Wednesday, July 14, 2004

Nicieties of genre

From an interview given by Jay Rosen to Global PR Week:
RUBEL: What about those who are empowered to blog by established media outlets, are they more like journalists than the rest of us?

ROSEN: Good question. I think these people--any journalist empowered to blog, as you well put it, by a mainstream news outlet--will be the ones in the best position to change journalism from inside the traditional firms. Will they? I have no idea. But if you are interested in the press, it pays to watch this one unfold.

From the perspective of the pre-AOL, pre-MSN days of blogging, it could be said that the question makes no sense. Didn't blogging's early spreading euphoria have a little something to do with its arising from low and inside, impacting the established media structure thanks to a matter of empowerment facilitated not by some middle management overseer, but rather by an ingenious technological simplification combined with people's interests in publishing what they themselves had to say?

It's probably just my age -- when I came in. When I see a blog "empowered" by a corporation, I do not see a blog. This has nothing in particular to do with the integrity of the individual producing it. Some are doubtless worth reading. But they feel like they belong to some other genre.

Sort of like: Over here, blogs and Jimi Hendrix. Over there, corporate extensions and Peter Lemongello. Different genre.


4 Comments:

Blogger Jon Husband said...

This ...

impacting the established media structure thanks to a matter of empowerment facilitated not by some middle management overseer, but rather by an ingenious technological simplification combined with people's interests in publishing what they themselves had to say?

It's probably just my age -- when I came in. When I see a blog "empowered" by a corporation, I do not see a blog
... combined with Jeneane's retrieval of your past exploration of corporate capital investing that may reveal surprising patterns and possibilities, brings us back to the touchstone of humans in society - always the same and endlessly twisting in variability, a thousand kisses deep.

As Jeneane points out, organizations of all sorts and businesses will do well to remember and honour and serve the best of what has come before, that which represent the finest of what we humans know and have done. I think that may be what my Mom used to call "quality", and my dad has always been proud of buying certain types of shoes that have lasted 50 years (with a re-soling now and then).

And as she also points out we can learn a lot from those bloggers who help us remember the explorations of the human condition in times past by writers, poets, philosophers, theologians and mystics, of how we come to know, connect and grow in life.

Ways to categorize, sequence and thread backwards to build rich human stories would be most welcome, I think. And undoubtedly coporations can also benefit from remembering their essential missions in a human context.

Apologies after the fact for meandering and incomplete thinking.

7/14/2004 12:05 PM  
Blogger Gerry said...

The technologist in me says a blog is made up of sets of overlapping features that allow for certain constancies and permanence in the service of the integrity of the network of content. When you think of genre, voice and authenticity you have stepped up to another level. Value, Quality, Ethics, etc. (to echo Jon's comment too)

I think it may be possible to blog from within a corporation or organization, but not *as* the organization, as an individual. Even then, few organizations are progressive enough to allow this without sanction or censure as a possible outcome if you "embarrass" them.

I am optimistic that we can create new organizational forms designed to support webs of interconnected knowledge workers on a peer-to-peer basis, not firm to employee as is typical. In designing the new forms we will also look to what worked in the past, before corportations shattered family and community life as it existed for generations.

7/14/2004 12:42 PM  
Blogger Tom Matrullo said...

Gerry - I welcome your optimism, but am not sure I'm sharing it without reserve. Corporations are the dominant wealth creation mode because they have maximum evolutionary capacity to do one thing well: They mobilize human labor, human knowledge, and human lives in the service of an objective that is probably not human: wealth. Every move society or government makes to bridge the gap between means and end is fought with all the power money can buy. Makes the development of alternate models a challenge.

7/15/2004 11:45 AM  
Blogger Mike said...

wealthy is easy. wealthy

10/01/2005 5:04 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home