Verge New Media - Latest Comments in The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

Re: The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

Rosetta Eaton — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:21:31 -0000

hi
570bhz1v2ebhyk4f
good luck

Re: The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

Jim Long — Tue, 08 May 2007 12:19:39 -0000

Wow! great conversation extension here! Thank you all for fleshing out conversation.

Re: The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

michaelsorg — Tue, 08 May 2007 08:55:34 -0000

It does feel like some hippy anti-corporation junkies vs people finding their place somewhere in the media landscape. This marriage of corporations "figuring it out" was inevitable to their survival in the changing landscape.

Re: The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

joec — Tue, 08 May 2007 07:36:02 -0000

People do love to argue as though things must be either-or, black-or-white, don't they?

What I try to tell people about Old and New Media is simply that one is not a substitute for the other. Each fills a need that the other cannot. So, there is a place for both in the future, although it does mean inevitably that there will be less Old Media viewed.

And, as you point out, both will change in response to the other. Will there ever be a complete merge? Maybe in certain cases, but certainly not across the board.

Re: The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

SpaceyG — Mon, 07 May 2007 16:08:07 -0000

It's all about bringing down the barricades and blurring the line now: in media, politics, entertainment, etc. I just had an editor of a major daily send me this message:

"I want to get more pieces in from the blogging community - there are a lot of good writers out there."

Wow! Took him a while, but he gets it. As for politics, I love that some Red bloggers are blogging for Blue blogs, and vice versa now. I for one just went "front page" with a right-leaning blog here in Georgia. Yikes! (People do need someone to revile in their lives.)

But as I like to say, "Let's blur the lines; let Diebold sort it out."

Re: The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

jonny goldstein — Mon, 07 May 2007 15:36:38 -0000

I'm with you a million percent. In order to provide value, a "show about nothing" has to actually be about something---like entertaining the heck out of people a-la Seinfeld.

One of the things that excites me is the idea that people can provide value to small circles of friends with minimal effort, just like sharing snapshots. That's nano media, baby.

Re: The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

Annie — Mon, 07 May 2007 15:32:19 -0000

The people who are lining up on either "side" are in the minority, I think. Some in the old media sector are probably afraid of the unknown and what it might mean to their careers, some in new media are anxious to gain a place of power and influence and see old corporate media as a blockade to that.

But over time I think you're right, it will all mesh in new and interesting ways, with both sides benefiting.

Re: The False Choice of New Media OR Old Media

Kami Huyse — Mon, 07 May 2007 15:13:44 -0000

I am so with you on this one. I think that the "X is dead" memes are self-serving at best and totally nonconstructive. I do believe that the mediums will change and evolve to fill a need. I think that the need to classify comes from the idea that there is a stark difference between the paid and unpaid "media." However, I find that even this line is starting to blur, as you have outlined above. The key is answering the question, "who is the gatekeeper." The answer is much more complicated than it used to be. (BTW, it is liberating to be out of 140 characters here)