#2). You are the first to spot that delicious piece of irony and you win the comptition prize: a Â鶹Éç Internet Blog funpack containing satin bomber jacket, bumper sticker and a Literacy Owl-shaped cuddly toy.
(On the other hand, just in case it might possibly look for a moment like I'd empty-headedly omitted to hyperlink the relevant text, I have now added the URI and the blog is rebuilding as I type. The competition is now closed and no further entries will be counted.)
Thank you, Mike.
Alan Connor, Â鶹Éç Internet Blog
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)