Nicht zu verpassen: Markus Breuer verfasst nach einem Jahr Pause wieder seine Notizen aus der Provinz des nördlichen Süd-Ostwestfalen. Zum Beispiel mit der Frage, was der Sinn von Web 2.0 ist.
Philipp Schindler, Nordeuropa-Chef der Internet-Suchmaschine Google, legt via FAZ den deutschen Medienunternehmen „eine Art Kriegserklärung auf den Eichenschreibtisch“ (Peter Turi).
Und Mark Pohlmann mag Unternehmen, die sich selbst kritisieren.

Die lang erwartete Readers Edition der Netzeitung ist da. Erste Stimmen aus dem Netz:

Die Idee ist gut, warten wir ab, ob die Welt dafür schon bereit ist. (Johnny Haeusler, Spreeblick)

Es ist ein sehr, sehr spannendes Projekt, das extrem viele wache Augen benötigt. Funktioniert es, setzt es vielleicht sogar international einen Maßstab. (Thomas Knüwer, Indiskretion Ehrensache)

Zumindest die ersten bereits eingereichten Artikel lassen gutes hoffen… (BloggingTom)

Das Layout wirkt sachlich, aber nicht unschick. Und auch nicht so unaufgeräumt-durcheinander wie bei vielen Newsseiten. (Robert Basic, Basic Thinking]

Weil es so schön ist, was Jürgen Ahting da ausgegraben hat, hier in voller Länge:

On the subject of broadcast vs broadband, Tom writes:

There’s nothing rapid about this transition at all. It’s been happening in the background for fifteen years. So let me rephrase it in ways that I understand. Shock revelation! A new set of technologies has started to displace older technologies and will continue to do so at a fairly slow rate over the next ten to thirty years!
…
My sense of these media organisations that use this argument of incredibly rapid technology change is that they’re screaming that they’re being pursued by a snail and yet they cannot get away! ‚The snail! The snail!‘, they cry. ‚How can we possibly escape!?‘. The problem being that the snail’s been moving closer for the last twenty years one way or another and they just weren’t paying attention.

In comments, Will writes:

If one person is claiming that the world is moving fairly slowly, and has some sound advice on what this might look like (as you are doing here), and another person is claiming that the world is moving extraordinarily quickly, but offers some quickfire measures through which to cope with this, the sense of emergency will win purely because it is present. From here, it almost becomes *risky* not to then adopt the quickfire measures suggested by the second person. Panic becomes a safer strategy than calmness. Which explains management consultancy…

and John asks:

does web2.0 count as a snail too?

But Web 2.0 is not a snail.

Web 2.0 is the people pointing and shouting ‚The snail! The snail!‘

Web 2.0 is also the people who overhear the first group and join in, shouting ‚The whale! The whale!‘ and pointing vaguely upwards and towards the nearest ocean.

Web 2.0 is also the people who hear the second group and panic about the approaching whale, or is it a land-whale? what is a land-whale anyway? whatever it is, there’s one coming and we’d all better… well, we’d better tell someone about it, anyway – I mean, there’s a land-whale coming, how often does something like that happen?

Web 2.0 is also the people who hear the third group and improvise a land-whale parade, with floats and dancers and drummers and at its centre a giant paper land-whale held aloft by fifteen people, because, I don’t know, but everyone was talking about land-whales and it just seemed like a good idea, you know?

And Web 2.0 is the people who come along halfway through the parade and sell the roadside spectators standing-room tickets.

Man beachte auch den Kommentar von Dharmesh Shah:

Absolutely brilliant.

I’d thought I’d read all the possible variations of definitions on Web 2.0 that there could be.

This is by far, one of the most insightful. I have a master’s thesis I’m working on that covers „Web 2.0 Business Models — An Oxymoron“. This might be a good fit.