tag:,2009:/1/tag:72.47.210.69,2006://1.4707- 2009-11-23T19:55:03Z Comments for Synthesis in New and Old Media Movable Type 4.23-en tag:72.47.210.69,2006://1.4707 2006-01-17T00:38:00Z 2007-12-16T23:15:57Z Synthesis in New and Old Media It's not quite a Bloggers and Old Media lovefest yet, but at least people seem to have eased up on the 'us vs them' rhetoric. AdAge.com has a nice article explaining why Blogging vs. Traditional Media has been oversold. Scott Karp's recent post entitled Bloggers Are So Wrong About Media raised some hackles, but in... Richard MacManus http://www.readwriteweb.com It's not quite a Bloggers and Old Media lovefest yet, but at least people seem to have eased up on the 'us vs them' rhetoric. AdAge.com has a nice article explaining why Blogging vs. Traditional Media has been oversold. Scott Karp's recent post entitled Bloggers Are So Wrong About Media raised some hackles, but in a follow-up post he explained that (in his view) New Media has the conversations but Old Media has synthesis. As I emailed Scott, I think he raises some interesting points - but I still don't quite agree. 

I'd argue that new media does have synthesis mechanisms - both human-powered and automated. As an example of the former, blogs like paidcontent.org and Ypulse provide comprehensive coverage of niche sectors. There are also tech-driven synthesis solutions such as search engines (Google, Technorati, etc), Digg, memeorandum, etc. None of these 'new media' synthesis solutions are perfect by any means - indeed just last week Digg dug a hole for itself when many of its members falsely (and largely anonymously) accused an O'Reilly writer of theft. But this new media world of blogging and aggregators is evolving rapidly and synthesis is one of many things that continues to improve.

Overall though, it's no longer a case of Old Media vs New Media... actually I don't think it ever was. As I mentioned above with paidcontent and ypulse, human-powered synthesis still has a very big part to play. Old media brands have the resources and brand strength to create powerful Web synthesis solutions, should they so desire. But it's no longer just old media playing the game - the rest of us can play too now ;-)

]]> tag:72.47.210.69,2006://1.4707-comment:36859 Comment from Scott Karp on 2006-01-16 Scott Karp http://publishing2.com You're right that New Media already has successful forms of synthesis, but I think there are real limitations to both the current technology and the current human intelligence models.

paidcontent.org and Ypulse are herculean efforts, with lots of great news coverage, but with very little time for in-depth feature stories (to use Old Media terms). Digg and memorandum play a similar role of surfacing important stories. But none of them can effectively tie all of the threads together and provide the kind of narrative and context that helps people follow the arc and evolution of an issue or story. Which is not to say that New Media won't figure this out.

I think the key is understanding what the average person wants and needs from media (I use the term "average person" on purpose because I think those who thrive on New Media have a tendency to look at it through their own experience).

I'm looking forward to watching New Media and Old Media brands compete for the best new model -- my prediction (for now) is that whoever best serves the "average person" will win the race -- and could well be the next Google.

That all said, thank you for picking up the conciliatory thread -- it's not a zero-sum game, and competition is a great thing.

(Thank you also for giving me a second look. You didn't have to, and I'm most grateful.)

]]> 2006-01-17T04:37:51Z