Comments on: Everything That Rises Must Converge

By: DuffBulpraf

DuffBulpraf — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 09:39:42 +0000

The old order. You can see
here

By: Evan

Evan — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 23:08:43 +0000

Cool oblique Shriekback refrence cicra 1985.

Blogs are here, because print media has failed the people, failed reality, and abetted a constitutional nightmare in progress.

By: Leslie McKerns

Leslie McKerns — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:24:55 +0000

Bob,
I think the blogs are not information overload, rather they are from information “underload.” The young people turned away from newspapers because young people are mobile–meaning they are not home. They carry their devices them. Look at the lament over the decline of TV news as well — the days of being home at five or six o’clock to be tuned into the news simply do not exist anymore.

Plus these content channels are seen as not fresh and relevant (to them). The newspaper content is printed and released the day after news happens - that alone turns off those hungry to stay on top of their world. And as for tv, the news is restricted to three topics 1. the weather. 2. traffic 3. the latest cute kitten or cub in the zoo, bear in a tree story. And, as for trust — how is it that every station has the exact cute kitten story on a loop? Is it any wonder that people have found a better way to stay in touch. With blogs you get fresh uncensored content.

By: Everything That Rises Must Converge : My Netrepreneur

Everything That Rises Must Converge : My Netrepreneur — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 23:45:18 +0000

[…] Everything That Rises Must Converge Blogs are the “in” thing today, with 8 million Americans adults saying they have started blogs Newspapers, meanwhile, are in decline: only 23 percent of adults under 30 today read newspapers regularly. To combat their sagging circulation, newspapers are now jumping on the blogging bandwagon. According to an article in Circulation Management (6/07, p. 14), 75% of the […] […]

By: Darren

Darren — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:00:59 +0000

It took me a while to “get” the whole blog phenomenon. I originally thought it was a fad. So I’ve been humbled by its continued success. Over time, I’ve adapted and have learned to enjoy them. But here’s the thing: the blogs I read reflect my own personal interests. The blogs my neighbor reads reflect his own personal interests. Is that a good thing or not? When we become the managers of our own content, will we degrade into a purely vapid society where 3/4 of the population restricts its news to the latest comings and goings of Paris Hilton?

On the other hand, I think we would all agree that corporate conglomerates shouldn’t completely dictate content either. And one could argue that the same thing happens right now with more traditional media. After all, we select the channels we watch and the magazines we purchase. But I think the sheer volume of blogs is what concerns me. Maybe I’m a fuddy duddy but I think there needs to be some centralization b/c I don’t trust our (society’s) collective ability to choose content responsibly (myself included).

By: Dianna Huff

Dianna Huff — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:31:22 +0000

What I find interesting is how magazines and newspapers are now printing where their articles are cited in the blogosphere (I just saw a magazine do this — “Last month these blogs cited the following articles . . . “). I like how the WSJ posts content from blogs, too.

The Boston Globe has a section called “Sidekick” and often posts content from people’s blogs. It’s very interesting and relevant. I don’t have time to go out and find all this info.

If you listen to talk radio, you’ll note that people can email in their comments versus calling. I find that fascinating, too.

By: Bob Bly

Bob Bly — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:19:34 +0000

Mike: 150,000 new books published every year, and now 120,000 new blogs a day. Talk about information overload! Do you know how many white papers are published annually?

By: Michael A. Stelzner

Michael A. Stelzner — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:18:02 +0000

Bob;

According to this report, 120,000 new blogs are coming online daily: http://www.sifry.com/alerts/archives/000493.html

So I think newspapers are a little late to the party.

They will just join the craziness and most likely be lost in the blogosphere.

Mike

By: Robert Rosenthal

Robert Rosenthal — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 12:05:19 +0000

I think the answer lies within your last sentence, Bob. If their blogs are relevant, their case is compelling.

By: John Dumbrille

John Dumbrille — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 20:00:22 +0000

Newspapers’ readership is in decline, but newspapers remain in many ways a superior display mechanism. So there is hope. The business model has to change. Locating blogs in electronic newspapers doesn’t solve their entire problem, because no-one wants to pay for electronic news content.

I don’t see evidence of a single stream emerging though, as each media type has its strength, and so far none has died out. TV sits beside internet sits beside books sits beside nespapers and magazines. etcetera.

Clay Shirky’s observation about why the Internet has changed things is still apt:

“So forget about blogs and bloggers and blogging and focus on this — the cost and difficulty of publishing absolutely anything, by anyone, into a global medium, just got a whole lot lower. And the effects of that increased pool of potential producers is going to be vast.”