<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is the social web about merit or is it morphing into the same old?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2009/07/is-the-social-web-about-merit-or-is-it-morphing-into-the-same-old/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2009/07/is-the-social-web-about-merit-or-is-it-morphing-into-the-same-old/</link>
	<description>innovate. integrate. ignite.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 01:27:35 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Douglas Walker</title>
		<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2009/07/is-the-social-web-about-merit-or-is-it-morphing-into-the-same-old/comment-page-1/#comment-393295</link>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:37:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/?p=236#comment-393295</guid>
		<description>I see Social Media like many other big power shifts in history (printing press, agrarian revolution, industrial revolution, etc.) It has the potential to re-distribute things, but that doesn&#039;t mean it actually will. Or more specifically, it seems that the old-boys slowly die-off only to be followed by the young bucks who quickly turn into a new old boys club.

These shifts in power have periods of chaos that allow new voices to emerge (i.e. Tech Crunch, Perez, etc.) that might not have under other circumstances. And any social media participant at least has the potential to create a big splash through insightful, valuable or just plain outrageous methods. Previously they would have been required to be &quot;discovered&quot; by a major content producer.

Is it a case of:
Meet the new boss.
Same as the old boss?

Not sure, I think we need a little more time before one can say.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see Social Media like many other big power shifts in history (printing press, agrarian revolution, industrial revolution, etc.) It has the potential to re-distribute things, but that doesn&#8217;t mean it actually will. Or more specifically, it seems that the old-boys slowly die-off only to be followed by the young bucks who quickly turn into a new old boys club.</p>
<p>These shifts in power have periods of chaos that allow new voices to emerge (i.e. Tech Crunch, Perez, etc.) that might not have under other circumstances. And any social media participant at least has the potential to create a big splash through insightful, valuable or just plain outrageous methods. Previously they would have been required to be &#8220;discovered&#8221; by a major content producer.</p>
<p>Is it a case of:<br />
Meet the new boss.<br />
Same as the old boss?</p>
<p>Not sure, I think we need a little more time before one can say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Waxman</title>
		<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2009/07/is-the-social-web-about-merit-or-is-it-morphing-into-the-same-old/comment-page-1/#comment-392187</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Waxman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:02:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/?p=236#comment-392187</guid>
		<description>I think you bring up some great points, Tamera. I agree that it&#039;s important to integrate new voices into the conversation. I wonder if that just takes some time, in the same way that getting to know and trust people takes time. (I hope that&#039;s what it is.)

I have to say that I was of two minds when I read the NYTimes article. First, I was really pleased that PR got such prominence. But it felt that it focused on the same old publicity machine, veiled in a social cloak.  Hopefully, we can get beyond that (it will take work) toward real two-way interactions.

One of the things I like best about social media is the number of people/voices I have been able to interact with, the fresh perspectives, the ideas and offbeat links. To me, that&#039;s one of its greatest values.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you bring up some great points, Tamera. I agree that it&#8217;s important to integrate new voices into the conversation. I wonder if that just takes some time, in the same way that getting to know and trust people takes time. (I hope that&#8217;s what it is.)</p>
<p>I have to say that I was of two minds when I read the NYTimes article. First, I was really pleased that PR got such prominence. But it felt that it focused on the same old publicity machine, veiled in a social cloak.  Hopefully, we can get beyond that (it will take work) toward real two-way interactions.</p>
<p>One of the things I like best about social media is the number of people/voices I have been able to interact with, the fresh perspectives, the ideas and offbeat links. To me, that&#8217;s one of its greatest values.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MicheBel</title>
		<link>http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2009/07/is-the-social-web-about-merit-or-is-it-morphing-into-the-same-old/comment-page-1/#comment-391845</link>
		<dc:creator>MicheBel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:23:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/?p=236#comment-391845</guid>
		<description>What the social web is doing that is different than previous is that every voice can be heard on an equal level. Rainn Wilson can have as much weight on my Twitter stream as someone I just met. Each voice, and their insight, is valuable.

And some, perhaps, can gravitate to the same old, same old patterns. Millions found Twitter because of Oprah and Ashton Kutcher. But what was true before that moment, and what remains true now, is that it&#039;s the underlying framework of community (perhaps not as visible to the inquiring eyes) is what keeps this all going.

The star followers are going to go after the next shiny thing, or the people they perceive with power.

What is different this time is that it is we, the community at large, that actually HAVE the power this time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What the social web is doing that is different than previous is that every voice can be heard on an equal level. Rainn Wilson can have as much weight on my Twitter stream as someone I just met. Each voice, and their insight, is valuable.</p>
<p>And some, perhaps, can gravitate to the same old, same old patterns. Millions found Twitter because of Oprah and Ashton Kutcher. But what was true before that moment, and what remains true now, is that it&#8217;s the underlying framework of community (perhaps not as visible to the inquiring eyes) is what keeps this all going.</p>
<p>The star followers are going to go after the next shiny thing, or the people they perceive with power.</p>
<p>What is different this time is that it is we, the community at large, that actually HAVE the power this time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
