Commentary and advice on marketing, mostly for publishers (traditional and brands) and writers, but sometimes from a broader perspective.
There's an interesting comment buried in the beginning of the article, attributed broadly to unnamed Amazon executives, that perfectly sums up the true state of the publishing industry and Amazon's position in it: "...they played down Amazon’s power and said publishers were in love with their own demise."
Most magazines, print and digital, are little more than advertising platforms whose readers are defined as “targets”, valued in quantity over quality, and when the advertising revenue stream dries up, the magazines usually fold, readers be damned.
In the pre-digital days, influential media brands like Cosmopolitan and Vogue were one of the primary gateways for marketers to connect with consumers. They offered an attentive audience that would have been difficult for most marketers to gather without investing heavily in staff and infrastructure. Today, those media brands are no longer primary gateways, and marketers aren't nearly as reliant on them to reach their desired audience as they used to be as they now have cost-effective tools at their disposal to engage directly with consumers.
I love data, but the more complex it becomes, the less effective spreadsheets and Powerpoint charts are at presenting it. Enter infographics and the growing field of data visualization, perhaps best personified by Facebook's hiring of personal infographics guru Nick Felton to work on the visual elements of their new Timeline feature.
Nothing in life is free, and in Facebook's case, you pay for the service with your data. As Kirkpatrick notes, the real question is have they finally gone too far and will users start to rethink their usage of Facebook as their Timeline reveals... what?
Book publishers, on the other hand, have traditionally either focused on "digital" as a secondary medium, or worse, not even as a distinct medium at all, simply a fascimile or marketing channel for their print products. In doing so, they've effectively positioned themselves for easier disintermediation, being seen as container manufacturers instead of content curators and community organizers.
"Editorial control" is a four-letter word in my book. It's a legacy of the pre-participatory era, and journalists, editors, authors, etc. who fight to maintain it, or the illusion of it, are spitting into the wind that should be filling their sails. Credibility is more important than control, and that comes from your community.