The Wall Street Journal has long envied the success of professional social network LinkedIn and its 15 million or so monthly visitors (WSJ.com has just a third of that). In late 2008 they launched WSJ Community, a social network bolted onto the main WSJ site. That community is a ghost town – raise your hand if you’ve even heard of it, let alone visited it. At some point, they’ll likely shut it down as quietly as possible.
But they are still serious about gunning for the LinkedIn crowd and all those monetization opportunities (jobs, ads and a heck of a marketing pool for WSJ subscriptions). They’ve been working on a new social network, to be called WSJ Connect, we’ve confirmed. And instead of building it internally, like they did with WSJ Community, they’ve enlisted the help of another arm of parent company News Corp. – Slingshot Labs. And yes, they call it “LinkedIn Killer” internally.
Slingshot Labs is the R&D arm of News Corp. and works on digital products. Their first product was Daily Fill, which launched earlier this year. They also built the MySpace Events product that we covered in March. They operate fairly independently, have their own funding and 40-50 staff, according to one person familiar with their operations.
WSJ Connect is still in the planning/conceptual stages, says one source, but there is “strong interest” to move the project forward. Importantly, it would leverage the WSJ brand but would be a separate property and unencumbered by the need for a paid subscription to the newspaper.
Conceptual screenshots of the product are apparently floating around Slingshot, the WSJ and MySpace. We’re trying to track them down.
Absolutely no one responded to our requests for comment. Luckily, lots of ex-MySpace employees are happy to talk.
Why do I get the feeling this isn’t going to end well for The WSJ? Anytime your internal name for a project is two words, starts with a popular product name, and ends with “killer” you’re doomed.
Totally agree. Has there *ever* been an actual killer where the product or service was (self-) proclaimed an “x killer”?
Here is a suggestion for you WSJ…! If you are looking to engage people around your brand visit http://talktoht.com .. you will understand what i mean. That is what another print media company did to get what u r trying to achieve.
~ Ramesh T
The only products that are never labeled as killers are Apple products. No one calls the Mac, a PC killer. The iPhone was never called a BlackBerry killer because it’s completely far fetched to compare a touch screen phone to one that has buttons.
There’s always a wannabe Apple-product killer. But there’s never an Apple product that tries to kill other products.
It’s fucking brilliant.
Okay – so why don’t they call it CareerSpace – and partner with MySpace
While every stripper says she’s dancing to pay for law school, I think MySpace and WSJ’s userbases have as much in common as Rupert Murdoch and Hootie McBoob.
If the service uses FB Connect for its user base, they will grow at an exponential rate and overtake LinkedIn within 18 months of launching.
Couldn’t LinkedIn just start using Facebook Conncect, too? That can’t be a strategy, right?
Of course they could. But they cannot compete with News Corp when it comes to advertising and depth of audience.
advertising. NewsCorp has the resources to advertise the hell out of WSJ Connect that would make LinkedIn an afterthought. But it may be cheaper for NewsCorp to give LinkedIn’s investors a 5x exit and call it a day. Whichever NewsCorp chooses, they will come out on top.
acquisition has much higher probability of success than internal R&D. while i’m a fan of FB Connect, no way in hell just by itself that gives WSJ/News any chance of catching LinkedIn.
historically-speaking, designing viral loops and adoption has not been a demonstrated success behavior for large corporations, even with R&D Labs.
News/WSJ may have superb content, but creating a successful social network from scratch is not trivial.
Beg to differ. Most LinkedIn users are also Facebook users, and that’s because they use FB for friends, LinkedIn for Business.
If WSJ are trying to build a business-related network, FB Connect is probably not the way to go.
Bingo! Almost everyone I know, business and friends is on both Facebook and LinkedIn. But they keep the two profiles and communities largely separated.
Next up Wall Street Journal Personals,
WSJDate anybody?
Yeah, internally known as The Craigslist Killer
isn’t that JDate?
I don’t like the sound of “WSJ Connect”. What do you think of the name?
WSJ Connect = incredibly generic
Fail.
I forgot to mention, I think LinkedIn is great, and I can’t see any way the traditional WSJ audience embraces similiar functionality given WSJ “who you know” dependence.
i wouldn’t rule it out yet. i’m one of those that never really got into LinkedIn.
the only problem about the WSJ brand is i bet they won’t allow for sharing of other news links? just thinking out loud.
If they want to remain competitive in the social space they’re going to have to embrace sharing of all news sources. They must know that by now.
One of the very few in this demo.
I just think LinkedIn is not going to be replaced.
No kidding, few years ago that was what a lot of people were saying about Friendster and MySpace.
I don’t remember *anyone* saying that.
Probably it is time for you to clean your ears or wake up.
We think there is another way for LinkedIn (and Twitter) to be killed. It’s a new feature for FaceBook that we call “Personas” — we created a new Facebook group on it here:
http://www.face...id=232334305213
You could be way more succinct in your group description.
Just some free advice – work on the usability of the page, because a lot of people will not search for info.
Per CNet, Netparty and others may one day challenge LinkedIn. http://news.cne...10296752-2.html.
LinkedIn is fairly new to me. WSJ Connect sounds very unappealing.
They’re both boring old business networks. The winner will be the one who embraces the new culture of transparency, free flow of info and data and crisp usability.
Linkedin user base is loyal because they grew over a long period of time: Pre-Facebook era. As a result, less hanky panky and Linkedin profiles are a reliable source of information. The groups are packed with great business related discussions and content. Limiting the ability to add contacts limited growth for Linkedin but helped users to deepen existing relationships rather and add people who they rarely interact with. SaloHomes.com board of directors is composed of Linkedin contacts. WSJ Connect could succeed and I wish them the best of luck but Linkedin is no flash in the pan. Paul
Mmmhmmm. Good luck with that, Wall Street Journal.
I’m interested in something that would be considered the “LinkedIn Killer” but I’m guessing that it won’t be. At least not at the rate LI is adding new apps, widgets, and other features.
Good Luck WSJ,. and you better come up with a more brandable name,.
Corporate Social Networking sites seem to always lack some spark to ignite them.
Manpower, the temporary staffing agency tried to create one last year around career management, http://www.mypath.com, and it didn’t even spark or sputter. The only participants seem to be paid Manpower employees.
Public access to an API would be a big advantage over LinkedIn.
Why don’t WSJ connect? everthing can come true.
Thank for interesting post!
WSJ Community looks pretty terrible.
why don’t they just buy LI or are they still going the IPO route?
I love LinkedIn – but really welcome something to come and upset them and put pace back into the development of tools. Not sure WSJ will be the ones to do that but bring on some competition.
Meh, LinkedIn = Technology connections, WSJ connect = sleazy real estate agents.
Your pick.
LinkedIn has a huge head start, and there’s been a social network fatigue / consolidation, so I don’t think very many people will want to participate in more than one professionally oriented network. So I suspect that the WSJ really does have to kill LinkedIn to succeed in this effort. Seems like a tall order. Granted, I’m a happy LinkedIn user, so perhaps I’m not objective.
I’m with you on the fatigue factor. New social networks underestimate this effect. Friendfeed being one of them. Great site, but I’m tapped out when it comes to social networks.
Between defunct Friendster and MySpace profiles, and active use of Twitter and FB, I’m much much less likely to sign up for something new (and go through the hassles of making connections) than I was even two years ago. Not saying it’s impossible, but the bar to start is so much higher now.
Unless, of course, I can port info and friends over. In that case, an incremental improvement *might* work.
we all know how murdoch bought the WSJ in the first place. i smell a takeover attempt.
Ok. WSJ vs. Reid Hoffman. Where do I place my bets!!?
++
grt..post…..thnx
thnx sir….useful post
Linkedin is a platform, a delivery tool; WSJ could provide the content. It could work but it’s not going to be easy for WSJ to get them.
Some considerations: McGraw HIll is a shareholder of Linkedin through Business Week if I am not mistaken; Linkedin growth has slowed down for the lack of building/launching a new big thing but it’s still a great business; Reid just stepped down from daily operations but staied on as executive Chairman; something will happen soon as Linkedin must do something to stay in the game and win it.
I think it is fair to differentiate between a platform and a content provider. Just like WSJ is struggling to build community, LI is struggling to engage its membership beyond a digital rolodex. Unlike Twitter, LI has not become a key channel for content distribution, nor have it’s content deals with NYT really made a big impact. WSJ + LI could become a useful and powerful combination.
Maybe they are thinking about the WSJ reader/user, a “business” kind of person for whom LinkedIn is a comfortable place to network and connect. If they could make an easier/better way for people to share info, comment on news etc. I’d try it.
Interesting that WSJ, a News Corporation company, would base their implementation on Facebook Connect, competitor to their own MySpace platform.
I just had a look at the new community launched by WSJ and I completely disagree that it can beat LinkedIn with its current design, flow & content. WSJ is trying to sell its products – news, blogs, videos, etc – more from it than enabling the business community interact. I tried to register on it and I was verified in 2 steps. Its too much work. Well, my point is that WSJ has still got to do much work to outbeat LinkedIn. The current version won’t work.
This can be an extension of WSJ, an online community. I think it good idea. You have classic news reporting and people interact and engage discussions around those news topics and network for business opportunities. If built right, a LinkedIn competitor!
Linkedin? Are they still around? I hope my account is still active.
Who takes LinkedIn seriously besides Sales personnel?
They should not call it WSJconnect. That is stupid. If they want to help people create something that brings value to them, and fixes a problem. Like a “GoToGuy” way to connect.
It is good for the web! I do not see that there is any thing like killer .. services fade away as better services become available. I saw a site http://ur-faves.com that has some features like you can scan twitter topics from ur-faves.com, you can search and play videos and you can interact with twitter users while at ur-faves.com. I thought we are going to see more and more of seamless interactions. WSJ is great and I welcome their new venture!
We are creating what WSJ should. Goal is to be most relevant SN of all. Stay tuned.
Interesting comments all around. What struck me as a major hurdle to WSJ is the fact that LinkedIn has already put/is putting $103 million into their dev and deployment effort, plus they have plenty of revenue already.
That’s a monstrous sum being applied to a very small target, in a positive way, meaning good luck catching up with a very late start unless you have a way to leap-frog the competitor such that people would drop it in a moment to get to your better mousetrap.
Is NewsCorp planning to spend that kind of money on the project? And in July 2008, LinkedIn’s $50 million raise was at a $! bn valuation. An acquisition would be for way more than that now, one would think.
LinkedIn is definitely quite useful to me, as a CTO, not only because of the personal profiles, but also because of special interest groups, where it’s easy to find people who are working in some specialized area.
LinkedIn is a technology platform that monetizes internal data; not sure WSJ is thinking about the situation with this level of abstraction. The social element isn’t really the deal, as another reader pointed out.
As soon as Rupert bought MySpace I figured this would be his play. It may stub its toe(s) but it should succeed in a very big way. (The WSJ edit, is what will make this better than LinkedIn. Duh.)
I would not underestimate the people at WSJ online – they are one of the few that seem to get where media is going and are not afraid to embrace it. I also would not underestimate the power of the WSJ brand. And yes, content is a great conversation starter. This should be interesting!
The power of LinkedIn is community provided content. I can paste WSJ article links or any other news on the web into the News or Discussions tab of any of my groups. Or paste the link into “What are you working on now”. People in my groups and those I’m connected to will see that in their email from LinkedIn changes, and read that article if I have credibility in their eyes. That’s what makes LinkedIn powerful and relevant. I’m glad to see more competition but WSJ will have to offer something very special and unique to get my interest. LinkedIn already has that, 40 million users.
Seems WSJ is kind of segmented where LinkedIn is covers business in general. Next up, social media networks from Wired and Fast Company. Not enough networks? Give us something new, not another reskinned social network. Twitter, as simple as it is, is a fresh idea. More of the same rebranded isn’t going to get my vote.
This is a great plan for building a business! Second only to Facebook’s plan to kill LikedIn, covered by TechCrunch in 2007 at http://www.tech...the-crosshairs/
LinkedIn has it’s place, so does Facebook. WSJ better think long and hard about their place before doing something stupid in this space….again.
I’ve tried to contact the folks at WSJ who ar trying to develop a better (than Linkedin) business type network to inform them I have spent the past two years developing one that is only a couple of months away from beta testing. It’s what they’re looking for but just don’t know about it yet. So far, no response.
Bill
i like