Mahalo 2.0 is a Wiki reference site that, unlike Wikipedia.org, compensates contributors to a column (only users who “claim” a column) with 50% of the ad revenue generated on that column.

I’m a big proponent of experimenting with ways to pay for content – it’s the only way to find a model that will support high-quality content creation – but, I do not think the small amounts of revenue generated for the contributor will be a big incentive. Contributers may be able to tie together multiple “claims” to begin aggregating revenue, but without massive traffic increases to pages that, by their nature, interest a very small niche of users, it’s just not going to equal a BigMac a month. It’s certainly not going to be a  greater incentive than the passion for the topic and vanity boost from connecting with a larger audience that a contributer gets on wikipedia.

I actually hope I’m wrong and this model becomes wildly successful. But, in this case, I don’t see it happening. Decide for yourself; visit Mahalo.com or read CNet’s recent column.

I love my Moleskine. I use it daily to keep track of lots of randomness that I seldom refer to again, but are nonetheless things I want to pluck from my brain and save.

If you don’t know what Moleskine notebooks are, they’re those little black books (now available in multiple styles and sizes, because Americans like choices) that you’ll see artists, writers, tech geeks and other crafty folk carrying around to coffee shops. Or, more likely, you’ll see folks like me using them – not so famous or interesting artists, writers or tech geeks. Dare I say, wannabes.

As hailed in the brochure included with the thing when you buy it – tucked away in the neat little pocket in back (a pocket that’s perfect for storing your used Europass ticket stubs or other proofs of your worldly travels) – Hemingway and other artsy types sat scribbling in them at every cafe in post-WWI Europe, recording the great works of our generation while still unknown and untouched by fame. Exactly what modern-day Moleskiners want to do – when they have time between trips to Target and Starbucks.

I thought that my treasured Moleskine and my chosen profession of interwebs interlocutor were relatively unconnectable, exactly the way I liked it. Our world is so filled with technology advancing every pursuit at breakneck speed that a bit of real-world interaction keeps you grounded (old cars, bikes, fly-fishing, Moleskines are the ying to my techno-yang).

But alas, Moleskine (the company, not my notebook) is asking me to go beyond paper. It’s clear that Moleskine is no longer a tiny, niche product; but rather, it’s a big brand with venture capital behind them and a “circle R” behind every usage of the name. Those marketers have recruited a social media posse to reach out and take its community online, creating all kinds of “synergies” and “positive brand experiences” for Moleskine lovers.

I usually dig these efforts – because that’s what I do. But this one seems at odds with the brand, ironically asking users to you join the community so that they can upload and share scans of cool things recorded in their private Moleskines. It’s also a bit narcissistic to take all this time to journal away in your book, with the intention of posting it publicly. That may just tap into the dirty little truth that the unstated intention of the modern Moleskinista is to create something that just might give them fame when their scribblings are found years from now – whereas current readers might just see them as…well, doodles.

Would Hemingway do this? Of course not. But then again, he probably wouldn’t have a Facebook or a computer for that matter.

In any case, give it a shot. Share your Moleskine scribbles by creating a “MyMoleskine” account.

Everyone needs to read this article. Having worked in the content industry, I know that quality content cannot continue to be produced without a new model for monetization of that content.

Here’s the opportunity for startups…

Pushing a message at a potential customer when it has not been requested and when the consumer is in the midst of something else on the net, will fail as a major revenue source for most internet sites. This is particularly true when the consumer knows that the sponsor of the ad has paid to have this information, which was verified by no one, thrust at him. The net will find monetization models and these will be different from the advertising models used by mass media, just as the models used by mass media were different from the monetization models of theater and sporting events before them.

via Why Advertising Is Failing On The Internet.

Be-a-magpie.com is the first full-fledged (fletched?) attempt I’ve seen to bring a 3rd party ad network model to Twitter. It’s looking like Twitter will be monetizing search much in the way Google Adsense program works, but Magpie operates outside of Twitter itself, signing up and rating “key-influencers” to pimp the goods of advertisers.

Reading their marketing info, the theory seems sound, but it’s as complicated as a Parisian roundabout (see the multi-diagram explanation here). The final calculation for costs to the advertiser also seems arbitrary, dividing the CPM rate by 1,000 then multiplying by the number of “friends” (I assume they mean followers) that a Magpie-Twitterer has. My guess, this will get some buzz (and Tweets), but the the it’s not the solution to making money on Twitter.

Now this is an awesome web-print integrated ad campaign:

YouTube – MINI Cabrio: Weltpremiere in den Händen!.

You may want to check out this iphone version that’s similar from ARToolWorks.

Thanks to Mark Daggett for the heads up.