Newsmaker: Reuters' 'Second Life' reporter talks shop

(continued from previous page)

How does Reuters plan to make this effort cost-effective?
Pasick: Right now, there is no direct return-on-investment calculation. We're not selling subscriptions or advertising, for example. But this has the potential to be a very valuable source of experience and exposure to a new tech-savvy community. And it's a tiny project for Reuters. I think my bosses are happy to see where it leads without having a direct source of revenue for now.

How will you and your bosses measure success in this endeavor?
Pasick: I can't give away our internal metrics for success. But broadly speaking, we're measuring visitors to Secondlife.reuters.com and use of (an in-world device that delivers Reuters news to residents). Traffic is the easiest to measure, but it's not the only yardstick we're watching. The caliber of my stories is another. So the pressure's on.

Are you expected to produce scoop after scoop?
Pasick: I'm sure they'd be ecstatic if I did. But no, I think they'll give me some time to learn the ropes.

What are some similarities you've seen between covering this stuff and a "normal" beat?
Pasick: The more time I spend in "Second Life," the more it feels like any other beat. Once you get over--or maybe embrace--the weirdness, it's much the same job: You find interesting people, read as much as you can and chase up the interesting story ideas you find.

What about some of the differences?
Pasick: We've had to do a bit of work adapting the Reuters editorial guidelines to deal with the fact that avatars are anonymous vis-a-vis their real-life identities. I know it breaks the metaphor a bit, but I ask people to provide their real-life identities. Not everyone wants to, and that's their right. I also take into account the reputation that is built up over time in "Second Life." I'm much more likely to trust a quote from someone who's been there awhile.

"Second Life" has gotten a lot of positive press. But there are also many issues that call for critical coverage. It is a business with all kinds of problems. What do you see as some of those?
Pasick: I think I'll gracefully pass on that one. If I have a story, you'll have to wait until I publish.

Well, how about broad topics?
Pasick: OK. Property rights. Contract law. And scalability issues.

How do you explain your new beat to friends, family and colleagues who don't understand what "Second Life" or virtual worlds are?
Pasick: I've had a lot of practice. But I've found the best way is to get them in front of a computer and show them. My parents love it now. They have avatars and hang out in the Reuters building.

Gabriel Riiser (from the audience) asks: There was a Slashdot article recently about several builders of virtual worlds, like Matt Mihaly (CEO of Achaea, published by Iron Realms Entertainment), who are criticizing "Second Life" and Linden Lab for being too much about PR and not enough about the quality of the world itself. What's your take, Adam?
Pasick: I think I'm going to use that old reporter's dodge--which happens to be true--and say that I think I'll report the facts and leave the opinions to smarter people.

But surely, you must have noticed that Linden Lab is rather adept at PR?
Pasick: Well, you don't get to a million registered avatar names by being dumb.

Liv Kamloops (from the audience) asks: Do you see "Second Life" becoming an interactive version of the Internet?
Pasick: This question probably has the potential to make me sound like an idiot. However, I think it makes a lot of sense for there to be a 3D successor to the Internet, and "Second Life" looks like the best candidate at the moment.

Why do you think it's the best candidate?
Pasick: It's a relatively open platform, with content created by users and which is non-game-based. It makes sense that some virtual 3D world or worlds is going to be what's next. Maybe it's "Second Life." Who knows? We wouldn't be here if we didn't think it was a possibility. 

More Newsmakers

[thedreaming]

Second Life

What I still don't understand about Second Life is that there aren't that many users in it. I figure they have at least a million, but WOW has over 6 million. If you were shooting for a mass audience, wouldn't it make sense to have a presence there?

Granted, I'm talking apples and oranges here. One is a standard MMORPG and the other is more a simulator where all the content is created by the users. It's more of a virtual store, selling virtual goods, but making real money (after the exchange from lindollars to US currency.)

[hybris06]

Second Life? How about a first life

I have no interest in using these fake realities. But from what I understand, users spend countless hours playing these games when they could be enriching their mind, developing real relationships, or working in the real world.

I sincerely hope that Second Life isn't a glimpse into the future of how we all will spend our free time. I enjoy going out with my friends, dating, and doing other non "bowling alone" scenarios.

The fact that these games have such a large community is somewhat scary. Are we destined to "tune in and tune out" and have our only contact with the outside be online?

[Len Bullard]

SecondLife IS About LindenDollars and $$$

SecondLife IS about the exchange rate for Linden dollars. There are plenty of online worlds out there and even some that work over dial-up and don't force content creators into the Linden Labs intellectual property trap. They don't matter because no one is making real world dollars in those.

Now at some point, the legal entanglements of exchange rates among virtual worlds will come up. These are the halcyon days when the corporations race each other to co-opt the next new thing. Just as with the web itself a decade ago, that fever dies in the face of unresolved and sometimes insoluable problems of technology and cultural issues that put ceilings on the real money that can be made inside the Lindenverse. But by that time, real-time 3D as a browser interface and as a new art form is well-established and the corporations will opt to host their own worlds with their own cultures and policies using standardized technologies that interoperate seamlessly.

For example, look at ABNet from Kimball Software (no I don't work for them). It enables basic chat for any X3D world from the users own hosting service. It will be service suppliers using technologies such as that who will build the 3D web. SecondLife will be to the 3D web what Netscape was to the text web.

As seen before, any technology on the web that gets its legs gets its competition fast and furious. That is the nature of the ecology and be glad for it. Otherwise, you'd be reading this on a gray screen with monotype text.