



Comment viewing options


Did it say anything?

So what was the message? If something can be said forward and backward and it is the same it must be true?

Not the same...

...if you didn't see that, then the message is lost on you.


It is different when viewed forward or backwards but there is no real information or insight there. This is getting passed around publishing houses because it is reassuring to hear that you are not going to die. But just because the words "you are not going to die" and put into a cute video does not mean it is not going to happen

It's not INSTEAD, it's AND

Did television or cinema put an end to plays? Did recordings mean the end of live concerts? Did books mean the end of the spoken word?
Yes, we have new formats. People will use them when it makes sense to use them. But we all know many situations where the fabulously portable, attractive, and mostly affordable format of the printed page ROCKS!
Sometimes I wonder just who is so obsessed with trends -- the young or simply the harried, careless writers who still call themselves journalists.

You don't get to be a Guru by applauding multiplicity

Since I've been touting "And Not Or" for *way* too many years now, I obviously agree--but I've also seen the realities:

1. Gurus and hotshot high-fee keynote speakers make Big Pronouncements, and that usually means deathwatches--declaring X dead because Y comes along. You don't get to be a Guru by recognizing and applauding "and thinking."

2. Journalists love conflict...because readers seem to do so. "Ebooks may expand the set of reaching choices" is ho-hum; "Ebooks will KILL print books" is exciting.

3. There are those--aided by gurus, to be sure--who have adopted as articles of faith the concept that Digital Is Always Better and Digital Always Win. It's always hard to argue with faith.

Print is Dead. Let's have a party. Bury Dead. Live the Future

past / future

bury the dead

live the future

Syndicate content