Comments on: Mass Media Vs. Niche Media

By: Eric Kotonya

Eric Kotonya — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:31:25 +0000

What if mass media and social media could be married together into some kind of “mass social media”?

This is possible, but not in the Facebook-be-my-friend or Twitter-follow-me design. If a social media platform could be built around content and not people, and a viral propagation engine added to each post, then we would have a new mass media, without eliminating the personal benefits of social media.

Readers endorsing a publication would automatically become the new owner, and instantly broadcast it to their virtual community members as their own. The new recipients would likewise take ownership and kill or propagate the message. The reach would grow (or fade off) exponentially depending on perceived value to each consumer.

Because relevance control would be in the hands of the consumer, this model would be self-regulating and work to the same level of success in both aggressive U.S. and conservative European markets. And if deployed on mobile devices, the rate of news propagation would be just as rapid as mainstream mass media.

By: Laura V

Laura V — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:03:06 +0000

I recently had the opportunity to travel to Europe and definitely noticed a lack of mass media during my time there. There are no billboards when you drive along the highways. Advertising, both outdoor and on television, is minimal when compared to the states. It was very refreshing.

I also noticed that the news in Europe is more explicit and honest. That the advertising and media that is present is less bland, and far more creative.

So, in that sense, I would say that the opinion given by Mitch Joel is very cultural centric. America has a need for progress. Always obtaining bigger and better. But do we all really need to know everything? Or can we easily find the information specific to our personal needs?

I feel that this is why social media is becoming exceedingly more popular then it’s “mass media” counterparts. People are overwhelmed with messages, so they choose to seek what they actually want to know, not what they are being told they need to know.

By: dean guadagni

dean guadagni — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 05:54:11 +0000

Adam,
Great article! What Mitch doesn’t grasp is how “mass media” is so willing to jump on the bandwagon. CNN is the perfect example. They completly hard sell their Twitter presence, lie about Larry King and Anderson Cooper “live” Twittering or blogging, and in general break every rule for social media “tone” and etiquette they can in a 2 hour broadcast.

Mitch’s reference to the internet as “something new and shiny” is almost embarrassing in it’s utter fantasy. I am 49 yrs old and grew up without the internet, cellphones, microwaves, cable TV, or remote controls. Yet I can see the paradigm shift and revolution that Web 2.0 social media represents.

Simply put I am sure a caveman never would have thought his cave canvass could be improved upon, a stone tablet never being replaced, or a 1930’s printing press never being replaced.

The world is changing-change with it Mitch or get left behind

By: Patrick

Patrick — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:00:25 +0000

This is a great debate. I recently discussed this idea in regards to publishing on my website. I think at it’s core it’s a generational thing where people somehow have a belief that without someone telling us what’s important or noteworthy we won’t be able to find it or figure it out on our own. I just don’t believe it. I think for better or worse the Internet democratizes information and I have complete confidence in my own ability to find it and interpret it sans filters.

By: Jonathan Goodman

Jonathan Goodman — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 18:01:17 +0000

Some nice inter-blog banter here… I find the U2 reference useful.

My own theory of media and pop culture fragmentation is best encapsulated as “U2 is the last super group.” No band that follows will capture the breadth of audience that U2 does. They peaked just before pop culture fragmented thanks to the Internet.

Media in this conversation is a catch-all term. I think the discussion gets more useful when you breakdown the kinds of content that the media carries (ads, editorial, entertainment, public information).

Focusing on journalism, the conversation can quickly becomes, can we rely on our online networks to really share ALL of the ideas worth knowing. None of my friends are embedded with a Marine unit in Afghanistan. It’s just those stories where we need a mass media to inform us of the things we should (want to) know about – even if on the surface they may seem “tedious and boring.”

Just a few thoughts to add to to the conversation…