Brands Not Microchunks

« The "We Media Deal" | Main | Community Powered Wifi »

Brands Not Microchunks

Mark Pincus has a rebuttal to my Future Of Media posts.

He says my focus on microchunks and syndication is "too much web 2.0-laide".

Mark makes a bunch of great points, but I don't think his views and mine are mutually exclusive.

As Rob Hof points out in his post on the subject, brands like "memeorandum, Digg, and no doubt many others to come" are being built out of microchuncks that are syndicated.

If you want to build a next gen media company, I think you'e got to do both my plan and Mark's at the same time.

Comments (3) | | TrackBack (4)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2c969e200e550222a2c8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Brands Not Microchunks:

» The Future of Media: Microchunks or Brands? from Tech Beat
VC Fred Wilson and serial entrepreneur Mark Pincus are debating what the next era of media will be. Fred think it's RSS-style microchunks of content that carry ads and are deliberately scattered to the Net winds to reach as many... [Read More]

Tracked on Jan 13, 2006 2:31:38 PM

Tracked on Jan 13, 2006 6:38:27 PM

» Read/Write Filter from Read/WriteWeb
A daily review of Web and Media news that crosses my path during the day. I need a better name for it - any suggestions? - John Battelle's thinking ahead to the next Web 2.0 Conference and is seeking feedback... [Read More]

Tracked on Jan 16, 2006 6:29:32 AM

Tracked on Jan 16, 2006 6:32:03 AM

Posted January 13, 2006 in Venture Capital and Technology

Comments

Web 2.0-laide? What the? Is that like Kool-Aide? Farm Aid?

Posted by: Jackson | Jan 13, 2006 8:50:40 AM

"you've got to do both Mark's plan and mine at the same time": exactly.

great media brands do lots of things simultaneously: they create content, filter content, and aggregate content.

and yes, now they ought to microchunk it, too: some of it, some of the time -- but not necessarily all of it, all of the time.

Posted by: Nicholas | Jan 13, 2006 2:09:54 PM

You make a good point about syndication and brands. It's important to understand, though, that to be successful a brand must syndicate more than just its name, or a fabricated aura. A brand must syndicate value customers can use. This happens on two levels: between a company and its customers, and (more critically) between customers themselves, with the brand serving as creative catalyst. Web 2.0 (or whatever we want to call it) will play a decisive role in this process. It will change the very landscape of brands.

Posted by: Brian Phipps | Jan 16, 2006 2:43:48 AM

A VC

Musings of a VC in NYC