A Quote by Randy Falco

I don't think there are too many traditional media guys who really understood what the new digital media is about. — © Randy Falco
I don't think there are too many traditional media guys who really understood what the new digital media is about.
I'm worried about the traditional media, but I think the new media is a plus for democracy.
My definition of media? 'Anything which owns attention.' This could be a game or, perhaps, a platform. Ironically, the media tends to associate media with publishing - digital or otherwise - which, in turn, is too narrow a way to consider not only the media but also the reality of the competitive landscape and media-focused innovation.
I've talked about how the future of journalism will be a hybrid future where traditional media players embrace the ways of new media (including transparency, interactivity, and immediacy) and new media companies adopt the best practices of old media (including fairness, accuracy, and high-impact investigative journalism).
I want to find the intersection between digital media and traditional media and be pioneering the endeavor to merge the two worlds.
I'm reading the way a lot of technology executives have decried 'gatekeepers' and 'traditional media,' and that one of the promises of 'new media' was that it would break the chokehold that old media companies had on public opinion.
New media's not very old, hence the word new, so we don't know a lot of things about new media and by the time you've taught it it's probably out of date. I think it's much more beneficial to have an experiential lesson versus a classroom lesson in new media.
The traditional media does not have the kind of reporting muscle on the ground that it used to. I was very hopeful that the new digital media operations would pick up that slack, and a lot of them are trying and they're doing creative things. But none of them can scale appropriately to have enough journalistic firepower as well.
In the founding days of the Constitution, the purpose of the media was to make sure that powerful government officials were held accountable. It really was. I mean, it was founders who hated the media like everybody else hates the media, but they understood the role they played. This media long ago when it comes to Hillary Clinton/Bill Clinton and the Democrat Party? No, no, no, no. They're the Democrat Party now. There is no media.
PR got to be much bigger because of the emergence of digital media. Now we have hundreds of people who are, in a sense, manning embassies for Facebook and Twitter for brands. So the business in effect has morphed from pitching stories to traditional media, to working with bloggers, Twitter, Facebook and other social media, and then putting good content up on owned websites.
I think traditional media is vitally important, I think there are a lot of benefits to working in traditional media, and I enjoy doing working with real paint when I get the chance.
I question the premise that digital is necessarily the enemy of traditional media. In many ways, it presents us with enormous opportunities.
Vladimir Putin understood, from the Communist era when he was a KGB officer, that the Russian propaganda system of targeting Western media - that in the digital world, you could easily pull the Western media around by a nose ring.
We are not going to get rid of the digital media - nor should we want to - and so our challenge is to use the media to determine the truth, rather than to let the media obfuscate matters.
There are fewer media writers in traditional settings. That is a beat that many legacy brands cannot afford. On the other hand technology writers are writing about media in ways they didn't before. As a consequence of the shift, there is less interest in many ways in the activities at some media. If you look at coverage of media as whole, the decision-making at the three broadcast networks and the cable channels, for instance, is much less of a focus than it once was. The guts of what goes on at Fox or CNN or MSNBC probably has less impact than it once did. It certainly gets less attention.
I don't think there's a... boundary between digital media and print media. Every magazine is doing an online version.
Yeah, look, I think what we have with the social media and the digital media, and all the telecommunications we have today is a big megaphone, amplification.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!