Comments on: Some Scott Karps are better than others http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/ ... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:37:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Connecting the Dots: Podcasting http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/comment-page-1/#comment-51766 Connecting the Dots: Podcasting Tue, 19 Sep 2006 05:47:25 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/#comment-51766 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] There are 600 channels on my television. I never watch any of them.Next I read Matthew Ingram's excellent post about Scott Karp at Publishing 2.0 whose premise is that the Web needs filters (i.e., learned and knowledgable editors) and that social promotion of article sites like Digg.com and Reddit.com are useless since they're random. [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> [...] There are 600 channels on my television. I never watch any of them.Next I read Matthew Ingram’s excellent post about Scott Karp at Publishing 2.0 whose premise is that the Web needs filters (i.e., learned and knowledgable editors) and that social promotion of article sites like Digg.com and Reddit.com are useless since they’re random. [...]

]]> By: The Economist on “social media” » mathewingram.com/work http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/comment-page-1/#comment-1717 The Economist on “social media” » mathewingram.com/work Sat, 22 Apr 2006 15:11:49 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/#comment-1717 [...] Scott Karp of Publishing 2.0 has also written about how social media relies on a conceit that everyone wants to (or has time to) become a creator of media, and also that in any cases people don’t really have much worth saying or contributing. I responded to this with a post of my own, in which I accused Scott of being an elitist (he responds to me in the comments). The Economist quotes Jerry Michalski on this topic: Not everything in the “blogosphere” is poetry, not every audio “podcast” is a symphony, not every video “vlog” would do well at Sundance, and not every entry on Wikipedia, the free and collaborative online encyclopedia, is 100% correct, concedes Mr Michalski. But exactly the same could be said about newspapers, radio, television and the Encyclopaedia Britannica. [...] [...] Scott Karp of Publishing 2.0 has also written about how social media relies on a conceit that everyone wants to (or has time to) become a creator of media, and also that in any cases people don’t really have much worth saying or contributing. I responded to this with a post of my own, in which I accused Scott of being an elitist (he responds to me in the comments). The Economist quotes Jerry Michalski on this topic: Not everything in the “blogosphere” is poetry, not every audio “podcast” is a symphony, not every video “vlog” would do well at Sundance, and not every entry on Wikipedia, the free and collaborative online encyclopedia, is 100% correct, concedes Mr Michalski. But exactly the same could be said about newspapers, radio, television and the Encyclopaedia Britannica. [...]

]]> By: robhyndman.com http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/comment-page-1/#comment-621 robhyndman.com Fri, 03 Mar 2006 13:22:00 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/#comment-621 [...] The “punk revolution” comment is of course a back-of-the-hand comment at the elitism in some mainstream writing about the great unwashed qua writer (see here and here, for example). But the remark suggests to me a lot more than that Glocer sees opportunity where the elitists feel fear - what I found particularly startling about Jeff’s summary was Glocer’s apparent clarity of mind about what’s happening in Web 2.0 and the promise it offers; in a time when so many in the mainstream are struggling to make sense of the mayhem, Glocer seems to have a clear vision of the opportunity available for those who seize it. Example: “If the user wants to be both author and editor, and technology is increasingly enabling this, what will be the role of the media company…?â€? He has three answers: Media companies will be a “seeder of clouds.â€? Nice analogy. I call it a magnet and would recommend that to him for he says that just creating content is not enough; they must attract the people. The second role is to be a “provider of tools… We need to produce open standards and interoperability to allowâ€? disparate people to create content of disparate types. “Let’s not make the same mistakes newspapers did with the protectionist online strategies that characterized Internet 1.â€? By that he means not recreating the old content in the new medium. The third role, he says, is that media companies will be “filter and editor.â€? He says that “the good stuff will rise to the topâ€? online. [...] [...] The “punk revolution” comment is of course a back-of-the-hand comment at the elitism in some mainstream writing about the great unwashed qua writer (see here and here, for example). But the remark suggests to me a lot more than that Glocer sees opportunity where the elitists feel fear – what I found particularly startling about Jeff’s summary was Glocer’s apparent clarity of mind about what’s happening in Web 2.0 and the promise it offers; in a time when so many in the mainstream are struggling to make sense of the mayhem, Glocer seems to have a clear vision of the opportunity available for those who seize it. Example: “If the user wants to be both author and editor, and technology is increasingly enabling this, what will be the role of the media company…?â€? He has three answers: Media companies will be a “seeder of clouds.â€? Nice analogy. I call it a magnet and would recommend that to him for he says that just creating content is not enough; they must attract the people. The second role is to be a “provider of tools… We need to produce open standards and interoperability to allowâ€? disparate people to create content of disparate types. “Let’s not make the same mistakes newspapers did with the protectionist online strategies that characterized Internet 1.â€? By that he means not recreating the old content in the new medium. The third role, he says, is that media companies will be “filter and editor.â€? He says that “the good stuff will rise to the topâ€? online. [...]

]]> By: Mr Mattua http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/comment-page-1/#comment-576 Mr Mattua Mon, 27 Feb 2006 00:37:46 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/#comment-576 Where is your bio? Where is your bio?

]]> By: Mark Evans http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/comment-page-1/#comment-575 Mark Evans Sun, 26 Feb 2006 23:29:09 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/25/some-scott-karps-are-better-than-others/#comment-575 <strong>Leah McLaren: Are You With Us or Agin Us?</strong> I finally got around to reading the weekend papers, and came across a column by the Globe & Mail's Leah McLaren on how she's giving up the blogosphere. At least, I think she's giving up the blogosphere but it's difficult to tell. On one hand, s... Leah McLaren: Are You With Us or Agin Us?

I finally got around to reading the weekend papers, and came across a column by the Globe & Mail’s Leah McLaren on how she’s giving up the blogosphere. At least, I think she’s giving up the blogosphere but it’s difficult to tell. On one hand, s…

]]>