Major book pubishers have not been known in years past for their innovation in adapting to online audiences, but after years of investing modestly in the future of online content many print publishers are stepping up their efforts to capture a new generation of audiences who grew up with online content as a given. Elsevier is one major scientific publisher that seems to have picked up their pace of online innovation significantly as of late, Their announcement last week of 10 major reference works being made available online this year was trumped today by the announcement of a new Wiki-based platform that will enable practicing physicians to update evidence-based medical information online. In both instances Elsevier is betting that some titles will do best as online-only reference materials.

Having seen a major response to its making chapters of its Major Reference Works availableonline Elsevier is indicating that two reference titles - the Encyclopedia of Neuroscience and the second edition of Encyclopedia of Ocean Science - are to become
online-only references. Elsevier indicates that other reference titles will be available in print for some period of time, but clearly the trend is to move towards online access that's likely to move people into recurring revenues rather than chancing the publication of expensive reference materials. Knovel showed the way years ago to Sci-Tech publishers with its Knovel Library of online reference content, but now the major scientific publishers are beginning to see that electronic additions are going to become the core of their revenues moving forward it's not just a game for aggressive startups.

Today's announcement of WiserWiki underscores not only the awareness that Sci-Tech publishers have for the value of online reference but also how best to make use of social media technologies to make it valuable to specific audiences. WiserWiki is seeded with The Textbook of Primary Care Medicine, a reference book covering problems, conditions and diseases encountered in the practices of primary care physicians. No longer in print, what better way to keep this grass-roots information about the real world of medicine than to let the physicians encountering these phenomena to update it themselves? This is a great online product strategy, combining authoritative content from peer professionals as a core that can help to build an online community rapidly. Just as Wikipedia did not spring from thin air - it took more than 100,000 articles from an earlier project to get it going - Wikis built for specialized online communities will work best when there's a core of content to help people feel that they don't have to wait for their contributions to be part of something that has collective merit.

Print titles are going to be with us for quite some time to come, but as printing, shipping and stocking expenses fall prey to rising energy and raw materials prices the need for better margins with less risk is pushing book publishers of reference materials inexorably towards "digital native" audiences who have become used to search engines as primary tools for accessing reference content. Obviously other types of titles benefit from this move but for reference works the move is essential if publishers are to keep these products growing and profitable. In the end scientific publishers have much to gain from tranforming their business from one of delivering tomes to delivering content in higly valuable contexts that can drive scientific research and applications forward more rapidly.

Labels: books, elsevier, reference, Social Media, STM, Wikis

The investment research marketplace is one of the most intensively cultivated business information sectors, with major investment banks, buy-side fund managers, ratings companies, publishers, media companies and independent research firms all putting their finger in the pie to try to pull out the plum of valued insights and recommendations. With such a daunting field of players you have to give credit to Wikinvest for even thinking about trying something new.

Wikinvest enables contributors to build up profiles of companies similar to what one gets in a typical stock profile report, with a neutral "just the facts" default tab for each company complemented by tabs that give indications as to what the bullish and bearish sentiments are on the investment. While these reports leverage mostly bog-standard MediaWiki technology they are attractive and readable for most purposes. They also have a nifty graphing package similar to that used in Google Finance that contributors can use to create annotations that correlate market movement to events affecting the company's stock.

Wikinvest company reports are complemented by topical concept reports, which lay out the details of major trends and investment methodologies. Like company reports each concept report also includes an area in which "bulls" and "bears" can add their own take on the impact of sub-prime loans on markets. There are also nice features such as the ability to add user-specific bookmarks on each page's sidebar and the ability to type in partial company names or concepts instead of ticker codes into their type-ahead search box to get some meaningful content. Top contributors to Wikinvest get titles akin to Wall Street professional titles - "Senior Director" is the label for the top grade of Wikinvest contributors.

For a just-out-of-the-box tool Wikinvest is already populated with a fair amount of content - 100,000 contributions are claimed - but it's content coming mostly from young enthusiasts rather than from seasoned investment analysts. Don't let the "Senior Director" label fool you - look at the bios of these leading contributors and you'll find many folks who have not yet made it out of school. That said, when one thinks of all of the off-shore operations cranking out stock reports these days, this is perhaps not the worst thing in a world of 80/20-rule online content. The concepts reports - basically a topical financial encyclopedia - have potential and are generally pretty well-written but it needs far more reports, as well as support for basic industry terms such as "uptick rule" found in sites such as Investopedia or Wikipedia.

This is a very day-one effort at an investment-oriented Wiki, and for day one it seems to have done a lot of the right things. The 100,000 articles is about the scale of the original Wikipedia, so there's reason to think that it will attract quality contributions over time that will flesh out content in this market sector. The use of a neutral/bull/bear model to gather content is also useful, helping to channel opinions to places where they're useful and hopefully helping to avoid opinion turning into facts too often. It's a model for Wiki content collection that others should consider to address topics that draw a lot of segmented opinions. The ability to define new concept articles on the fly also allows Wikinvest to be a fresh and topical source of content that will draw people on a regular basis, giving the potential for building audience loyalty as a must-stop bookmark.

Will Wikinvest really fly? I think the real question is rather how does any sector-specific Wiki project manage to build authoritative content that will attract an audience and quality contributions. From this perspective I think that Wikinvest is a pretty good roadmap into how Wiki technology can be used to build communities of interest around professional-grade topics that can become a strong media source over time. I expect that Wikinvest will have relatively slow and steady growth over the next few months and then either be snatched up by a major portal (is the similarity to Google Finance charting a hint as to their exit strategy?) or outclassed by a startup with deeper pockets and more of an ability to attract higher-grade contributors. But then again, with a little more cash to accelerate content growth, Wikinvest could wind up being that better-financed startup themselves - and find themselves in a very interesting spot in the online content world.

Labels: Business Information, financial information, wikinvest, Wikipedia, Wikis