David Cohn

• 

  • Digidave  This is a great post. One more thought re: newspapers should do what they do best and link to the rest. Interesting idea: In a crisis - where is the best source for info? Is it your newspaper? In fact, it's Craigslist, wikipedia and now twitter - These are the info sources people turn to. News organizations aren't able to compete. That's an extreme example -- which to me says: newspapers are trying more and more to fight in a 24/7 news cycle - when really they need to take a step back and figure out what is the real value add they can provide. To me -- it's in-depth reporting. Just a thought.
  • • 1 week ago
    •   Jam Today? - Painting Eric's Fence: The Evolution of Business Models
    •   Jam Today?
  • • 1 point
    • 0 replies

  

  • Digidave  Excellent video Robin. I may do a video response. If I do....Yes, I will give away my response for free ;)
  • • 2 months ago
    •   Free Content Needs To Be Fully Free... Or Not?
    •   Master New Media
  • • 1 point
    • 0 replies

  

  • Digidave  Robin This is a topic I've been wresting with myself. In fact, I just got finished reading an essay from Clay Shriky about this topic: http://shirky.com/writings/fame_vs_fortune.html He deals with a lot of similar issues. I still think there has to be an alternative. I come at this question from the angle of a professional journalist. Giving away content on blogs is great. But what about the local investigations??? Those take time. They take months even - someone has to dedicate their themselves to it as a full time job. And that means - they need to make a living. The question is, how? Of course - my personal blog, for example, is the kind of content that should be given away for free. But if I were to start investigating the school district in San Francisco - that's an important topic - and if I were to do it all the time, as a full time job, I'd like to be compensated (since i would need to eat). It's a growing issue. Excited to see how it plays out.
  • • 2 months ago
    •   Content Publishing Strategy: Free or Paid? What Is Better?
    •   Master New Media
  •   RobinGood  Hi Dave, thank you for this thoughtful comment. Re your reading on Clay Shirky, I think he really writes some great stuff, and at the time he wrote that essay I wrote my own version of what I thought on the same topic. See what you think of it: http://www.masternewmedia.org/2003/09/29/first_fame_then_fortune_an.htm Re the work of a professional journalist it all depends on the circumstances and goals of the person and not by established rules existing out there. The point is that one can put out a lot of valuable free content with the goal of getting paid (and more) for specific assignments, as your credibility and authority grow by giving out more for free. As a matter of fact a perfect balance between free and paid content may be the very best option for those who want to both increase their authority and their revenues.
  • • 1 point
    • 1 reply

  

  • Digidave  Hi. Thanks for reading my post - and the explanation of how you came across it. I'm on FriendFeed too - and I love it. In fact, I suspect FriendFeed will be more useful to me than Facebook soon. Facebook's friend feed is good, but it's filled with so much random useless stuff (pokes, zombies etc). FriendFeed just seems like the perfect example of the friend recommended long tail. That and Google Reader's shared items are my new favorite sources of new things to read.
  • • 2 months ago
    •   I might be cranky but even I can learn new tricks
    •   WinExtra Comments
  •   StevenHodson  I definitely find FriendFeed a more valuable resource than I would ever consider Facebook to be. I don't need nudges or vampires or any of the other crap that goes on there. FriendFeed got it right - they made it simple for me to see just what my friends are finding interesting. I also subscribe to you blog as well so like I said in the post I won both ways.
  • • 1 point
    • 1 reply

  

  • Digidave  It is an interesting thing to watch isn't it. My involvement in all this is just to make sure that Digg become more transparent. For me - and I think everyone - the algo change is a distant second.
  • • 3 months ago
    •   Digg: A social media Petri dish
    •   Mathew's comments
  •   mathewi  I would have to agree, Dave. But the algorithm changes are what often stir the pot and enrage the masses :-)
  • • 1 point
    • 1 reply

  

  • Digidave  I thought Porn invented the internet?
  • • 4 months ago
    •   Ning and porn: Get a life, blogosphere
    •   Mathew's comments
  •   mathewi  No, no, no, Dave -- the Internet invented porn :-)
  • • 1 point
    • 1 reply

  

  • David Cohn  I've been waiting for the pro-am approach to wikipedia for a long time. Citizendium is close - but doesn't have the critical mass. If anybody could pull it off, it would be Google.
  • • 5 months ago
    •   Is Google going after Wikipedia?
    •   Mathew's comments
  •   mathewi  I agree, Dave.
  • • 1 point
    • 1 reply

  

  • David Cohn  More annoying than that: Mixx is going to highlight LA Times articles in their search results - as an active social bookmarker - I find that offensive.
  • • 5 months ago
    •   LA Times and Mixx: Don’t get it
    •   Mathew's comments
  •   mathewi  I agree, Dave. I can see why the paper would want that (and I'm sure that's part of the reason for the investment) but I think it denigrates the quality or trustworthiness of the overall index.
  • • 1 point
    • 1 reply