Content and Its Discontents

For years, we in traditional media have consoled ourselves about the increasing irrelevance of our work. First, we insist that content is king. If a story, image, film or report is compelling enough — a candid photo of Malia Obama, “Slumdog Millionaire,” the columns of Maureen Dowd — it will translate into pixels. It will flourish on any platform, dominate every sport. By this logic, creators, producers, artists and journalists should attend only ... Full Story »

Posted by Fabrice Florin

See All Reviews »

Review

Subramanya Sastry
2.9
by Subramanya Sastry - Dec. 9, 2008

The arguments are not very well supported -- actually I am not even sure what the argument is. While distribution mediums affects the content that is suitable for that medium, that to me is an argument to use different distribution mediums to draw attention to the same content in different ways. Unless we all are going to stop wanting to read investigative reports, news reports, analyses, content still holds a lot of punch. So yes, new distribution mechanisms need to be leveraged, and they change the content mix (from pure text forms to mixed media forms, for example) and they change business models, but, I don't see how they relegate existing content forms to obscurity. So, you won't read 6-part investigative series on Twitter (god forbid if we were forced to do that!), but, you will share links to 6-part investigate series via twitter.

See All Reviews »

Subramanya's Rating

Overall
2.9

Average
from 7 answers
Quality
2.7
Insight
3.0
Style
2.0
Depth
2.0
Relevance
3.0
Popularity
3.5
Recommendation
3.0
Credibility
4.0
More How our ratings work »