Patrick Ruffini is a pretty bright guy, but his latest column is particularly smart. In the column, Patrick notes something I was told by a smart blogger several years ago. It is not necessarily the overall numbers that matter most, but how many people of influence you are reaching. That is especially true when it comes to conveying political information. Patrick makes that point and many others in his latest column about the media and news consumers.
Blogs and personal media outlets from YouTube to MySpace are breaking from under the yoke of mass media. And the new medium is versatile enough that old media isn't always the loser -- more often than not, it's mainstream news clips us political junkies like to pass around. The difference is that MSM content is being passed around in 2-minute increments, not tidily packaged 42-minute programming blocs. And there's just as much "juice" in that audience of 10,000 that watches the clip on YouTube as there is in the 300,000 who watched in on TV. Why? Because those 10,000 are invested enough to seek out the clip and make sure it's remembered; for most of the 300,000, it's just background noise.When you think about how political blogs exert influence, it is not always because so many people read an idea at a particular blog, but often because an idea or a piece of information found there is seen by someone who has the ability to either spread it to the masses or because it is picked up by someone in a position, either legislatively or otherwise, to put it into action. Patrick goes on to talk about how the old media is reacting to the new media. It is definitely a whole new world today. Just ask Katie Couric.
In the new media world, you don't need big numbers so much as you need to generate passion and interest with the right audience. An old adage seems adept: "Sure, I have just one reader, but he's the President of the United States."
Permalink | E-mail This | Technorati Links | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Blogosphere, Media
Comments (9)
Who is Katie Couric?... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Barry Dauphin | March 10, 2007 1:44 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Who is Katie Couric?
1. Posted by Barry Dauphin | March 10, 2007 1:44 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2007 13:44
2. Posted by BC | March 10, 2007 2:39 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Judging from the average quality of blogs and the other "new media" in terms of journalism, investigative reporting, and comprehensive information collecting and accurate presentation in general, I have the feeling that future historians will refer to this period of time period as the beginning of what could be called "The Misinformation Age".
2. Posted by BC | March 10, 2007 2:39 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2007 14:39
3. Posted by Lee | March 10, 2007 3:23 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The last two paragraphs on Ruffini's linked page says it all:
He's so "dedicated" to helping "achieve dominance" for conservatives and Republicans that he pulls numbers like 10,000 vs 300,000 out of rear without any backup or cite as to where or how's he obtaining those numbers.
Sure, cancel your subscription to the newspaper and instead rely on the lies and fabrications of the right-wing blogosphere. Ruffini and the right would like nothing better than to cut you off from the truth and feed their made-up crap to you in its place.
3. Posted by Lee | March 10, 2007 3:23 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2007 15:23
4. Posted by Maggie | March 10, 2007 4:23 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"It is not necessarily the overall numbers that matter most, but how many people of influence you are reaching. That is especially true when it comes to conveying political information."
Lorie, I just left a comment in the post above about "the dropping of Fox" in the Democrat debate.
Obviously, the Dems just don't "get it".
"How many people of influence you are reaching"?
One would think that the Dems would love to target those in the middle or the other side of the fence ....hoping to pick up any supporters of influence they could.
BUT Nooooooooooooo!
They're just tooooooo stuuuuuupid.
Dump Fox. Stick with your own audience. Your own spheres of influence.
And then LOSE IN '08.
But, hey, it works just fine for me.
4. Posted by Maggie | March 10, 2007 4:23 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2007 16:23
5. Posted by marc | March 10, 2007 4:43 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Lee, what a foolish jump you make.
Do you really believe he was citing the numbers as facts and not as a comparative example of his overall idea?
Come on Lee you're smarter than that, at least you've shown you are in the past.
Then you compound the mistake by assuming Ruffini only watches and listens to "lies and fabrications of the right-wing blogosphere"
Credibility can't get stretched further than that Lee. Unless, you can show evidence of Ruffini's viewing habits I'll chalk this one up as something far removed from reality.
5. Posted by marc | March 10, 2007 4:43 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2007 16:43
6. Posted by Lee | March 10, 2007 5:26 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Do you really believe he was citing the numbers as facts and not as a comparative example of his overall idea?"
how convenient - to make up numbers that support your thesis, rather than using facts.
No, I'm not surprised he did that at all.
"Then you compound the mistake by assuming Ruffini only watches and listens to "lies and fabrications of the right-wing blogosphere""
I don't assume that - I said that that's what Ruffini is suggesting - that you cancel your newspaper subscription and read the BS he makes up instead. I suspect he just sits around and makes up his own news, rather than reading a newspaper.
This was such a gem it's worth repeating: "Do you really believe he was citing the numbers as facts and not as a comparative example of his overall idea?"
A "comparative example of his overall idea" - lol! That's priceless! NO FACTS behind it - just make it up... lol!
6. Posted by Lee | March 10, 2007 5:26 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2007 17:26
7. Posted by kim | March 11, 2007 8:01 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hey sharpen up, Lee, and BC. It's possible to get stuff on the internets. Trust your guiding genius. Let the force be with you.
================================
7. Posted by kim | March 11, 2007 8:01 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 11, 2007 08:01
8. Posted by kim | March 12, 2007 7:18 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Good Lord, I see Lee acknowledging an error after being shown proof in a following thread. How do you guys cultivate leftists like that? Keep up the good work, because they are an increasingly endangered species.
==========================
8. Posted by kim | March 12, 2007 7:18 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 12, 2007 19:18
9. Posted by kim | March 12, 2007 7:21 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The Kos Dancers, who believe that if they control the dialogue just right, and choreograph the whole piece with rigid political correctedness, then the glory days of 'Liberalism' will return.
=======================================
9. Posted by kim | March 12, 2007 7:21 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 12, 2007 19:21