I’ve already explained my rationale why you should embrace the use and reuse of your content – authorized or not. There are benefits here on multiple fronts, especially since it’s something you’re not likely to contain. In a digital world it’s always more strategic to focus resources on that which you can control and ignore or try to leverage that which you cannot. This is a tough lesson the music and newspaper industries are going through today.
Ever seen those apps that show you “how much your website is worth?” They’re sort of fun, except no one actually takes them seriously. What if you applied that same concept to a Facebook page? It would make just as little sense and be equally as silly.
The early adopters tend to overvalue what’s new. That’s fine and nothing out of the norm, it’s just what they do. But what bothers me is when they proclaim a new piece of technology created by companies they’re fans of changes not just general consumer tech, but also industry x or y without really understanding those industries.
The web is a referential medium. Bloggers and digitally-savvy journalists understand the concept of linking as a source, and instead of having to re-explain something already fleshed out, we just link as proof. It’s simple and as still as effective as ever, even in a real-time world.
Everyone collects competitive data. The web has provided a glut of qualitative and qualitative information you can quickly acquire on competitors to use to your advantage. The truth, though, is most stop at simply collecting this data or using it as a barometer for themselves. In other words: they usually just report on it. Some analyze it.
Last week an interesting situation erupted between TechCrunch and Fortune Magazine. And, it perfectly highlights the old vs. new media mindsets. I suggest you click the previous link and read Mike Arrington’s version of the story, (including emails from Fortune) but in case you’re busy here’s a summarized version of what happened: