Why Attention.xml Could Change PR Forever

Attention.xml is a new technology standard that's being proselytized by influencers like Steve Gillmor, David Sifry, Robert Scoble and Jeremy Zawodny. Basically it is metadata that records and shares information on the "attention" users give to their RSS feeds and blogs.

Scoble said that by the end of 2005 we'll all know what attention.xml is and why it's important for the services we choose to support it. Listening to this podcast with Steve Gillmor and Chris Pirillo today, I could not help but agree.

Aggregated metadata (definition) projects like attention.xml and Richard MacManus' collaborative Feedburner stat project, could have a lot of value for PR professionals. Attention.xml could tell us who looks at a blog or feed, how often they look at it, where those viewers come from, and more, according to a piece Gillmor wrote for Release 1.0. If it really gets off the ground, it could have a massive impact on the PR professional because it will solve some of the industry’s measurement issues (we still have to talk about how we boost the bottom line!).

Before attention.xml can get going, however, there are some stumbling blocks such as privacy/technical issues and questions over who should own the standard that need to be overcome first.

One of the questions I get often is "how can I tell how influential a blogger is/isn't?" As Scoble says, you can look at how many subscribers they have on Bloglines, how many in-bound links they have on Technorati, etc., but we need more. Now imagine for a moment you can look at an RSS feed on My Yahoo and see how many people have read the same post you’re reading or how many page views it is getting, etc. What if you could get an RSS feed that notifies you every time there are blog posts that are read by more than 100,000 people? Attention.xml as I understand it could make that possible (correct me if I am wrong please). I don’t know about you, but I would subscribe to that feed.

Going a step further, consider the possibilities if the mainstream media (MSM) adopted attention.xml as well. This could happen if the big RSS feed aggregators get behind it.

The MSM is increasingly merging with the blogosphere into one unisphere. Some blogs break news stories and have thousands of subscribers. Meanwhile, media sites are launching branded RSS readers, blogs, podcasts and even adopting trackbacks and comments. It is conceivable that if there is a groundswell of love for attention.xml from the blogosphere, it could tip the hand of the big guys towards adopting it.

So, go with me for a moment. Let's say this happens in a year or two's time. Imagine how valuable this aggregated information would be. PR professionals and marketers could spec out the exact number of people who saw an article online – including both the site that generated it and the blogs that linked to it. There's no guessing. Attention.xml or whatever becomes the standard would go a long way to helping the public relations industry measure the value of media placements, but it has to get off the ground first. I support aggregated metadata if it's a true standard (e.g. no one single company owns it) and the privacy issues are solved and urge everyone in PR to do the same.

Comments

[Randy Charles Morin]

I keep hearing about attention.xml. I ask, "What is it?" I'm pointed to a Webpage, which makes it sounds like OPML. I say, "You mean it's another OPML?" They always answer "No."

Now, I jump into the time machine and go back five years.

I keep hearing about RDF. I ask, "What is it?" I'm pointed to a Webpage, which makes it sounds like XML. I say, "You mean it's another XML?" They always answer "No."

Sounds like the new RDF.

[Anonymous]

Why would users want their reading patterns known?

[Denis de Bernardy]

To anonymous: Your reading patterns could be interesting if you've a machine-learning algorithms in the background who feed themselves with this information as a semantic resource.

[FH]

Randy's right. And anyway, why on earth would I need a micrometer to measure what's happening in the nanomedia -- oops blogosphere -- if I still can't really generate a reliable picture of my PR impact on the mainstream (read: MASS, ie, large readership/viewership) media?

Blogging's a good thing. But it's not far removed from word of mouth, which in PR is also a good thing. But clients aren't asking me for yet another set of arcane charts about what a few people with shared interests are saying.

[Niall Cook]

Steve,

You raise some interesting points here, well worthy of further thinking.

I'm less sure about the measurement conclusions though. Yes, it can help measure media placements, as you say, but I'm not sure what that really tells us.

This just measures "output", when most clients - at least in the UK - want to know the impact that PR has on their business "outcomes".

In this context, attention.xml looks like a welcome means to a end, but not the end in itself - at least where the measurement argument is concered.

[Chris Bechtel]

Steve -

I think you raise some very interesting and exciting points. It's a little frightening (but sadly, perhaps typical) that the few PR-industry comments you received were luke-warm to the idea. I don't think people realize the fundamental changes that are occuring within this industry. The consumers are far more advanced than industry and those that service and advise industry. In fact, what's even more frightening is that often it seems that our clients are the ones asking for new technologies - as consultants and advisors we have failed miserably when it comes to educating our clients and serving as a resource for them when it comes to utilizing the most innovative and effective means for promoting their brands.

Measurement in PR is difficult. With the growth in RSS - it's even more difficult. The trend that has more and more consumers of news and information using RSS will only continue. Readership in old forms of media will only decrease as time goes on. I have clients currently that could not give a $#@&% whether they appeared in the Daily Breeze - but they do care if they are mentioned on a Blog, in a chat room, or if their feed was picked up. Currently, there is no way to measure these eyeballs.

Today's PR world is far more complicated than simply measuring "output" and "outcome". We need to measure everything in between - influence, interest and impact. RSS makes brands available in many, many more places - a powerful vehicle. Right now, we just don't know who's watching.

[Hendy Irawan]

Hey, this is a good thing!

Although I guess I'm a little bit biased, but not everytime is that something read 10,000 times is going to be interesting for me. Every post in Slashdot is read by thousands and more people but that doesn't mean I'm going to subscribe to it.

I think it'd be even greater if there's somehow a way to measure the quality of a post instead of just mere numbers/statistics...

[Jason Cain]

You folks need to get a life!

Such a standard doesn't measure "influence" it measures POPULARITY.

If you have a post with "dancing gerbils" you are going to have millions of visitors, but it hardly means that the person is influential.

The blogeois are at it again...