4 ms·

The Value of Attention

58 points by cwan 17y ago

ruchi 17y ago
Karma system for submissions and comments is already using it to some extent.
- pwhelan 17y ago
  ruchi -- ok ok ruchi I'll upvote you. I assure you ruchi that these desperate pleas for us to notice you and your cool handle, ruchi, haven't gone unnoticed. I had never thought of this, but it clarifies why so many people on the internet (and sadly some friends irl) seem not to be trolling but just making relatively ludicrous statements. Ever since reading this I've been analyzing everything everyone in the office is saying and the conversations they've started. It's like a weird Heisenberg conversational thing.
briancooley 17y ago
The value of having a guest editorial in the NYT goes far beyond whatever payment one might receive. Just ask the Diaspora quartet. (I realize they didn't have an editorial. Work with me. ;-) ) That component is so large, I'm not sure I can separate it enough to address the spirit of SA's question. There's a certain component of esteem that goes along with most of our actions, but our desire to attain it can almost always be linked to a promise of tangible gain.
CoryMathews 17y ago
I'm to poor to pay attention...
wheaties 17y ago
I think Google with YouTube has already attempted to monetize the "pay attention to me" phenomenon. Then there's Wordpress and a host of other blogging services. However, I have to agree, pay-attention-to-me-as-a-service is a good business model if you do it right.
alexcharlie 17y ago
Some brilliant dating sites monetize by creating an attention economy. Fubar.com comes to mind. We tried to emulate some of this for Friends for Sale.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
brandnewlow 17y ago
Isn't he just talking about advertising?
- culled 17y ago
  No, he's talking about people's desire to receive attention. Advertising puts a price on getting attention from others but it generally does so to try to sell stuff not just as a self-esteem boost.
logic 17y ago
In a similar (but perhaps unrelated) vein, his hypothetical about amateurs freely volunteering their words to the New York Times is precisely what has been happening in the photography world for quite a few years, with a resulting range of pricing: Flickr, vs. stock photography sites, vs. traditional publishers like Getty.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
olliesaunders 17y ago
Very much enjoyed this. Perhaps this adds even more weight to Dale Carnegie's advice about listening to people. I have some friends who barely know anything about me but are fond of me just because I let them speak as much as they like.
horseass 17y ago
'Someday an entrepreneur will make a fortune by figuring out how to monetize personal attention in the most efficient way.' pimps
krmmalik 17y ago
Great article, one of the best writing voices i've ever come across i have to say. Its possible i may have mis-understood the article, but arent Facebook and Twitter in the best position to monetize this? I mean "status updates" are exactly that, no? A cry for attention? Obviously he's talking about paying someone to give you that attention, but would Facebook not be in a very good position to work out who wants it the most, in what way, and how much (roughly) they are willing to pay? Just a theory

58 points by cwan 17y ago

ruchi 17y ago

Karma system for submissions and comments is already using it to some extent.

pwhelan 17y ago
ruchi -- ok ok ruchi I'll upvote you. I assure you ruchi that these desperate pleas for us to notice you and your cool handle, ruchi, haven't gone unnoticed. I had never thought of this, but it clarifies why so many people on the internet (and sadly some friends irl) seem not to be trolling but just making relatively ludicrous statements. Ever since reading this I've been analyzing everything everyone in the office is saying and the conversations they've started. It's like a weird Heisenberg conversational thing.

briancooley 17y ago

The value of having a guest editorial in the NYT goes far beyond whatever payment one might receive. Just ask the Diaspora quartet. (I realize they didn't have an editorial. Work with me. ;-) ) That component is so large, I'm not sure I can separate it enough to address the spirit of SA's question. There's a certain component of esteem that goes along with most of our actions, but our desire to attain it can almost always be linked to a promise of tangible gain.

CoryMathews 17y ago

I'm to poor to pay attention...

wheaties 17y ago

I think Google with YouTube has already attempted to monetize the "pay attention to me" phenomenon. Then there's Wordpress and a host of other blogging services. However, I have to agree, pay-attention-to-me-as-a-service is a good business model if you do it right.

alexcharlie 17y ago

Some brilliant dating sites monetize by creating an attention economy. Fubar.com comes to mind. We tried to emulate some of this for Friends for Sale.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

brandnewlow 17y ago

Isn't he just talking about advertising?

culled 17y ago
No, he's talking about people's desire to receive attention. Advertising puts a price on getting attention from others but it generally does so to try to sell stuff not just as a self-esteem boost.

logic 17y ago

In a similar (but perhaps unrelated) vein, his hypothetical about amateurs freely volunteering their words to the New York Times is precisely what has been happening in the photography world for quite a few years, with a resulting range of pricing: Flickr, vs. stock photography sites, vs. traditional publishers like Getty.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

olliesaunders 17y ago

Very much enjoyed this. Perhaps this adds even more weight to Dale Carnegie's advice about listening to people. I have some friends who barely know anything about me but are fond of me just because I let them speak as much as they like.

horseass 17y ago

'Someday an entrepreneur will make a fortune by figuring out how to monetize personal attention in the most efficient way.' pimps

krmmalik 17y ago

Great article, one of the best writing voices i've ever come across i have to say. Its possible i may have mis-understood the article, but arent Facebook and Twitter in the best position to monetize this? I mean "status updates" are exactly that, no? A cry for attention? Obviously he's talking about paying someone to give you that attention, but would Facebook not be in a very good position to work out who wants it the most, in what way, and how much (roughly) they are willing to pay? Just a theory