So many of the people at the Tech Policy Summit where old friends, contacts meet along the way in the last decade or so or folks who have been around the tech policy niche who I hadn't yet had the opportunity to meet yet.
On the other hand, there were the four social media leaders on the on today's Policy 2.0 panel with moderator Kara Swisher. Not exactly the usual suspects at these types of gigs (which, btw, isn't necessarily a good thing). On the panel was:
Jonathan Abrams of Socializer (and Friendster's founder)
Reid Hoffman of LinkedIn
Jay Adelson of Digg
David Sifry of Technorati
One big take-away was that the four were mostly (and appropriately) talking about media policy and business models -- not classic tech policy. It just indicative of how Silicon Valley is also transforming into "Media Valley" -- credit goes to my lunch partner today, Tom Foremski, for the thought.
My big picture thought though as I was driving away from two days at this event was that the old-guard of tech policy (basically any company founded before 2001) is almost exclusively still using traditional communications platforms to get their point across in DC and other policy centers. While, those born after the bust like the four companies on this panel, almost exclusively use new media to get their viewpoints across. As I mentioned the other day, it's high time for the industry to embrace a hybrid model.
User-generated paraphrased panel content after the jump...
Copyright:
Jay A: Digg doesn't cache like Google. Not has every been contacted for any sort
of copyright issue.
But the issue is going to come up. We use creative commons for the repurposing.
We think Creative Commnons is the wave of the future.
Jonathan A: Most people want to be indexed by others based on fear and control -- like what the record companies are doing. Companies are calling us to take down and put up at the same time.
What would you do if you were running a big media company...
DS: The big shift with the media companies happened right after the 2004 election. Big companies feared the new media then later decided that these people are potentially the best customers. W Post, Der Spiegel, etc, talked to Technorati -- learned the rules of the Internet that by sending someone
away would bring them back more. Bloggers learned that by blogging on Post articles they would get more attention. Then the Post got way more traffic from blogs.
Jonathan A: BitTorrent announced some lame deal with Hollywood. If Hollywood thinks that doing a deal with BitTorrent, the company, is going to do anything to stop illegitmate traffic, they have no idea what they are doing.
Jay A: But, the jury is still out on this. If it is easy and safe, some consumers may decide they want it.
DS: People are becoming well known now w/o traditional media structures thanks to the Internet.
Jonathan A: Most artists I talked to want exposure first. What is going to be the most effective doing this. There is going to be a coexistence of traditional media supply chains and the new way of doing things -- who will bring a greater percentage of revenue to the artist or journalist.
Will DRM be gone in a year?
Consensus: No, but it's already irrelevant.
Privacy:
Is there danger with all this vast amount of information being collected?
RH: The pictures of you dancing drunk on the Mexican restaurant table will get on the Web. 50% of what is digital will get on the Web.
Everyone can be a publisher on the Web and this will be an issue.
Jonathan A: This is a generational issue. With Friendster, I would say that this is a free Web site and you don't have to use it. But, then I hear about super sensitive material being stolen from a laptop at a big company or a federal agency. What is worse?
People would choose having Google or Yahoo content exposed rather than health care records.
DS; Yes, this is generational. There is a greater sense of a freedom and openness. And, I am so glad they didn't have digital cameras when I was in college.
What happens in 30 years when a Supreme Court Nominee had a MySpace page?
There is a malleability of identity.
When facial recognition technology gets out, things get really interesting. That's when you can find me drunk on Flickr when I wasn't previously identified.
We either become more puritan or more exhibitionist.
Jay A: Since we can shape policy, remember that identity has various levels on the Internet. People don't use their real names. There are various layers.
Privacy is going to be limited to specifics, like your social security number.
There is a movement towards Open ID, that you, the individual gets to choose what is broadcasted over the medium. It's not a centralized address book. I am much more interested in a set of open standards.
Steven Levy: Any movement toward your models for presidential elections?
Jay A: We are seeing our site used a lot for analysis. We aren't predictive now, but hopefully over time. We have 15 to 20 million users coming to our site in a month, we need a lot more.
We are a couple years from a true collaborative web.
Jonathan A: Republicans don't seem to be as interested in using these.
RH: Republicans actually do better in the organizational aspect online.
Walt Mossberg: There is a declining audience for serious reading now. What do you think? You need 5000 words to unravel scandal.
Jay A: In my audience, they are reading more than they used to. Are they reading longer pieces? I don't know, but we are seeing teenagers consumer sophisticated content.
DS: This starts with education to read those hard words. Technorati was created to hopefully create a sense of civics in the US.
Jonathan A: I think the audience is there, but there is a risk of alienating the audience if they don't trust the source.
RH: There is a raised bar in making serious content easy to consume.
This was very nice. I enjoyed meeting your dad through your matured perception of him. When we are younger we often don't realize that which we appreciated in our parents all along, but weren't aware in the throes of our youth and ignorance.
Posted by: bar table | June 23, 2011 at 06:05 PM
Words can't do this fine piece justice - I'd give you one of Linda's hugs if she'd lend me one.
Posted by: jack stands | June 23, 2011 at 06:08 PM
I don't know how so many people could get so many things wrong in such a short period of time, or how you could have spent so much time watching them utter one inanity after another....or why you wasted the effort.
Posted by: Base cap | June 23, 2011 at 06:11 PM
Just the fact that you noticed your anxiety about his need for autonomy makes you a great mother to Jake. Be sensitive to this as you are but I would keep a sharp eye out for him. I only say that because I am a nervous mom myself.
Posted by: battery cable | June 23, 2011 at 06:12 PM
Great story! I'm not really a big hockey fan, but I sometimes have to pretend to be interested in it, because I have so many Canadian friends...
Posted by: non-woven fabric | June 23, 2011 at 06:13 PM
A really touching piece, Mary. Yeah...I remember the first time I saw my dad scared. I was still a teenager and it petrified me.
Posted by: power strips | June 23, 2011 at 06:19 PM
The thing I was happy about was that his dutiful wife was not there at his side. She left for Africa. What is sad is that there is now a child involved in all of this
Posted by: crystal gifts | June 23, 2011 at 06:21 PM
This strikes me as an extended rationalization regarding why this particular book isn't worth the effort.
Posted by: crystal box | June 23, 2011 at 06:22 PM
Thanks for your comments. That time on the road with my dad was actually pretty magical.
Posted by: children umbrella | June 23, 2011 at 06:24 PM
This is very sweet. Take your happiness where you find it, I say.
Posted by: Outdoor umbrella | June 23, 2011 at 06:27 PM
Louis Vuitton "from scratch" minimalist philosophy
Posted by: renlewei | August 30, 2011 at 08:47 PM