Comments on: Can nuanced discourse compete against “strategy by soundbite”?

By: Thoughts, Clarified | Taylor Davidson

Thoughts, Clarified | Taylor Davidson — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 12:21:53 +0000

[...] By demanding and rewarding nuanced discourse. [...]

By: Conversational Black Holes | Taylor Davidson

Conversational Black Holes | Taylor Davidson — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 08:52:59 +0000

[...] Because we’re human. Perhaps I’m naive, but I’m hopeful that culture will reshape the economics of media… [...]

By: On business models, niches and originality | Taylor Davidson

On business models, niches and originality | Taylor Davidson — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 09:59:25 +0000

[...] with multiple thoughts on niches and nuances and [...]

By: CarlNelson

CarlNelson — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:33:50 +0000

Before I get into looking at comments and reading the bevy of blog links and arguments back and forth I wanted to say thank you Taylor for this blog post. Here's my first response.

"Can a shift in demand reshape the economics of media?
When easy answers sell, polarized positions become good business strategies and nuanced thought loses out."

Easy answers sell because of peoples reluctance to spend time investigating. It comes off cynical or pessimistic but the majority of people don't have the time, or don't want to bother spending the time, to investigate answers more deeply. Curiosity to investigate takes time and energy.

Polarized positions and easy answers are built into the structures of power currently in place in politics, religion, education, and media (list could go on).

Even in free or open models there are always structures of power with authority figures or tribe leaders or experts who possess more power even if the underlying platform is built on equality.

By: Taylor Davidson

Taylor Davidson — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:33:56 +0000

To continue to add a layer, add mass-market v. niche appeal; in today's culture, it makes financial sense (because of audience and revenue) for media outlets to adopt polarized positions because they are easier and simpler to spread.

Niches are where the web shows its true power, aggregating people across boundaries impossible in different media economic structures.

Free isn't a ubiquitous strategy (for example, Twitter and Facebook have vastly different cost structures [think pictures, video and expensive, rich media] and thus "free" should be applied very differently), nor is it the right strategy for all industry cycles or product growth / maturation curves; the real need right now is less theory. Debating whether it's right or wrong kinda misses the point about what to do about it (thus Maltoni's and Masnik's posts).

But some part of me hopes that culture adopts to new economic opportunities to allow mass-market media to take a more nuanced approach. Yes, call me naive and optimistic, but I have hope. Until then, I would advise to avoid my methods of thought and communication :)

By: Fred H Schlegel

Fred H Schlegel — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:36:38 +0000

As simple answers continue to disappoint one can only hope that the pendulum will swing to allow fuller discourse. This is a nicer layer to add to the 'Free' debate, since the impact of blogs and other web communication devices are having such a devastating effect on traditional journalistic enterprises. The ability of web sites to to dig deeper into subjects, debate, and inform seems to be an antidote for what passes for debate on cable for those who chose to be cured. At some point I have to hope the world would grow tired of watching folks yell past each other, though Jerry Springer might be proof of the opposite.