I haven’t yet had a chance to weigh in on the Patch.org initiative backed by AOL, but I will tonight, inspired by a glowing post by Fast Company.  Although my prose will not be as long as usual, it will be clear and concise.  This Patch.org thing… umm… not so much.  We are all about making news easier to access and read, with increased relevance, but I don’t see this AOL backed site doing it.  And yes folks, I know Jeff Jarvis is on the editorial board, and yes it’s true I am one of his biggest fans, but  I still don’t think that AOL is the brand to make it happen.

Already online today, there are a ton of news aggregators and organic sites that seem to serve the public well; The Huffington Post,  Digg, The Examiner, Topix,  Fwix, and let’s not forget Google News, coupled with the fact that I could continue listing sites that have garnered lasting mind and market share.  Moreover, these sites, despite their tenured success, are continuing to evolve/reinvent themselves for the betterment of the user and for further longevity.  Patch.org, on the other hand, has chosen to attract media attention with only five of the 50 states covered, with no international news.  A case of the premature clout quest I would say.

In order for Patch.org to make a lasting ripple on the market, they need an element that doesn’t make them a ‘me too’ product.

I am sorry AOL and Patch Media, but I just don’t see this as a viable competitor to the other online news tools Web users already have at their disposal.