Is embedding better than quoting?

by Mathew on March 17, 2008 · Comments

Anil Dash of Six Apart has an interesting post up in which he proposes that instead of simply linking to or quoting from blog posts, bloggers could actually embed a segment of the post they are citing — in much the same way that people embed YouTube videos etc. by inserting some Javascript. I’ve included an excerpt of the post here as an experiment, in part because I’m wondering whether this idea (which I found via a Twitter post from Steve Rubel) makes any sense or not.

Like Anil, part of me finds this kind of thing appealing — but is it just the geek part of me? It’s elegant in a way, but I wonder whether it’s more trouble than is really necessary (Piers Fawkes at PSFK has written about it as well, and Anil has commented on that post). After all, I can quote from Anil’s post by simply cutting and pasting text, like this:

I want you to place the text of this blog post on your own site. But I don’t want you to do it just by copying and pasting it into your own blogging tool. I think there might be a different way to do it.

What benefits does using Anil’s method have? It includes a link to the comments on the post, which is nice (although it could get unwieldy if there were too many), but I’m not sure it’s a killer feature. And it has a nice colored border, of course. I experimented with Clipmarks.com as a way of doing something similar — since it allows you to clip and save a blog or web-page excerpt and then paste it into your blog automatically — but in the end it seemed too cumbersome.

Share:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • SphereIt
  • StumbleUpon
  • personally I found the embedded version distracting which took away from the flow of the post
  • I know what you mean, Steven. I felt the same way.


    On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Disqus
  • Ram
    The embedded text added too much junk (comment links), who wants that. One more thing the embedded version is not visible in Google Reader
  • That's interesting -- if it wasn't visible in RSS readers that would
    definitely detract from the usefulness. I had a similar problem with
    Clipmarks, where the code wrapped around the clip screwed up my RSS
    feed.

    On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Disqus
  • My sense is that this very primitive implementation that I've done is probably *not* the most useful thing to do with this technique. I'm just hoping to inspire someone more creative to come up with a good reason to do this. :)
  • Don't get me wrong, Anil -- I think it's an interesting idea.


    On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Disqus
  • I think the concept is cool and VERY interesting, mostly because of the implications it carries for monetization.

    At the moment, content on the web goes everywhere, but it's nearly impossible to tie it back to the source and, if you're the author, monetize it anywhere other than your own site.

    But if content becomes embedded instead of just copied...hmm...
  • Jon Husband
    Personally, I don't think it adds a lot .. maybe it saves "half" a key stroke if you want to ensure that you follow general rules by providing a ling (I assume the eembed creates a link).

    But made at least one click more easy, it might becomes a part of lots of peoples' blogging work flow.

    And StevenHodson's point below is pertinent, too .. I presume that CSS adaptations could / will follow ?

    ... cut-or-copy-and-paste is pretty hard to dislodge from work flows. This is effectively another form of that, and requires additional html, no ?
  • Tumblr type approach would be good.
  • Yeah, Tumblr's reblogging is quite cool.


    On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Disqus
  • This can't work, for a few reasons, some already mentioned.
    1. People's URL structures change
    2. People's blogs disappear.
    3. People forget to maintain their Javascript applications. Any of these three would cause a nice fat javascript error
    4. It doesn't save much time.
    5. It doesn't allow pulling the part of the post I want, though I'm sure we could rig that.
    6. It does include things I may not want, like the comments, though I do think that's a neat idea.
    7. It won't count as Google food.
    8. It won't be searchable on my blog search.
    9. It's yet another thing my page has to go get while it's loading, and while that's not so bad in the sidebars, it could be irritating waiting for a post to load before I can read it.
    10. There is no 10, but I like lists of 10.

    It did get me thinking though. What I think would be cool is if everyone's comments on a particular subject were melded together.

    Take this subject as an example. Anil does the originating post over on his blog. A couple of people comment over there. Then Mathew does this post, and when he does, he clicks a box that says this is a response to a post and enters the trackback. Now this post shows up here, and as well as a comment on Anil's blog.

    Now a couple people comment here, and these comments show up on Anil's post as well, and so on. And, all new comments from Anil's post show up here, too. So all the comments are all in one place.

    This is one place where you might WANT to be using JS so that Google doesn't see duplicate content all over the place.

    Just a thought...
  • Those are all good points, Tim -- and the comment thing in particular
    is something I've wanted for a while. CoComment and Disqus and other
    things are all attempts to do that, but they don't really work as well
    as they might.

    And I like number 10 the best :-)


    On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:30 PM, Disqus
  • Test
  • I’d love to see a truly original post on your blog, Ingram. Anyway, no, you don’t want to be embedding plain text from other people’s sites because (a) that’s what BLOCKQUOTE with cite is for and (b) it leads to 360 validation errors, which is what this page had just before I wrote this paragraph.
  • Thanks, Joe. When you leave an original comment, maybe I'll start
    coming up with original posts.


    On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Disqus
blog comments powered by Disqus

Older post:

Newer post: