Comments on: The death of the death of the death of … http://www.socializedpr.com/the-death-of-the-death-of-the-death-of-%e2%80%a6/ Fri, 10 Sep 2010 18:28:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: The Death Of ‘The Death Of’ « Goodway Blog http://www.socializedpr.com/the-death-of-the-death-of-the-death-of-%e2%80%a6/#comment-2874 The Death Of ‘The Death Of’ « Goodway Blog Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:58:13 +0000 http://www.socializedpr.com/?p=497#comment-2874 [...] let’s stop ‘the death of’ stuff.  I’m apparently not even the first one to ask for the death of ‘the death of’!  Yes, it’s easy to be sensationalistic. [...] [...] let’s stop ‘the death of’ stuff.  I’m apparently not even the first one to ask for the death of ‘the death of’!  Yes, it’s easy to be sensationalistic. [...]

]]> By: Dirk Singer http://www.socializedpr.com/the-death-of-the-death-of-the-death-of-%e2%80%a6/#comment-1569 Dirk Singer Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:53:58 +0000 http://www.socializedpr.com/?p=497#comment-1569 I'm usually a big fan of your blog but on this instance I don't agree. Yes I talk about the whole newspaper death watch meme quite a lot and to be honest...why shouldn't I (or anyone else for that matter)? No, newspapers aren't going to vanish tomorrow but we all agree the media market is changing beyond recognition. I would have thought that was a legitimate area for discussion for anyone in brand communications. I’m usually a big fan of your blog but on this instance I don’t agree.

Yes I talk about the whole newspaper death watch meme quite a lot and to be honest…why shouldn’t I (or anyone else for that matter)?

No, newspapers aren’t going to vanish tomorrow but we all agree the media market is changing beyond recognition.

I would have thought that was a legitimate area for discussion for anyone in brand communications.

]]> By: Charlie http://www.socializedpr.com/the-death-of-the-death-of-the-death-of-%e2%80%a6/#comment-1568 Charlie Tue, 31 Mar 2009 05:55:39 +0000 http://www.socializedpr.com/?p=497#comment-1568 I personally love discussing the death of things (life, ideologies, systems, etc.). But that has been my M.O. since I was a kid. The reason many other people are doing it now (people I consider to be the opposite of me -- who discuss exhaustively the "death of" a system during these times when they normally wouldn't) is because (i) they lack creativity or insight to see what is on the horizon as a result of the tremendous restructuring of entire industries worldwide (can't blame them for that - even the experts are clueless and (ii) it is their way of holding on to the old (discussing it keeps it alive the way they remember it rather than for what it actually is today - whether or not we can articulate it). The only way to kill the "death of" talk is to present the clear picture of what is going to rise out of the ashes of these systems that are dying (its opposite). Until someone does that (until it becomes clear to everyone what that is) expect more "death of" talk (it might be tiresome, but to the people who perpetuate it, it's at least a concrete statement upon which to stick their flag of journalism/blogging than discussing the murky future. I personally love discussing the death of things (life, ideologies, systems, etc.). But that has been my M.O. since I was a kid.

The reason many other people are doing it now (people I consider to be the opposite of me — who discuss exhaustively the “death of” a system during these times when they normally wouldn’t) is because (i) they lack creativity or insight to see what is on the horizon as a result of the tremendous restructuring of entire industries worldwide (can’t blame them for that - even the experts are clueless and (ii) it is their way of holding on to the old (discussing it keeps it alive the way they remember it rather than for what it actually is today - whether or not we can articulate it).

The only way to kill the “death of” talk is to present the clear picture of what is going to rise out of the ashes of these systems that are dying (its opposite). Until someone does that (until it becomes clear to everyone what that is) expect more “death of” talk (it might be tiresome, but to the people who perpetuate it, it’s at least a concrete statement upon which to stick their flag of journalism/blogging than discussing the murky future.

]]> By: joel http://www.socializedpr.com/the-death-of-the-death-of-the-death-of-%e2%80%a6/#comment-1567 joel Mon, 30 Mar 2009 03:18:04 +0000 http://www.socializedpr.com/?p=497#comment-1567 Lucretia: I heard someone today refer to "the tyranny of 'or' and the liberation of 'and'" referring to arguments that erroneously assume you must have "or," that is, print or the internet. Lucretia: I heard someone today refer to “the tyranny of ‘or’ and the liberation of ‘and’” referring to arguments that erroneously assume you must have “or,” that is, print or the internet.

]]> By: Lucretia Pruitt http://www.socializedpr.com/the-death-of-the-death-of-the-death-of-%e2%80%a6/#comment-1562 Lucretia Pruitt Sun, 29 Mar 2009 10:46:42 +0000 http://www.socializedpr.com/?p=497#comment-1562 Good luck with that crusade... as long as "top 10/25/50/100" lists and "Death of" posts make the front page of digg.com and are those which generate the most inbound traffic? We'll keep seeing them ad nauseum. Anytime someone says near me (I don't even both with 'to' any more, the internet is seldom specific in its intended audience) "Social Media killed Newspapers!" I'm hard-pressed not to reply with "Yep! Just like Television killed radio!" One medium doesn't necessarily kill another - it simply causes it to adapt or suicide. Some things are better done in one medium than another. Those "newspapers" which figured out how to adapt to digital mediums and to reinvent their non-digital incarnations? Will survive. Those that have not and do not will not. Then again, those bloggers you mention above who keep churning out "death of" posts? They'd better quickly figure out a new line or find themselves obsolete when your "death of the death of meme" proves true! Good luck with that crusade… as long as “top 10/25/50/100″ lists and “Death of” posts make the front page of digg.com and are those which generate the most inbound traffic? We’ll keep seeing them ad nauseum.

Anytime someone says near me (I don’t even both with ‘to’ any more, the internet is seldom specific in its intended audience) “Social Media killed Newspapers!” I’m hard-pressed not to reply with “Yep! Just like Television killed radio!”

One medium doesn’t necessarily kill another - it simply causes it to adapt or suicide.

Some things are better done in one medium than another. Those “newspapers” which figured out how to adapt to digital mediums and to reinvent their non-digital incarnations? Will survive. Those that have not and do not will not.

Then again, those bloggers you mention above who keep churning out “death of” posts? They’d better quickly figure out a new line or find themselves obsolete when your “death of the death of meme” proves true!

]]>