Print This Post Print This Post

Great column by David Kirkpatrick, “Old media meets empowered customers,” that coincidentally just appeared in my inbox.  The springboard for the point made by the title is Kirkpatrick’s observations about the Digital Life Design conference in Munich that just ended.

I recommend the entire column, but here’s the part that most resonates for me:

Most media companies still think it’s all about the content, but taking a software-driven approach makes it easier to find unique and creative ways to develop a synthesis between professional and non-professional content, and to monetize both, usually with advertising.

Blogger and old-media refugee Jeff Jarvis, on a great panel called “Exploding Media,” said “Media companies should stop complaining and ask themselves ‘What would Google do?’” He said today’s mandate is to help people distribute both their own creations and what they receive from professional media in their own way.

As if to illustrate, Google (GOOG, Fortune 500) executive Marissa Mayer showed how Google’s Maps and Earth software are both being augmented by contributions from users. For example, ordinary straphangers have built the best map of the Santiago, Chile subway system.

All wasn’t lovey-dovey there, though:

[Mahalo.com creator Jason] Calacanis criticizes the vapidity, profanity and offhandedness of much user-contributed content online, including what often passes for feedback to professionally-written blogs and articles. “Now it’s the wisdom of crowds versus the expertise of individuals,” he says, “and the wisdom of crowds has maxed out.”

Regardless, many of us have been saying for years now that it’s the audience, stupid.  It is fascinating to experience just how long it’s taking certain segments, often those that need to get the message the soonest unless they want to die off, to get the message.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:22 am January 24th, 2008 in Blogging, Business, Media, Tech | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Just connecting a few dots.

Details on State Rep. Matt Dolan’s request to step down are here on Right Angle Blog.

More on the wine mess and my questions about leadership are here.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:09 am January 24th, 2008 in Government, Ohio, Politics, Statehouse | Comments Off 

Print This Post Print This Post

Nice but same old, same old and very superficial. I actually think the PD would do better to get some community experts to write editorials for them, people who can really write passionately and with no holding back on their partisanship about an issue, if the PD really wants to persuade people of something. But what does this editorial even ask us to do? Isn’t it supposed to tell us to do something? Or is that just op-eds?

Sigh.

Of course, I’m always appreciative of ink being given to the plight of gifted kids. And I lost count a long time ago re: how many people are desperate for how-to information on doing the best they can for gifted kids. But the fact is, little has changed in the landscape that hasn’t been pushed, shoved or wrangled into a semblance of systematic help for gifted kids.

I’m way past my blogging time allotment for today but the Ohio Association for Gifted Children is an excellent resource. As are most parents of gifted kids. And remember, gifted kids can be dual-diagnosis – learning disabled as well as gifted. And gifted kids don’t know about socioeconomic – it’s their brain that’s crying out for more.

I love this topic and this topic frustrates me constantly. Not a week, and sometimes, not a day goes by that I’m not doing something related to gifted education.

But do I expect there to be much systemic change?

Nope.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:35 am January 24th, 2008 in Education, Government | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Hmm, I’m being a little hard on Barack, aren’t I? Nothing like reviewing one’s own posts to stand up and notice. Some thinking to do here.

My The Moderate Voice Posts:

Toughen up, Obama

Rendell endorses Clinton

Obama underwhelms

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:05 am January 24th, 2008 in Blogging, Politics, TMV, WH2008 | Comments Off 

Print This Post Print This Post

That could be the title of a ballad, but for now, it’s the subject of this very interesting post by Polimom:

If you’re old enough to remember the Clinton years with any kind of clarity, you’ll remember the enormous role Hillary played in Bill’s presidency. I don’t think that was an anomaly. Rather, it seems to be a function of their relationship. They have apparently built a peer marriage.

The rule books haven’t been written yet; peer couples are making it up as they go along. But this much I have observed: Peer couples trade a frustrated, angry relationship with a spouse for one of deep friendship. They may have somewhat tamer sex lives than couples in traditional marriages. They definitely have fewer external sources of validation. And these couples have a closeness that tends to exclude others. But theirs is a collaboration of love and labor that produces profound intimacy and mutual respect. Traditional couples live in separate spheres and have parallel lives. Above all, peer couples live the same life. In doing so, they have found a new way to make love last.

It’s far more than re-distributing child care duties or alternating meal preparation. Peer marriages involve not just respect for your partner, but giving consideration and weight to their ideas and, even more importantly, a willingness to have them stand equally beside you. The partners are a true working team.

Now, the only thing that confuses me a bit with this concept is, when I look at John and Elizabeth Edwards, let’s say.  They seem as though they would qualify for a peer marriage distinction, except they don’t have that frustrated, angry piece and they don’t live the same life.

What do you think about this paradigm and its aptness in being applied to the Clintons? Does it help them or hurt them from a voter’s standpoint? Or does it not matter one iota?

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:48 am January 24th, 2008 in Campaigning, Elections, Politics, Social Issues, Women | 4 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Please welcome a new MSM-blogosphere collaboration, The Point.

Kyle Kutuchief of The Chief Source and Ben Keeler of The Keeler Political Report (and a co-editor of mine at the Carnival of Ohio Politics – don’t miss its 101 edition this week) have taken their friendship and fight (as in energy, not animus) to a new political website, Politics.Ohio.Com, hosted by the Akron Beacon Journal and Ohio.com. The Point is where they will discuss and disseminate news and opinion from their perspectives.

What signs of lessons learned do we see from the experience of the now-defunct Plain Dealer/cleveland.com venture, Wide Open?

1. The About This Site page which has its own page tag at the top of the home webpage;

2. A Disclaimer just under the title of The Point;

3. A banner under each blogger’s post title (seen here under Kyle and here under Ben) that specifically mentions the partisan nature of their perspective.

4. Ben reveals in this comment that they are getting paid for their work (scroll down to a comment by Ben, it’s #8).

There may be some other subtle items I’m missing and chances are also good that during negotiations, Kyle, Ben and the ABJ/Ohio.com folks talked about other ground rules that we won’t notice or notice immediately.

Other observations from someone who has been there, tried that: Read more

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:00 am January 24th, 2008 in Blogging, Media, Ohio, Politics, Tech | 2 Comments 

"));