Ted Rheingold is the most inspiring person I have the honor of knowing. I’ve thought about it quite a bit these last 24 hrs, and the superlative is appropriate.
Ted’s power to inspire is his normalcy – he isn’t Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg – Ted is just like us in that he hasn’t had that life-changing exit or been catapulted to celebrity status. But unlike many of us, Ted has truly lived his life for others, and it’s brought him a level of love, respect, and admiration that no amount of money could ever buy.
Last year, I got roped into fighting in a charity boxing match shortly after Ted shared his diagnosis. I needed to pick a charity to raise money for and I wanted to dedicate my fight to Ted. So I texted him to explain the situation and ask for what charity he’d like me to raise money. I was expecting an organization doing research that could help treat him, or maybe a fund for the hospital where he was receiving treatment, or maybe the American Cancer Society. I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised when he responded with a list of organizations helping the homeless in the Bay Area, because it was typical Ted – even in his darkest days, thinking of others first.
He never said it, but I understood from our text conversation that he didn’t want a fundraiser in his name. He and I decided on a great organization called Lava Mae, which provides showers to homeless people. And thanks to Ted’s help promoting the fundraiser and the generosity of some amazing people, we raised $2,825 for them. As always, Ted eschewed the spotlight and did the actual work of helping people.
I have learned so much from Ted and he has been essential to my transition to a purpose-driven career path. I know I’m one of many who have been graced by Ted’s boundless generosity in advice, introductions, and discussions. And I’m sure they agree it’s impossible to overstate the value of Ted’s counsel in work and in life.
When he first got sick, I asked Ted how I could help and he told me to send him photos of pretty flowers. So I started paying more attention as I walked around and Tweeting photos to Ted of flowers that caught my eye. As with everything else, this was as much something for me as it was for Ted. He gave me the gift of opening my eyes to the everyday beauty that surrounds us. And it’s a habit I don’t plan to give up.
Life is so fucking unfair! Horrible tragic things happen to the best people. #EnjoyEveryDay and fight for justice at every opportunity. ❤️
I am eternally grateful for everything Ted has given me and to have a constant reminder of Ted and his lessons in my son, Teddy. When I told Ted about our son’s name shortly after he was born last year, I explained that his legal name isn’t actually Ted or Theodore but we just decided to call him Teddy because we like it. To which Ted replied that his name isn’t actually Ted either and his parents did the same thing as us. Elizabeth and I couldn’t imagine a better person to be an unintentional namesake for our son.
I texted Ted 2 weeks ago when I was coming to San Francisco for the day to see if he was up for a visit. He told me it was Mabel’s first day of school and he wasn’t making any other plans that day – that was our last conversation. Ted’s love for Molly and Mabel is infinite, and my heart is so broken for their unimaginable loss. Knowing Ted, I believe leaving them was probably the only thing with which he couldn’t make peace.
May we all strive to be as kind and brave and wonderful as Ted and to live by his example and words:
I don’t discuss politics on the Internet. This is different. This is my small strike back against the evil that manifested in Paris last night.
I’m generally dismissive of social media activism for often over-simplifying discussions of complex issues into us vs. them shouting matches. This is different. This is very much an us vs. them shouting match, in which we are members of a multi-cultural global civil society and they are zealots who want to start an “apocalyptic ‘war of civilizations.'”
I share the belief that the goal of the Paris attacks is to eliminate the “grayzone” of Moderate Islam by triggering Islamophobic backlash in the non-Islamic world. It is the same goal of the other recent atrocities attributed to the self-proclaimed Islamic State: the bombings in Beirut; the downing of the Russian airliner; the bombings in Ankara. These terrorists believe in a black and white conflict between Radical Islam and the entire rest of the world, and these attacks are their way to make that vision a reality.
This is our opportunity to fight back! Do not allow the perpetrators of these attacks to be proved right by our words and deeds, nor our inaction against the words and deeds of others, in response to their horrible acts of evil. This is a time when spreading messages of tolerance and love on social media actually can have an impact.
I stand with the majority of Muslims in the world, who are equally devastated by these attacks, to show the enemies of civilization that it is *all of us together* versus them.
By no means is this alone a panacea. These events have made clear that the threat from the self-proclaimed Islamic State is much bigger and closer than most of us had hoped. Unfortunately, the hard work and sacrifice required of government officials, diplomats, armed forces, and first responders all over the world may be far from over. But this is also a propaganda war being fought on our home turf, and those of us not in a position to take direct action IRL can make a difference with our voices online.
For better or for worse, Yahoo! has always been a pretty siloed organization. Each major Business Unit is very much a reflection of its leader’s personality and style. While the famed re-org promises to reduce the number of these silos (and make them more aligned with logically distinct business objectives), it shows no signs of reducing the autonomy of BU leadership — which is a great thing in my book.
The head of the BU in which I work, Connected Life, is Marco Boerries. And he is one of the main reasons I’ve remained at Yahoo! through all of the shit that has gone on in the last 18 months or so (there’s a big part of your answer Kareem). This is where the siloes come in handy — no matter how crazy things have gotten in YMG or with Panama, those of us in Marco’s world have been able to focus on our goals and have largely had the tools to achieve them.
For those of you not in the know, the mission of the Connected Life BU is to extend Yahoo! “beyond the browser” — specifically, that means mobile, digital home, and the PC desktop. Working in Connected Life is all about taking bleeding edge products and technologies and bringing them to Yahoo!’s mainstream audience, which is extremely challenging but always exciting. And, to my initial point, it’s also a lot about executing on Marco’s personal vision for how consumers will use Yahoo! across devices. Now, normally that would irk someone as headstrong as me — having to follow someone else’s lead. And at times, Marco and I have had some pretty heated debates. But for me, and a lot of other people I respect, it’s pretty hard to disagree with most of what Marco wants to get done.
Back in November, Marco was asked to deliver the opening keynote at >play. It provided a rare public glimpse into the philsophy that drives the vision behind some of the most interesting (IMHO) things going on at Yahoo! today. I posted about it at the time, and vowed to put the full deck up at some point.
“It’s the Consumers, Stupid!” Technology = Consumer Empowerment The Internet is the Ultimate Democratizing Innovation Delivering Consumers What They Want is the Best Strategy Case Study — Digital Music: iPod/iTunes/iTMS = total vertical integration -> Plays for Sure = completely open ecosystem -> Zune = total vertical integration
There is Another Way You don’t have to build everything yourself, but you can’t leave it all to chance either Through close partnership with industry-leading network operators and OEM’s, Yahoo! is extending our consumer-centric view across the value chain
What Consumers Want It’s Not About Bringing the Device to the Internet It’s About Bringing the Internet into the Device Device-Optimized Experiences Leverage Features Unique to the Device Example — Flickr: Mobile Phone = Upload -> TV = View -> PC = Manage
What About Content? Publishers want their Content Distributed as Widely as their Business Model allows The Internet is Lowering Costs and Enabling New Business Models Content Delivery is no longer a Publisher Pain Point Content is no longer Scarce Consumers care about the Relevance of Content, not it’s Source — “Tier 1 to Me” “Context is King”
Social Relevance is the Key Too Much Choice is the new Consumer Pain Point Attention Management is the new Frontier of Innovation The Evolution of Attention Management — Web Content: Editorial = Y! Directory -> Automated = Google Search; Y! Search -> Social = del.icio.us; Digg; Y! MyWeb; Technorati
Like many, I had a bit of a time getting to where I was going this holiday. However unlike most of them, my issues were pretty much of my own doing. The 32.5 hours between when I first left my house and when I finally arrived in Aspen provided some interesting (mis)adventures. And thanks to Twitter (with a little help from Flickr), I managed to capture most of it in what I like to call my Web 2.0 travelogue (comments in [ ] were added after the fact).
[December 22: I called a cab for a 5:45pm pick-up to catch a 7:05pm. I was planning to check 1 bag (+2 carry-ons), but I had checked-in online and United now offers online bag check at SFO. The cab was there on time, but I didn’t get downstairs until 6pm. Then I realized I forgot my laptop charger. Ok, now it’s 6:05pm and we’re just leaving the Marina. As long as we get there in 20 minutes, I should be fine.
We actually make it there by 6:25pm. But, I forgot that this is the Friday night before Christmas and the airport is pretty packed. While United.com makes it sound like the online bag check is just a simple drop off, I spend 20 min in line before the agent tells me to just try to gate check the bag. I then end up arguing with a security guy for 5 min about whether or not I can bring 3 bags through security — guess who wins. It’s now 15 min before my flight is supposed to leave and they tell me I have no choice but to get in line to be rebooked.
Well, I know that means I’m not going anywhere until after Christmas. So, I furiously cram the contents of my backpack and the backpack, itself, into my other 2 bags. Get through security with 2 bulging bags, flight leaves in 5 min. Run to the monitors (keep in mind that one of these bags has my ski boots and all my ski clothes, so running is not easy) to see what gate my flight’s at. It’s delayed by 20 min, hallelujah! Get to the gate, and then the fun really starts…]
Me – Flight cancelled. But, at least they’re rescheduling it for tomorrow morning. Higher powers willing, I’ll still be on the slopes tomorrow. 07:49 PM December 22, 2006 from mobile
[The details of what transpired in the 13 hours between these two Twitter updates are, and will remain, somewhat shrouded in mystery. What I do know is that after arriving home from SFO around 8:30pm, I repacked my bags (2 back to 3) and booked a cab to pick me up at 4:30am the next morning. Then, I figured I’d pop by the bar for a drink or two. Well, two drinks turned into more, and the next thing I know I wake up 3 hours after my flight was supposed to leave.]
Me – Mile 350 – Mill City, NV; GPS Sez: arriving @ 3:42am; Mental State: Can’t wait to see Battle Mtn now, thanks to Cody. 03:19 PM December 23, 2006 from mobile
[Getting the Twitter updates from my friends definitely helped me make it through the unending bleakness of Northern Nevada’s high desert. Though, I was pret
ty disappointed to not see the “BM” when I passed Battle Mountain — Cody’s update really made me chuckle for a good 20 miles.]
[Ticket for going 100mph in Nevada = $347 — I guess it’s for the best that cruise control wouldn’t let me go any faster. If I wasn’t already regretting the decision to drive, this definitely put me over the top. But, there was no turning back at this point…]
Me – Mile 573 – Somewhere in Eastern Nevada; Mental State: Worried. Fuel light came on 32 miles from next gas station and it’s 27 degrees out. 06:02 PM December 23, 2006 from mobile
[What I didn’t mention was that I had passed a town with gas about 28 miles earlier and decided to keep going, even though the fuel gauge told me I only had enough gas to make it 4 miles past Wendover. Why would I do such a thing? Because I didn’t want to stop before I hit the 600 mile mark, duh!]
Me – Mile 603 – Wendover, UT; Mental State: So much to celebrate – 1/2 way there, made it to UT, didn’t run out of gas 😀 Beef jerky time! 06:43 PM December 23, 2006 from mobile
Me – Mile 730 – Salt Lake City, UT; Mental State: Wishing I had bought a car adapter for my iPod. Just heard Ferg-alicious for the 5th time. 08:16 PM December 23, 2006 from mobile
[I believe the final count was “Fergalicious” 6 times and “London Bridge” once. Why not change the channel, you ask? Well, in most of these places, other than the one top 40 station, every other channel (and usually there were only 2-3 others) was either Xmas music or people talking about Jesus.]
Me – Mile 1,004 – Grand Junction, CO; Mental State: Sad it’s dark out. This is where the really pretty part starts, and I can’t see it. Missed Hwy 6 too. 12:30 AM December 24, 2006 from mobile
Me – Mile 1,058 – Rifle, CO; Mental State: Stopped for a roadside “break”, and the snow, the cold, the sound of the river reminded me why I did this. 01:19 AM December 24, 2006 from mobile
Me – Mile 1,084 – Glenwood Springs, CO; Mental State: Running on fumes (me, not the car this time). But, only 40 miles to go. Sack up! 01:33 AM December 24, 2006 from mobile
Me – Mile 1,117 – Snowmass, CO; Mental State: Might be too excited about skiing tomorrow to sleep tonight. 02:05 AM December 24, 2006 from mobile
[Somehow, this update got delayed being posted on Twitter. So, I reordered it and used the time I sent it from my phone.]
Me – 1,123.8 miles, 15hr 37min (3.5hrs less than GPS said!), and one moving violation later, I’m here. Except for 1 small problem: I’m locked out. Lol! 02:23 AM December 24, 2006 from mobile
Me – Managed to get in the house and get some sleep. Woke up to 3+ in of fresh and still comin. Gettin on the gondola now. Ready to rip shit up! 10:20 AM December 24, 2006 from mobile
So, that’s it. I made it having only missed 1 day of skiing. That plus the cash costs of the rental car, gas, and, of course, the speeding ticket, seem a fair price to pay for my idiocy. But those who know me, know that it probably won’t keep me from doing something like this again (in fact, this reminds me of the time I went to North Carolina for a wedding and missed my flights going and coming back — spent more time in transit than at my destination).
Anyway, I’m glad to be here with my family (not to mention the nice snowy mountains). Here’s wishing everyone as happy, if less adventurous, holidays.
I had a somewhat synchronistic experience yesterday that made me want to write about this subject. First, I was reading my monthly Wired in good old paper form and came across this blurb:
Almost three years ago,Scott Kirwin was Wired‘s pissed off programmer (“The New Face of the Silicon Age,” issue 12.02). Tossed from his job and raging against globalization, he had launched the Information Technology Professionals Association of America to lobby against offshored work and imported workers. These days, Kirwin still works with computers. He’s just less pissed: In June, he shuttered the ITPAA. “I don’t view outsourcing as the big threat it was,” he says. What changed? Well, Kirwin found better work as an analyst and software architect. And he noticed that the talents that make him valuable – open-mindedness, a willingness to take risks, flashes of ingenuity – couldn’t be reduced to a spec sheet and emailed to Hyderabad. If more Americans develop such abilities, Kirwin believes, the use of Indian programmers could even improve our economic outlook. Outsourcing isn’t going away, he says. “But in the end, America may be stronger for it.”
This happy-ending story got me thinking about a blog post with the first half of this one’s title. In my professional life, I constantly find myself arguing on behalf of disruptive change. So, I am always looking for examples to help me in what generally devolve into emotional arguments instead of rational discussions. The concept of creative destruction has been part of the discussion of economic theory for over 50 years. But, the human mind (while incredibly able to adapt) is inherently change-averse when it comes to the underlying assumptions of one’s daily life.
This reflexive defense mechanism is probably a good idea in this case, because Schumpeter‘s theory is a macroeconomic phenomenon — it only holds true at the scale of entire industries or economies, and it provides little consolation to those individuals and firms destroyed so that others might be created. Which is where the second act of synchronicity and the second half of this post’s title come in. Last night, I decided to watch one of the two Netflix movies I’ve been holding on to for the last 6 months (you’re welcome, Netflix). Roger & Me is Michael Moore‘s first film, and it just happens to be a documentary of the microeconomic impact of creative destruction in action — specifically, the devestation of Flint, MI in the late ’80’s due to drastic changes in the US auto industry.
While I don’t particularly care for Michael Moore (even though I am a liberal Democrat) and I disagree with his fundamental premise in the film (that the auto-industry “owed” the people of Flint because that’s where it began), I found his account of the personal and social impact of these events to be extremely poignant. The trade-offs between the advancement of the greater good and the cost to individuals are never easy (John Rawls proposed a theoretical means of making these decisions with his difference principle, but no one has figured out yet how to put it into practice systematically).
I really don’t have a point to make with this post, per se. I guess I said what I had to say with the title alone. Progress is generally good, but how good really depends on how one goes about it. There is a human element to value creation, something that won’t show up on any balance sheet. I think good leaders know this and guide their actions to maximize their own concepts of this holistic value (objectively measuring such value is precisely where implementation of Rawlsian principles starts to break-down), and not just the financial bottom-line. As Kant said, a human being “must be treated never as a mere means but as…an end at the same time.”
One potentially happy sign that progress is improving on itself comes from a comparison of these two examples of creative destruction. Only now, more than 28 years after GM started eliminating jobs in Flint, is the city showing evidence of a sustainable social and economic transition from its roots as the birthplace of the world’s largest auto-maker. Yet, those who feared similar economic devastation from the rise of software development outsourcing appear to be thriving just three short years later. While this is hardly an apples-to-apples comparison, it is encouraging to think (right or wrong) that in only two decades change has actually become a little easier.
In the words of our Engineering Manager, “hey so now that you’re famous, can you put the job description up on your blog?” I actually did post these job descriptions before, but I didn’t quite have the same readership way back then (i.e. before last Wednesday). So, here it goes again: the Yahoo! Widgets team is looking for client developers with Win32, C/C++ and Carbon/Cocoa experience. If you know anyone who is interested, please have them apply via the links below or email bmayes -at- yahoo-inc.com
And finally, a little known irony that was overlooked in last week’s feeding frenzy and of which I was just reminded today: I’m still the face of Yahoo! Investor Relations. ROTFL!!! That’s been up there for ~2 years now, and I had totally forgotten about it — I wonder if now they’ll take it down or leave it up longer?
When I wrote that post last night (with Kevin standing over my shoulder), I had no idea it would blow up like *this*. I really didn’t have any ulterior motives at the time, I was just so incensed reading all the punditry (as wrong as some of the bloggers are getting things, it’s the commenters who really piss me off) that I felt compelled to speak out.
So now that my day of Internet celebrity is coming to a close, I thought I would preserve some of my favorite moments for posterity:
Making the top story on Techmeme (pictured), and Ian‘s comment: “i think that’s the first time i’ve seen a 360 post make techmeme”
But, what I’m truly happiest about is all the positive feedback I’ve received from current and former Yahoos and people not even affiliated with the company. With the critics being so vocal of late, I’m glad to see that there are still some fans around. And I hope more of them will start to speak up.
Ok, now back to my normal ramblings that no one else generally cares about (and sticking to my usual rule of not blogging about work-related matters).
So, I’m probably breaking a ton of rules by doing this. But, f@$k it! Here is the transcript, verbatim (I rewound the webcast several times just to get it right), of Terry’s closing comments at today’s re-org all-hands:
“At the next all-hands. Just as a reminder. I’m sorry I didn’t do it today. I’m gonna put up there all of the press reports on how Yahoo! was going out of business 5 years ago. And of how we were gonna be swallowed up by AOL, owned by Time-Warner, and by Microsoft, and by everybody else. And Yahoo! looked like it had a dim future. Well those headlines, of course, were used to wrap a lot of fish in a lot of people’s houses, as the expression goes. And they were all full of shit, and they had no idea what we had planned for them. And they do not now as well!
So, we could read about how I’m gonna join some retirement home. And we could read about how the company doesn’t have a vision. And we could read about how we can’t do this and we can’t do that. Trust me, they will be as full of shit this time as they were last time.”
To hell with what Valleywag, TechCrunch, or WSJ say. It’s easy to sit back and Monday-morning-quarterback the leadership of a multi-billion dollar international company in the fastest moving and most competitive market that has likely *ever* existed. Today was one of the most exciting days in my two and a half years at Yahoo!, and I know a lot of people who feel the same.
As someone who has witnessed many of Yahoo!’s dysfunctions first-hand, I am frankly surprised at how right on they got it with this re-org. The changes that were announced this week and the ones that will come over the next few months are pretty much exactly what I think needs to be done to enable Yahoo! to realize its full potential. What seems to have been lost in the media’s Yahoo!-bashing dogpile is the fact that we are still the dominant player on most of the web. Yes, we’re #2 in search and Google is currently monetizing much more effectively than we are. But, they keep trying to get into our core businesses with very little success. Why if Google is so awesome, are they trying to do all the things that pokey old Yahoo! does? Hrmmm…must mean we actually do have some valuable assets. While we have a lot of improvements to make in certain areas, I firmly believe that Yahoo! still has the opportunity to approach our market from a position of strength. And I think this re-org is a *huge* step in that direction.
As for the Terry-bashing, you are all idiots. It seems like the tech world is getting its hubris back in bubble 2.0 and pundits are dying (again) to prove that an outsider can’t possibly have what it takes to succeed on the Internet. Schadenfreud is very easy to spot, and it is ugly. I hate to break it to all of you, but the Internet isn’t about technology. Cisco is a technology company, Yahoo! is a consumer services company — the fact that those services are delivered via IP is just a detail. The people who fault Terry for not knowing how IP switching works might as well have criticized Ted Turner for not knowing how to install a cable head-end. Technology savvy can be hired (and I won’t defend Yahoo!’s track record on that), but true leadership is something more.
What our company needs right now from a leader is resilience, defiance, and strength. And I couldn’t think of anyone better than Mr. Semel to provide that. All those idiots speculating on Terry’s departure (which has been talked about since he got here), have no understanding of the man. Do you think that after WB he ever had to work another day in his life? Let alone 70 hour weeks (I know when he leaves, and it is frequently after my 7:30pm shuttle)? Think about the kind of man who takes one of the most sterling records in recent executive management history and steps into a turnaround role at a company and in an industry with no certainty for the future. He may not be as bellicose as some other CEOs in tech. But, Terry is not the one to run from a fight — he runs to them. Right now we don’t need a leader who invented some cool technology when he was 25, we need the guy who spent 25 years climbing the corporate ladder all the way from the bottom to become arguably the most respected leader in one of the most cut-throat businesses in the world.
I’m glad to see that the anti-“UGC” (the term, not the concept) meme that started back in April is finally getting some mainstream (if you can consider Valleywag mainstream) airplay now that our very own Web 2.0 poster-boy Stewart Butterfield is speaking out.
“Every time I hear “UGC”, a little part of me — and everything I’ve ever believed in — dies.”
Amen, brother! But, let’s give credit where it’s due. Derek Powazek originated this meme (as far as I know) back in April with his post “Death to User-Generated Content” (a title I just realized I unintentionally/subconsciously repurposed in a post last week). Here’s how Derek breaks it down:
User: One who uses. Like, you know, a junkie. Generated: Like a generator, engine. Like, you know, a robot. Content: Something that fills a box. Like, you know, packing peanuts.
So what’s user-generated content? Junkies robotically filling boxes with packing peanuts. Lovely.
Calling the beautiful, amazing, brilliant things people create online “user-generated content” is like sliding up to your lady, putting your arm around her and whispering, “Hey baby, let’s have intercourse.”
I have subsequently posted twice on this topic, here and here. And I know from conversations with others who I respect that there is a broad consensus among the people who get “it” that the people who throw around the term “UGC” like so much “2.0” clearly don’t. I’m glad that this meme has now shown up on the only tech blog (or blog, period) that these “corp development morons” (Denton’s words, not mine) likely read. Maybe now they will be too ashamed to keep dropping it at every opportunity.
And I’m not at all upset that this is (probably only) being talked about in the context of people hating on Michael Arrington (in real-time, no less). I sat through the first 5 minutes of the panel in question, and that guy is a pompous prick. It probably didn’t help that the sycophantic b-school student introducing him called him the “King of Web 2.0” and he didn’t even consider blushing at such an absurd statement. The organizers of >play, who did an excellent job, had an innovative real-time feedback system powered by Mozes that enabled the audience to text their questions to the panel and have them show up on the big screen. In the true spirit of community participation emblematic of his reign over Web 2.0, Arrington’s first request was to turn the system off because it gave him less personal control over the conversation (a request the organizers, surprisingly and happily, refused). Then he proceeded to launch into a totally premeditated and exceedingly smug attack on Micki Krimmel and Revver, a person and a company for which I have a lot of respect.
Arrington’s relatively simplistic premise — of which he was oh-so-proud — was that the popularity of sites like YouTube was built on the back of illegal use of copyrighted content and that, as such, there was no legitimate business model to be had in this space — basically he was saying that no one wants to watch truly user-generated content. I wanted to remind him that Apple’s entire billion-dollar digital music business was built on illegal use of copyrighted content (iTunes and the iPod pre-date the iTunes Music Store by several years), and explain to him that this whole Web 2.0 thing that he apparently rules is all about the fact that you don’t need to aggregate large audiences to build a successful business. But, I left to go watch some football instead.
P.S. I managed to sneak Randy‘s term “Context is King” into Marco’s keynote this morning. It was far and away the best delivered and received speech I’ve heard from an executive at a conference in a while, way to go Marco! Maybe if Arrington had shown up for that as well, instead of just for his panel, he would have had a clue. I’ll link to the deck when it goes online.
Yesterday, while still in the place that spawned theseposts, I stumbled onto this post by Micki Krimmel, a fellow film industry vet (and LA BarCamper) who now works at Revver and writes for Worldchanging.com. Micki’s post on “Keeping the New Media new” is a great primer for citizen content creators and consumers on what they can do to preserve the open nature of entertainment on the Internet in a world in which conventional entertainment incumbents are taking an active interest in “user-generated content.”
And, the discussion in the comments would make Hegel proud:
Thesis A – Content is king.
Antithesis A – Content’s importance is only derived from the control it has over context (i.e. distribution / consumption).
Synthesis A /Thesis B – Context is king.
Antithesis B – Context is created by conversation / community.
Synthesis B – “If context is king and conversation is the queen mum, then consumers are the subjects who give this monarchy its power by investing it with their sovereignty.”
My two not uncontroversial assertions based on this are:
Randy, for coining, as far as I know, the phrase “context is king,” which is the title of a presentation he’s been giving around Yahoo! (and has promised to blog about soon) – and for continuing to tirelessly represent the voice of the consumer.
Russell, for the discussions that honed my thinking on DRM strategy (and for this post, which in hindsight is a case in point for the better product and execution beating the seemingly better strategy).
Kareem, Heather, and all the others responsible for BarCampLA – a venue for discussions on the intersection of media and technology much more powerful than any Digital Media Summit Yahoo! has paid $2,000 to send me to.