-
Website
http://www.mathewingram.com/work -
Original page
http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/02/26/for-media-disruption-is-the-new-order/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
scrawledinwax
23 comments · 1 points
-
webomatica
35 comments · 5 points
-
howardlindzon
46 comments · 69 points
-
JoeDuck
57 comments · 1 points
-
Karoli
32 comments · 39 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
In defence of newspapers and serendipity
2 weeks ago · 43 comments
-
Are independent bloggers an endangered species?
2 weeks ago · 8 comments
-
Bloggers, trust, MSM and correction fluid
1 week ago · 2 comments
-
Why media outlets want Facebook Connect
2 weeks ago · 1 comment
-
First Read: Follow the Breadcrumbs : CJR
2 weeks ago · 1 comment
-
In defence of newspapers and serendipity
And I also don't think it's right to say that content creation is no longer an easily scalable business. First, when was it ever? It's a creative, time and materials enterprise. Aggregation / distribution scales - it's technology - and now it scales even better, because the technology transcends geography and is now cheaper by orders of magnitude - it's scalier, if you will.
But if content can scale, surely that time is now. It may be 10,000 monkeys on typewriters (many happy to do it for free), but if everyone is a content producer, and the distribution tools are free or near-free (Wordpress, hosting account, ISP account), well, that seems like something like scaleability to me. And maybe we don't need aggregation and distribution by anyone else because we are easily findable and we can distribute ourselves.
Indeed, it may be that Scott has it exactly wrong on the schism, at least for some media. With Wordpress, a hosting account and broadband I'm a content provider and a distributor. So with one technological leap, I and 9,999 other monkeys have been turned into content producers and distributors - we've been 'un-schism-ed', if you will.
But I would agree that the disruption we're seeing does allow micro-content to scale pretty easily, although at some point there does have to be an aggregator of some kind, even if it's just Technorati or Techmeme.
In any case, I think we agree more than we disagree.
2. We're not damaging newspapers much, that's mostly mythology. Note the comments our CEO, Jim Buckmaster, just made in Edinburgh, which have been circulating bloggily.
Craig
craig@craigslist.org
Great post. There are definitely major changes in store. One of the biggest coming changes is the importantce of content creators learnign to be distributers, too. Everyone has distribution available to them -- all they need is a web site -- and if they don't advantage of it, they will get lost in the flood. I'm expecting a lot of niche distributors in the coming years, instead of massive broadcasters. Big business will no longer just be big business -- but lots of little businesses (in the long-tail spirit).
It's a pretty exciting time.
- Maureen
Basically, ever since the printing press, technology has allowed mass production and therefore commodification of people's thoughts for knowledge or entertainment - essentially creating the "media" we know today. However, the tools of this production have been kept in the hands of few, or corporations, as it's always been cost prohibitive to scale up to mass entertainment levels. A recording artist was forced to deal with the record labels since they had access to all the record stores and the recording studios.
Now this is obviously changing. And it's affecting music, movies, television, video, and obviously print, too.
I'd go so far as to say while web 2.0 has so far been about websites springing up that allow people to share content (social news, YouTube), web 3.0 is going to allow the average folks to build social, dynamic websites themselves (Pipes, Ning), or even applications. Wouldn't it be awesome if anybody could be a programmer?