A series of our Tweets on the new nature of media, followed by some interesting @replies.
“We are the media” is one of those phrases that is perfectly sensible while slightly confusing.
One way to look at it is that everyone is (or can become, cheaply) a publisher. Your blog’s features are the same as @nytimes
If everyone is a publisher, then “the sources” that @nytimes or @howmag once relied on are now going direct to readers.
Some publishers: @drawn @grainedit @booooooom @designmilk @bookoven @designobserver
But even @wardomatic @migy @skottieyoung and @templesmith are publishers. They create media just by tweeting their daily thoughts or work.
Now, if everyone publishes, we need filters. That’s the 2nd part of “we are the media.” Some of us are publishers & some of us are filters. (Some are both.)
Filters used to be editors, people who were paid to be at the front-end of the publishing process and decide what’s in or out.
Deciding what was in or out was a necessity based on fixed size: a magazine or paper is only so big. Some things must go.
But now that anyone can publish we need those editors at the back-end of the process: to filter. People who filter are curators.
Some filters: @michaelnobbs @carinberger @taralazar @thecreativepenn @ftoolan @illusionists
We ARE the media. But like the staff at yesterday’s publishers, we have different roles, skills, and contributions.
@troygilbert: @Storybird: Evolution of communication: 1-to-1 (talk), 1-to-few (groups), 1-to-many (oration), few-to-many (broadcast), many-to-many (web).
@troygilbert: Agree. The tricky part has been sorting out the the many-to-many. That’s why we like @umairh’s “organize something” manifesto.
queenjustine @Storybird I’ve been wondering if we’re moving toward true meritocracy – whereas “media” sometimes (often) fan flames and create illusions?
@queenjustine: media is a loaded term. But in this context, appropriate since individuals now have power to fan flames/create illusions too.
queenjustine @Storybird Isn’t that a form of corruption? Happens with group-think and bureaucracy, but not millions of individuals acting alone.
@queenjustine: poss talking about 2 dif things. But, u r right that “we are the media”=meritocracy. How/if/when it’s corrupted is separate.
queenjustine @Storybird so interesting! Thank you for the thoughts. Adds another dimension to my mental model of media utopia…
@molly_oneill @Storybird Interesting thoughts. But I’d argue that editors are more than merely filters. We are nurturers of writers/artists & of stories.
@molly_oneill: in the context you’re talking about—absolutely. In the context of “organizing” the sea of media, less so.
@molly_oneill @Storybird Perhaps you are right. The thought of trying to edit the whole internet makes me want to cry. Carry on, then!
