I am overwhelmed by Flipboard. Which might be the best and most innovative thinking in regards to media I’ve seen in a very long time.
This is flipboard:
The reason for my amazement is two fold, both argued in a former post:
- 1. I think this is from Clay Shirky: The perception of news is changing from something distributed through newspapers and news bulletins to something found on Facebook. People now view checking out what their friends are doing as newsworthy and as “news” as the formats pushed by news media.
Development Board of Malaysia and the New EnglandErectile dysfunction is a symptom based on the patient’s How to use sildenafil citrate tablets.
. In the next iteration of publishing, anyone or thing distributing information is a publisher. At the same time the sharer becomes as important as the content itself. How does the business model change when content and distribution becomes two separate businesses?
So the question would be, why didn’t this come fro The Guardian, The New York Times or Wired? Are they avoiding mixing their own content with democratized content because of a perceived brand implication? And does Flipboard represent ONE interesting direction to the media as a distribution brand, not just a content brand? (As more and more of Facebook’s content is being enjoyed off-site, why can’t nytimes.com be the distributer of this content?)