Disqus - Latest Comments for indexmb

Re: In defence of newspapers and serendipity

mathewi — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:02:42 -0000

I think that's a great point, Mark. So many newspaper websites -- ours
included -- simply copy the format and structure that worked in print,
rather than taking advantage of this new medium and the way people consume
and understand content online. Hopefully we are all learning quickly :-)

Re: In defence of newspapers and serendipity

indexmb — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:54:25 -0000

Hi Mathew,

Newspapers help filter and condense and aggregate content. Yes. But they don't do very a good job of it on net.

The thing I keep coming back to with the 'serendipity defence' is the really poor information architecture at newspaper websites.

Newspaper designers/editors had two centuries to get it right with the physical medium: the art of the headline, the right juxtaposition, and the right amount of column inches for the right story. Now none of that matters, but most sites are still organized exactly like their print counterparts.

Instead of 200 years of internalized design sense, newspaper site designers have only had 15 years. Most sites look and act their age -- like awkward teenagers with a misplaced sense of importance. I think we are still a few iterations away from getting the alignment right (see the latest redesign at thestar.com or see the infographics at the NYT or see the wholly new approach proposed at konigi http://konigi.com/notebook/redub-designs-better...) but hopefully things will fall into place soon because I agree with you serendipity is KEY but I still buy the paper on Saturday.

Re: Motivational Cliches Aren’t Business Models

glecharles — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:31:42 -0000

Thanks for both the dialogue and the compliment.

As for Godin's talk last week, I tackled that one a couple of posts back. Love TRIBES, but he's definitely lost a step or three!

Re: Motivational Cliches Aren’t Business Models

indexmb — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:47:34 -0000

Guy -- Irrespective of the Temple attribution, I really enjoyed your post. I watched Seth Godin speak at Random House earlier this week (posted at Galley Cat) and I thought he was passing tactics off as strategies. That is to say I am on board with your thesis re: transformation.

Cheers,
~mb

Re: Motivational Cliches Aren’t Business Models

indexmb — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:45:12 -0000

Guy -- Irrespective of the Temple attribution, I really enjoyed the post. When I listened to Seth Godin lecture at Random House (posted at Galley Cat) I thought there is a guy who is prescribing tactics but calling them strategies. That is too say I am totally on board with your thesis re: transformation.

Re: DRM or not? a debate that won’t be over anytime soon

MikeShatzkin — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 09:05:28 -0000

Mark, I don't actually disagree with anything you said but your remarks
reveal that you are more sophisticated than the average consumer who, like
me, often does not even READ the TOS. So while your point is right, my
expectation is that really only a minority of consumers would notice one
way or the other.
Mike
--------------------
Mike Shatzkin
http://idealog.com/blog
mike@idealog.com
Founder & CEO
The Idea Logical Company, Inc.
Co-founder: Filedby, Inc.
212-758-5670

Re: DRM or not? a debate that won’t be over anytime soon

indexmb — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:45:28 -0000

Indeed Micheal. I think Shortcovers' choice to be 100% cloud-based has brought the future to the present.

Your point about interoperability in the gadget world is interesting. The gadget world is a big place. I am not certain which part you are referring to. In my experience products in the gadget word are interoperable but services in the gadget world are not (generally). For instance there's typically a TOS agreement for the operating system but not for the computer. Customer expectations follow from there.

As an industry we need to decide if books are a product or a service and then share that decision with our customers. A book-as-service model would include a lower price, a TOS, and stricter rights restrictions. An ebook that is a product would exist similarly to the printed edition, allowing for resale.

That seems simple enough but no one wants to make that distinction. If Amazon was forthright with their customers and declared from the outset that the Kindle was a service, and not a book seller, the 1984 controversy would have been diminished.

Clarity is the key here and DRM (the term and the conversation) is anything but. Lets abandon the subterfuge of DRM and talk instead about licensing versus buying or services versus products. At least those are conversations that readers can understand and be included in. As I said above anything else is simply dishonest.

Re: DRM or not? a debate that won’t be over anytime soon

MikeShatzkin — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:37:24 -0000

No, DRM isn't helpful to the consumer but I suspect that the average
consumer expects a certain degree of non-interoperability.
Non-interoperability is common in the gadget world. VERY common.
And please don't lose the context of the post. Sharing opportunities will
proliferate. Ebook reading will spread. The combination of those two things
will create a very different environment without DRM than the one we have
now, and even more different from the one we've had the past ten years,
which is the basis of everybody's experience.

Mike
--------------------
Mike Shatzkin
http://idealog.com/blog
mike@idealog.com
Founder & CEO
The Idea Logical Company, Inc.
Co-founder: Filedby, Inc.
212-758-5670

Re: DRM or not? a debate that won’t be over anytime soon

indexmb — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:19:40 -0000

Now that sounds reflexive!

Michael -- I left my comment because your post glossed over the anti-consumer nature of DRM. I advocate that we call it what it is. Content with DRM is licensed content. Content with copy protection is locked content. No euphemisms. No obfuscation. Once we establish a baseline then we can add nuance. This isn't an absolutist position. This is one of honesty.

Let me rephrase my comment above -- being honest with your customer is the only thing that counts.

I don't think we disagree -- unless of course you think DRM is helpful to the consumer?

Re: DRM or not? a debate that won’t be over anytime soon

MikeShatzkin — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:11:32 -0000

Mark, there is no answer to an absolutist. I won't try. Nuance is clearly
wasted on some people.
Mike
--------------------
Mike Shatzkin
http://idealog.com/blog
mike@idealog.com
Founder & CEO
The Idea Logical Company, Inc.
Co-founder: Filedby, Inc.
212-758-5670

Re: DRM or not? a debate that won’t be over anytime soon

indexmb — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:08:22 -0000

Bob Livos of BooksonBoard.com had some interesting things to say about DRM at the ebook session at Bookexpo09

http://bookexpocast.com/2009/07/24/profitable-d...

Re: DRM or not? a debate that won’t be over anytime soon

indexmb — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:01:26 -0000

Michael -- DRM is anti-consumer. People might not know what to call it but they hate it when they are come across it.

Taking a position that is anti-reader will always be 'commercial stupidity' for publishers regardless if we are in the establishment stage or not. This is really the only line of argument that counts.

Re: DiSO Dashboard Inspires an Open Plea

indexmb — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:38:13 -0000

This is a great post that draws together several threads and ties them back to the publishing world. Canter's presentation reminds me of a presentation I just saw today by Charlene Li of the Altimeter group http://www.slideshare.net/charleneli/the-future.... The second part of her presentation addresses monetization which may be of interest to magazine publishers like yourself.

Re: Yes, Twitter is a source of journalism

mathewi — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 23:07:21 -0000

Good point, Mark -- which is why I think a lot of people have made the point that while individual Twitter posts may be inaccurate, in the aggregate it is a useful tool.

Re: Yes, Twitter is a source of journalism

Mark — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:59:11 -0000

For a nice antidote to all this hand wringing about MSM versus new media ---

Journalism Will Survive the Death of Its Institutions
http://www.pbs.org/idealab/2008/04/journalism-w...

Re: Yes, Twitter is a source of journalism

Mark — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:54:49 -0000

Hmm. Tom's example of the Ramada versus the Marriot reminds me of the tweets on Michael Mukasey's collapse earlier this week. Many people on twitter thought Mukasey had died. Those people were simply reading the wrong tweets. Apparently, (according to @brianstelter) there was an aide in the room twittering that Mukasey was alive and the ERT was treating him and that things were fine.

The problem wasn't twitter, it was people didn't find, digg, and share the aide's tweets -- the accurate ones. The tool wasn't inaccurate, the first reports were. This is a filter problem not a problem with the platform.

Yes typically MSM won't publish until they have two confirmed sources and that makes them seemingly more reliable, but you have seen Rashamon haven't you? Might as well make the construction of the truth as transparent as possible. Bring on the wikification of journalism -- I think you will find it can holds its own versus the old woodstein methods.

Re: Journalism: Filtering, interpretation, context

mathewi — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:11:22 -0000

Thanks, Mark. I totally agree. And that Shirky speech was excellent.

Re: Journalism: Filtering, interpretation, context

Mark — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:17:28 -0000

The Wire's David Simon is more concise on the topic in his talk "The Audacity of Despair" http://townsendcenter.berkeley.edu/webcast_Simo...
Highly recommended. HT @hughmcguire

He says journalists have simply stopped asking 'why'.

Yes there is a filter problem -- see Shirky's excellent speech at Web2.0NYC http://web2expo.blip.tv/file/1277460/ -- but journalism doesn't have to get all academic to solve its problems. Forget the attention economy. Forget complicated filtering. Rediscover the 'why' and readers will find you.

Re: Personal note: A job change for yours truly

mathewi — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 08:27:35 -0000

Thanks a lot, Mark -- and I will definitely keep your comments in mind. The books section is just one of the many projects we're planning to tackle, so feel free to get in touch with more suggestions any time -- mathew (at) mathewingram.com

Re: Personal note: A job change for yours truly

Mark — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 02:57:08 -0000

Congratulations Mathew. And to make this different than all the comments above I will add this: Can you please please please do something about the book section at the Globe? The community is there, but it is just killing me that G&M is letting it slip away by neglecting social media -- no RSS, no photos, lockeddown reviews (imagine if you had to pay for movie reviews!). This is such a tired rant amongst my friends, we have collectively offered to pitch in. Don't hold me to that because we were drinking at the time. You get the idea and I just wanted to mix it up in the comments. It is awesome that you have this opportunity. A sincere congratulations once again.

Re: Who do you want to see at mesh 2009?

Mark — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:36:44 -0000

I got to wondering if the Boy Genius Report (http://www.boygeniusreport.com) was a Canadian blog. Then I wondered if the Boy himself would be at MESH. I am not sure if there is a hook there or not.

Seconds votes for Clay Shirky, Rex Sorgatz, and Don Gilmor.
And thumbs for Randall Munroe.

best

Re: Steve Jobs: Citizen journalism didn’t fail

mathewi — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 17:28:26 -0000

Thanks, Mark.

Re: Steve Jobs: Citizen journalism didn’t fail

Mark — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 17:03:55 -0000

Hi Mathew -- 25 minutes passed from your initial tweet to the denial via the TUAW. The crowd self corrected and it didn't take long. IMHO that is pretty good. As for individual actors like yourself, you acted responsibly and in the spirit of the medium. When I saw the tweet from @ForbesTech saying the source was CNN and not iReport, I shuddered a bit because an alleged CNN confirmation would surely spawn a stock run -- especially when it comes from Forbes. In your case, you said it was unverified and you did so from your personal account. You did not mislead or act irresponsibly. Don't let journos steeped in Woodstein era overblown self regard give you a guilt trip.
best,

Re: Is this what online news has come to?

mathewi — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:02:47 -0000

Fair enough, Mark -- and you are quite right that I don't have to read them (and nor does anyone else, of course). And maybe if Techmeme keeps pointing them out, pretty soon no one will read them :-)

Re: Is this what online news has come to?

mark — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 22:54:19 -0000

Hi Mathew -- sorry to be troll-like in with my comment above, and I risk sounding more obtuse than ever by saying this, but here goes -- you don't have to read bloggers (or journalists) who suck.

Are their lazy bloggers out there practising me-too reporting? Absolutely. But you don't have to read them. (Without techmeme you don't even have to know about them.) As a reader, sometimes I want analysis and sometimes I want just to be in the know. There is nothing wrong with that -- no matter the length of the post.

Look at the above commenters alone... Om and Mike prove their is a meritocracy at work. Feeling despair at the efforts of lesser bloggers is a waste of positive energy.

I wish wish wish that the blogosphere can postpone that phase TV went through in the late 70s where all the insiders went sour on it (its zenith being Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death). I am sensing that slide everytime I see a post like this.

At the end of the day your own writing stands for itself. Imagine the novelists back in the 30s all piling on each other. Well? We only remember the good ones now. Each blog stands -- and should be judged -- on its own. The blogosphere - or journalism for that matter - is a straw man.

best.