Not to beat a dead horse... but I wanted to pose a point to think about, following up one of the commentators on the last post. In her comment she suggest that you are 'power hungry' because of the dilemma you were facing.
What I think we should all think about is: who is it that's truly power hungry in this situation? Is is the journalist who, if at a newspaper rather than on new media, would be encouraged to break a story or the brand and magazine who would hold the fate of a young woman's livelihood over the heads of potential rank breakers?
It's just makeup, yes, but there is something rather sinister going on with this new avenue of behaviour from the magazine(s) (perhaps out of fear that they're losing they're carefully orchestrated edge) and/or the brands (because they, understandably, rue the loss of control over their message).
Equally I get the sense from a few of the comments from the previous post that there are some bloggers out there who want to 'stick it to the man'. The media and the PR industry exist in this weird sort of symbiosis. OK, new media is going to change how that works, inevitably. But charging in there like a bull into a china shop, just because you can, probably isn't the best way to bring that about. The best way to get into an exclusive club isn't always to firebomb it.
I see your point, GreatSheElephant, but following someone else's rules simply so that said someone can remain in his/her position is counter-intuitive AND not beneficial to anyone but those making the rules for the sake of saving their own respective hides.
Additionally, it is worth noting that simply because a system is in place does not make it the right system, but simply the one that has benefited those who had power to control and mould it.
And I would rather see a so-called firebomb any day, and create some immediate change in the media landscape, rather than let the subtle use of insidious and anti-innovative behaviour from the institutions that promote the status quo become normal practice.
Perhaps we don't want entry to the club but want to create a new club.
3 comments:
Not to beat a dead horse... but I wanted to pose a point to think about, following up one of the commentators on the last post. In her comment she suggest that you are 'power hungry' because of the dilemma you were facing.
What I think we should all think about is: who is it that's truly power hungry in this situation? Is is the journalist who, if at a newspaper rather than on new media, would be encouraged to break a story or the brand and magazine who would hold the fate of a young woman's livelihood over the heads of potential rank breakers?
It's just makeup, yes, but there is something rather sinister going on with this new avenue of behaviour from the magazine(s) (perhaps out of fear that they're losing they're carefully orchestrated edge) and/or the brands (because they, understandably, rue the loss of control over their message).
Just sayin'...
Equally I get the sense from a few of the comments from the previous post that there are some bloggers out there who want to 'stick it to the man'. The media and the PR industry exist in this weird sort of symbiosis. OK, new media is going to change how that works, inevitably. But charging in there like a bull into a china shop, just because you can, probably isn't the best way to bring that about. The best way to get into an exclusive club isn't always to firebomb it.
I see your point, GreatSheElephant, but following someone else's rules simply so that said someone can remain in his/her position is counter-intuitive AND not beneficial to anyone but those making the rules for the sake of saving their own respective hides.
Additionally, it is worth noting that simply because a system is in place does not make it the right system, but simply the one that has benefited those who had power to control and mould it.
And I would rather see a so-called firebomb any day, and create some immediate change in the media landscape, rather than let the subtle use of insidious and anti-innovative behaviour from the institutions that promote the status quo become normal practice.
Perhaps we don't want entry to the club but want to create a new club.
Post a Comment