Posts Tagged ‘New Media’


Value of the Written Word

Thursday, May 1st, 2008

Yesterday I was listening to the Sound Opinions podcast with Peter Blackstock as a guest to talk about the last print issue of No Depression magazine. (I’m reluctant to link to ND, since I’m pretty sure Peter will find this within hours.) But something caught my attention even though I was very busy at work. Peter made a comment about the “devaluation of the written word” as a contributing factor in ND’s change of medium.

Devaluation is a word that is bandied about a lot these days. There is a lot of discussion about the devaluation of music as well. It’s a bit like a recent discussion I had on Twitter about the old “vinyl vs. CD” argument. When someone says music or writing is being devalued, everyone just nods there heads in agreement. Remember when music and writing had value? Kids today.

I don’t mean to single Peter out (because, again, I’m pretty certain he’ll read this), but it’s an interesting issue to explore in greater depth.

I think the argument is better framed as a democratization of media rather than a devaluation. The stakeholders in traditional media are accustomed to a one-way model. At the top is the advertiser, the medium (newspaper, magazine, radio station, etc.) delivers the audience to the advertiser. Editorial considerations aside, that’s the basic paradigm.

What’s happening now is that a whole lot of folks are delivering content to audiences for free. Such a democratization inevitably results in an overall lowering of quality. This same thing occurred with the advent of desktop publishing in the mid-nineties.

But this scenario also allows for exciting possibilities inherent in the word democracy. A lot of content will be bland, narcissistic, and even bad but it can also be exciting and important. Citizen journalism is the most intriguing new concept to arise from the blogging revolution. Engaged citizens can make their own choices about what they feel should be highlighted and new communities arise around those who are good stewards of their content.

Let’s look at those last few words again: stewards of their content. That’s where the onus lies for independent media producers. The world is filled with blogs about personal exploits and nights on the town, but being a good producer means developing good editorial skills and considering your audience. Those of us who are good stewards to our audience will build successful communities around our respective media.

Music, writing, video, audio production might hold more potential value for those of us in the lower parts of the long tail than ever before. And we’re more accessible than traditional media.

As long as we’re redefining paradigms, let’s go back to No Depression. My initial reaction to the final print version of No Depression was sadness. I’ve got back issues in my basement going back almost to issue #1. (I think the oldest one I have may be #3. Whichever one has Whiskeytown on the cover.) No Depression has benefited from media democratization since it’s inception. It started up as an AOL discussion group, then went to print (remember the desktop publishing revolution?), and now is headed into a new medium again that just happens to be web-based. So it’s really not an end. It may be starting over, but I give them credit for embracing changes in the industry and moving accordingly. They’ve built a devoted audience over the years. They are no less valuable for existing (mostly) on the web.

MinneWebCon 2008

Tuesday, April 15th, 2008

I spent a great day at MinneWebCon yesterday talking with and meeting other folks in the industry at The Big U where I work and elsewhere.

It was really a good event for those of us in Minneapolis who are interested in current and emerging web technology. The interesting this to me is how much Twitter added to the experience for those of us participating.

If you weren’t monitoring things on Twitter, you really missed out on an ongoing conversation. The most obvious observation is that there was a general air of excitement about the event and a lot of people were merely expressing that sentiment in real time. That had one benefit: I was able to get a sense of what was happening in sessions that I was not attending. At least once it influenced my decision to bail out of one session in favor of another.

The second, perhaps more valuable thing about Twitter at the event was a stream of continuous feedback. We were not 30 seconds into the conference before someone was commenting on the @klayon’s introduction. Tracking “#minnewebcon” from my cell phone was like having an ear to the wall. The best part about that? The organizers of the event responded directly to me about a couple of comments I made. They were paying attention and that’s important.

There will be more formal methods for providing feedback in the next few days, but if you want to troubleshoot the problems in real-time and address them, Twitter is your friend.

Google’s AppEngine

Thursday, April 10th, 2008

Last week Google announced it’s AppEngine. It took a couple of days and a conversation with a friend to realize some of the potential for this service.

Google’s AppEngine service is a framework for developing web-based applications. Google provides free hosting for anything built with it. Right now Python is the only supported language, but Ruby and PHP are on the horizon.

What if someone built a new music distribution application using Google’s AppEngine? A savvy developer could create an easy-to-use application for bands to create sites with the means to upload, share or sell mp3 downloads (or FLAC or whatever). Tie it in with Google’s Checkout service and you’ve got a winner.

How long before someone develops a social networking application that makes Facebook mute using Google’s AppEngine and social networking framework? Or tie in to Google’s mobile technology? Say what you will about Google holding the keys. They certainly exhibit vision. Big as they are, I think this is only the beginning. Dark fiber anyone?

Will Twitter Get Benched?

Friday, April 4th, 2008

The Industry Standard put Twitter on it’s “predicted to fail” list.

Failings: There’s no compelling reason for most people to use it, and many existing services — ranging from AIM to FriendFeed to social networks — have overlapping functionality. And how is it supposed to make money?

That’s the $10,000 question isn’t it? (Pun intended.) Where’s the money in it?

When I was a senior in high school (in 1988), a teacher once told me that in the near future information would be the key factor in success and power. It sounded good, but I didn’t quite get what he was talking about at the time. Now look at us. Google is the case and point for what he was talking about.

The information contained in Twitter is not as voluminous as what Google has to offer, but it’s immediate. I know within seconds if someone is tweeting about something I’m tracking on Twitter. Seconds. It doesn’t take a lot of imagination to figure out a potential use for that information. And the last I checked, Twitter was still the most popular of the micromedia sites out there. I think it could go somewhere. You?

Amazon.com Announces TextBuyIt

Thursday, April 3rd, 2008

Cell phones are quickly becoming the new frontier in emerging technology. I’m told that smart phone adoption rates are much higher in Japan and Europe. Here in the U.S., things are just heating up. Yesterday Amazon.com announced TextBuyIt, a service that will allow you to compare prices by sending a text message. Amazon sends a message in return with pricing info on the product in question w/ an option to buy from them on the spot.

Amazon TextBuyIt, which launched late Tuesday, lets people text the name of a product, its description or its UPC or ISBN to 262966 (that’s “Amazon” on the keypad) from anywhere their cell phones work – including from inside physical stores.

If Amazon stocks matching items, the service returns two results at a time. Shoppers can immediately buy one of the first two the selections by texting back the number “1″ or “2,” or they can ask for more by texting the letter “M.”

Paypal announced a similar service last year. Paypal offers more possibilities for independent retailers whereas Amazon’s service is a direct challenge to big box retailers. The only thing the two have in common is leveraging mobile phone technology. Therein lies the key. Terms like Web 3.0 will quickly become obsolete as mobile technology continues to emerge. What we’re going to see is a combination of traditional internet technology combined with mobile technology. What we consider “Web” is quickly moving beyond fiber optics and phone lines and is combining with wireless internet and cellular. Phones are cheap in comparison to computers. Their mobility makes communication even more instantaneous in an era where a story is old seconds after it first appears.

I never fully realized the appeal of this instantaneous communication until this year’s SXSW Interactive conference. I was following someone from Minnesota who was there and witnessed the takeover of a panel that was facilitated by backchannels created in Twitter and Meebo. I didn’t get a detailed account, but sitting in my office in Minneapolis, I was privy to something very interesting occurring in Austin, TX. I’ll be very surprised if I don’t read about it in Wired next month.

Last month I saw Matt Dickman speak and in part of his presentation, he covered the timing of information released about the 35W bridge collapse. It turns out that word got out via Twitter before traditional media had a chance to start reporting on it.

Two days ago, @chuckumentary reported on an oil spill via Twitter as it happened. The whole phenomenon has exciting implications for consumers, marketers, citizen journalists and friends. The connections no longer require us to be tethered to a computer. If you haven’t tried it, you have no idea how appealing that is.

Anger Content Management

Tuesday, April 1st, 2008

Last Friday James Lileks published a column in the Star Tribune called “Godless Death or Sensible Joy Spirals.” I realize that this is meant to be a humorous piece, but it got me thinking: What is the purpose of publishing such innocuous content in the newspaper? I mean, why waste the column inches?

Then I thought about my reaction to the piece, which, at least initially, was anger. Admittedly this is probably not the response the piece is meant to evoke. It’s just my zealous environmentalism getting the best of me. But it worked. The article hooked me and I was drawn, not only to read the whole thing, but to look it up on their website for this post.

I can only conclude then, that this was a very successful column. I bet by the time this posts, there will be some responses in the editorial pages. Maybe that’s the point. Maybe articles like this are meant to engage us in a dialog–no matter how silly. No reaction to a newspaper article is a bad reaction. Any reaction at all is good as long as the reader is engaged in some way. After all, publishing papers is all about delivering readers to advertisers.