Comments on: Publishers should be idea advocates

By: glecharles

glecharles — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:32:51 +0000

An idea, in and of itself, is worthless. Ideas + Execution = Value, and that's where publishers — traditional and new media — come into the picture. IMO, what separates great publishers from the rest is a passion for the community they serve and the content they curate; it's not a numbers game.

As for what people get out of creating content, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs was referenced at least three times at last week's Conversational Marketing Summit. Frank Eliason from Comcast noted that “People blog because they want to be heard.” The successful publishers in the future will connect ideas and communities, curating high-quality content that serves that community's needs and gives them a voice.

By: glecharles

glecharles — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 11:32:51 +0000

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:36:06 +0000

I like the idea of Publishers as Idea Advocates. Could the industry be doing a better job of collectively asserting the value of ideas?

Regarding the value of a digital presence: this is such a ripe topic for further exploration. I'm particularly interested in the value of content-generation for individuals. What do private individuals get out of creating content? Love, Respect, Regard, Attention, Face, Empathy, Understanding?

Is there a relationship between individual user value and corporate value? Does the notion of corporate personhood suggest that businesses are somehow benefiting from these decidedly non-monetary values?

By: glecharles

glecharles — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 02:54:44 +0000

#3 was an interesting point that got a bit of attention from the panel but could have been a whole session of its own. The effects of search on both the quality and intent of content have already been seen with multiple instances of blogola, but when it comes to books, the question of credibility is even more critical. There will always be gatekeepers of one form or another — Digg, Technorati, Twitter, et al, are easily gamed by power users; the “crowds” are usually led by a few vocal minorities — and publishing already has a bad history of chasing trends to the detriment of new voices and ideas.

As for the slow embrace of the digital realm, I think it partly has to do with the end result. If a publisher isn't doing direct sales, something with clear ROI, the value of a digital presence is often underestimated.

By: newsstandpromos

newsstandpromos — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:53:02 +0000

Item #1 is something that I am familiar with and your description is dead on. #2 is something I need to learn more about but has fascinated me for some time. Item 3 is the one that scares the hell out of me. I see it more and more as the people I call on are no longer “buyers” in the traditional sense, but order processors. I'd be better off trying to fix an airline ticket with some poor person in Bhopal.

To this date, I am still surprised by the number of publishers who have not really seriously tried to move beyond traditional print and aren't even trying digital, social media, etc.