Comments on: Connectivity, not content

By: freelanceunbound

freelanceunbound — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:14:19 +0000

You’re absolutely right of course, though I would probably disagree about old media “finding an area that is attractive”. They simply won’t, because it is too late and there’s not enough money in it now to run the media as it used to be. I suspect that the community aspect of local media is now taken up entirely by social networking sites [gossip, personal news], while the small ad, transactional side is the territory of Craigslist etc. The one fly in the ointment for social media is it doesn’t make any money either. But while a big player like Google might buy up Facebook, it isn’t likely to acquire the Barnet Press…

By: On the Money

On the Money — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:51:43 +0000

The masses – for want of a better phrase – have always been disconnected from bothering to digest news. That “new” technology has facilitated their connectivity, etc, is, I believe, a good thing. It is still up to a small minority to try to highlight important issues and make people care … That was as true in the days of print (and yes, I was a print journalist, albeit in the 1990s) and traditional broadcast as it is now in the web age. I much prefer what we have now to even 11 years ago.

Most people want to go through life having decisions made for them. A sad but true fact. Those of us who care that bit more will always try a bit harder – and it IS possible to make the difference.

Thanks for your excellent post – full of insight and thought.

By: wanless

wanless — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:17:26 +0000

Hello:
I’m an ex journo and I’ve watched newspapers struggle with the new communication channels as well.
Can’t argue with your premise — people want community instead of “news”. But I think it’s not carried far enough.
Newspapers used to be the centres of communities, the point of reference for everyone in a community, ie a town, or an industry.
They were successful because they had the territory to themselves. When television became more popular and started to steal away advertising, however, newspapers tried to fight them, on their own turf – with hard news — or on a new turf — “investigative” pieces.
They eventually reached a stand-off, but then along came Web 2.0, social networking, google, etc., and the process of destruction for both papers and television began.
Until these “old media” find an area that is attractive and stop trying to supply the same thing as everybody else, that process will continue.