Peter Kafka

Recent Posts by Peter Kafka

Now This Is a Content Mill: Narrative Science Raises $6 Million for Human-Free Stories

Demand Media and its peers pay lots of writers small sums in order to generate lots and lots of content, with the help of computers. But you can do it for even less if you eliminate the writers altogether.

That’s the premise behind Narrative Science, a start-up that sells technology that “generates news stories, industry reports, headlines and more–at scale and without human authoring or editing.”

And the pitch seems to be effective: It’s allowed the company to raise $6 million in a round led by Battery Ventures that closed this week.

The Evanston, Ill.-based company, which started up last year, is led by former DoubleClick executive Stuart Frankel, with Kris Hammond and Larry Birnbaum, two Northwestern University computer science professors. Other investors include Frankel’s former boss David Rosenblatt, who stuck around Google for a bit after it bought the online ad company, and who now advises companies like Twitter, where he sits on the board.

Frankel and Hammond worked on an earlier incarnation of the idea at Northwestern, where they helped produce Stats Monkey, a program that could automatically create passable sports stories based solely on game data. And StatSheet, a North Carolina start-up, wants to use the same premise to fuel a network of sports sites.

But Narrative Science has ambitions bigger than box scores. The company wants to use structured data sets to produce a wide range of stories. Many of which you probably wouldn’t identify as stories (“narrative” is an intentionally broad term), and many of which you’ll never see anyway, because they’re behind a paywall of some sort. Think of financial reports, real estate write-ups, etc.

I suppose some people might get queasy about the idea of robot writers, but I think it makes perfect sense. There’s lots of content-making that machines can and should do much faster than humans, and at least as effectively.

Meanwhile, the push to produce more copy for less has been underway for a long time, even for publishers that don’t get labeled “content farms“–Reuters moved some of its financial-reporting resources to India years ago, and you never hear a peep about that.

The trick for content makers like myself is to find work that only content makers like myself can do–work where human qualities like experience, judgment and creativity get rewarded. And if we can’t do that, we ought to be doing something else, anyway.


comments so far. Add yours.

  • Anonymous

    Please allow the text (and the comments) of your posts to be resized larger and smaller.

  • http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/ PKafka

    Can you give me an example of a site that does what you’re talking about?

  • Anonymous

    Peter, surely, Narrative Science would be pitched against news writers rather than the likes of ehow. Also it reminds me of a guy on Amazon who came up with a similar idea a few years ago (story via NYTimes)

  • Anonymous

    Peter,

    You wrote in summary:

    “The trick for content makers like myself is to find work that only content makers like myself can do–work where human qualities like experience, judgment and creativity get rewarded. And if we can’t do that, we ought to be doing something else, anyway.”

    Well, the first sentence is wrong — cliched, brain-dead, traditional newsie nonsense. So, welcome to your second sentence.

    Look, Peter, being in ‘the media’, you’ve long been up to your eyebrows in ‘traditional media’ going way back, through the techniques illustrated in ‘Citizen Kane’, to Ben Franklin, and before. Heavily the whole enterprise has been from the techniques of English literature and before that ancient Greek drama. So, it’s been ‘story telling’ with good/bad guys, vicarious escapist fantasy emotional experience entertainment or threats, dangers, and scandals intended to grab people by the heart, gut, and below the belt.

    In particular the whole of the ‘news media’ hasn’t changed their view of what is important in ‘content’ since the 18th century well before the science, e.g., J. Maxwell, of the 19th century or the grand, new standards of information ‘safety and efficacy’ illustrated in the 20th century by mathematics, physical science, engineering, medical science, medicine, and technology.

    Bad News. I’ve off and on tried WSJ on paper and via the Web and always quickly decided that the content was just traditional newsie junk irrelevant to business or anything important and quickly gave up.

    Good News. I recently found your page on the Internet and have been including it in my daily reading. Now I’m about to give up again because of the content and now your first sentence I quoted.

    Reality Check. Peter, you don’t ‘get it’. You’re wandering around blind. You are stuck with the newsie traditions of the past and, bluntly, do not know what meaningful content is.

    Good News. Now, toss out 99 44/100% of those newsie traditions on ‘content’. Next, what you are after are special cases of important ‘meaning’. With just that observation, and in the context of your present ‘story’, I have some good news for you: So far computing, ‘information technology’, ‘computer science’, ‘artificial intelligence’, etc. are very far from ‘meaning’.

    Or, so far humans can create ‘meaning’ and have a monopoly — are the only way to create meaning; that is, computers can’t.

    For your first sentence, that’s not what you want. Instead you want special cases of ‘meaning’. So, your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to create valuable meaning.

    How to Start. It would help for you to have a good college education. Then you would have no doubt about what solid ‘meaning’ is. For more, look at the examples of the 20th century in math, physical science, … I listed.

    For the rest, I can’t give it all to you in a blog post. But now you know to give up on what you said in your first sentence above and where to go next.

    At least for me, you and WSJ don’t have much time: I’m about to leave again.

    Uh, you and the WSJ, with your traditional newsie views of meaningful content, are at high risk of soon being replaced and/or ‘dis-intermediated’.

    Remember about old media: Dine-o-sour, dine-o-sour, dine-o-sour. Greek drama, formula fiction, Ben Franklin, newsie traditions, J. F. Kane, Welter Crankcase, RIP.

Latest Video

View all videos »

Search »

Facebook bought the thing that is hardest to fake. It bought sincerity.

— Paul Ford, writing about FaceTagram in New York Magazine