At lunch with a TV exec today, I think I finally came up with a way to explain the communication != content formulation to media people: Online communications aren’t user-generated content for the same reason that phone calls aren’t user-generated radio.
I'm not sure the analogy fits. Phone calls are not published on the Web. They are not indexed by Google. The content is not addressable via URL's. Online conversations include content, but that content is fundamentally different than other types of content.
1. James Snell on July 20, 2004 4:08 PM writes...
I'm not sure the analogy fits. Phone calls are not published on the Web. They are not indexed by Google. The content is not addressable via URL's. Online conversations include content, but that content is fundamentally different than other types of content.
Permalink to Comment2. Trevor F. Smith on July 20, 2004 5:31 PM writes...
Perhaps it could be stated like so:
Online communications aren’t user-generated content for the same reason that 1-800 party lines aren’t user-generated radio.
Permalink to Comment3. Lucas Gonze on July 20, 2004 6:10 PM writes...
So is Listener-created radio online communications?
Seriously, I have started to see what I'm doing on user-generated radio as an adjunct of IM. The messages are audio, but that's not a big difference.
Permalink to Comment4. Jay Fienberg on July 21, 2004 2:33 AM writes...
Maybe its too ambiguous an equation to connect with a good analogy. Might not:
communication > content
be a better place to start analogizing from?
(In case my greater-than sign gets filtered out as an evil angle bracket, that is: communication is more than content).
Permalink to Comment5. K5M on July 21, 2004 2:36 PM writes...
What about a call-in show? Isn't that user generated radio?
Permalink to Comment