Comments on: Are media consumers mostly couch potatoes?

By: Who Are the New Media Gatekeepers? » Publishing 2.0

Who Are the New Media Gatekeepers? » Publishing 2.0 — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 23:16:18 +0000

[...] All in all, quite ironic, given my rag on Web 2.0 media applications. But then maybe not, since I was aiming at the sacred cow of the geeks who use these apps (I use the term “geek” respectfully, since I’m one too), which has a way of “getting under the skin,” as Mathew Ingram put it. Needless to say, my traffic doubled. [...]

By: Edward

Edward — Fri, 05 May 2006 15:11:24 +0000

Hi i really like your site, i place a link on my web-site, continue like that.
[URL=http://s3.phpbbforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=kkarsha]adipex[/URL] [URL=http://vvarder.cba.pl/adipex.html]adipex[/URL] [URL=http://vvarder.cba.pl/alprazolam.html]alprazolam[/URL]

By: Publishing 2.0 » Who Are the New Media Gatekeepers?

Publishing 2.0 » Who Are the New Media Gatekeepers? — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 06:34:29 +0000

By: Mathew

Mathew — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:44:33 +0000

I think we actually agree more than anything, Scott — but what fun
would it be if everyone agreed all the time? :-) And I hear what
you’re saying about media overload — believe me, if anyone is
interested in there still being a market for filters and synthesizers,
it’s me. But I also think people are more adaptable than we give them
credit for — when they see something they’re interested in.

Who would have thought that something like Flickr would have taken off
the way it has, even though it takes a fair bit of work to understand?
And you are right that it and eBay give people an easy way to do
something that used to be hard. But I think Web 2.0 apps can too (and
Digg might not be the best example) and that is to find things that
interest them. Newspapers and other “old” media don’t make that as
easy as they should — in fact they routinely make it a lot harder
than it should be, and some of that is just the nature of the media.
But I think that’s the itch that the Web can scratch.

Thanks for the comment, and for taking my jabs so well. Let’s keep
this conversation going.

By: Scott Karp

Scott Karp — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 03:21:04 +0000

Mathew, sorry about the skin problem. My point here is not so much about easy of use, but that these Web 2.0 media applications don’t solve real problems with media. I don’t think the problem is not enough choices — we’ve got those by the boatload. The problem is overload, and I’m sorry, but Digg just makes that problem worse. I just went to Digg and found:

- New way to lose weight: stay in the dark!
- Police Computers Clash With Dunkin’ Donuts System
- Iceland the First Country to Try Abandoning Gasoline

Now there’s a killer app. I mean really, you can’t seriously argue that this is useful. Cool, fun, sure. But is this really the best way to spend my limited media time?

Flickr and eBay are successful not based on ease of use, but because they give people an easier way to do something that was hard to do. How does reading Digg solve my information overload problem?

I’m not trying to push to the other extreme — the Globe and Mail is a great example of middle ground — I see news I can use presented in a user-friendly way, with the opportunity to comment if the spirit moves me.

Can’t promise I won’t get under your skin again, but I do enjoy the conversation (I’m geeky that way).