RSS is underhyped: Since several people are pointing to this post that recaps the “research” revealing that RSS is used by only 11% of bloggers as an indication of it being “overhyped,” I responded to it in a comment there, rather than yet another post here. However, it makes me wonder what the response would be if you asked the users of Skype if they used VOIP? My point is not that one should be “investing in” RSS business schemes, however. No doubt, a tremendous amount of money will be lost on RSS investments (it took a lot of restraint not to add a link to that last comment). My point is that research taking a backward-looking “snapshot” of the awareness of three letters is meaningless in trying to understand how RSS will change the way in which we interact with information and with each other.
Nashville blogger named CEO of Thomas Nelson Inc.: Obviously, I’m joking by describing Michael Hyatt first as “a blogger,” since he’s better known for being a visionary executive and influential business author who also happens to be a great blogger (when he does it) and here.
However, I believe when the history of business blogging is written, Michael will get major props for his early embrace of the power of blogs in a business context and his enlightened approach to leading his publicly-traded company into the era of conversational media, including a very insightful and public process of developing a corporate blogging policy.
I guess he doesn’t “get it”: (Updated: to add link to the 1984 single-advertiser issue of Newsweek) (From Lewis Lazare, advertising columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times, about the New Yorker carrying only advertising from Target in this issue) “It can only be described as the most jaw-dropping collapse of the so-called sacred wall between editorial and advertising in modern magazine history. And it happened this week — of all places — at arguably the country’s most prestigious magazine, the New Yorker.”
Observation: Those who have not studied magazine history are doomed to repeat ridiculous observations like that made by Lazare. (I can recall at least one example off the top of my head — in November, 1984 the post-election issue of Newsweek carried only Apple advertising.) Also, if we have to worry that readers of the New Yorker are not sophisticated enough to understand what is and is not advertising, we’ve got a much bigger problem than this issue.
Transparency: I am a fan of New Yorker publisher David Carey and am in awe of how the New Yorker constantly displays — by being open to ideas from advertisers, and by suggesting ideas to advertisers — how creative and powerful an advertising medium a magazine can be, while maintaining the highest quality of writing and journalism one can find in a national consumer publication.
Update: Pith in the Wind and Nashville is Talking are talking about this. From my vantage point, anything that gets people talking about magazine advertising is a good thing. Target and the New Yorker have obviously scored a big coup if non-magazine wonks are kicking this topic around.
Update: Earlier, I didn’t have time to Google that Newsweek single-advertiser issue and, as they don’t have the type of historic archive Time does, I waited until lunch to look. Not only did I find it, I found someone who saved all the ads from the issue. Think about that for a moment. Someone took the time to scan all the ads from a magazine and place it on their website. And they weren’t confused by all that editorial content in it.