<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Media Megatrends</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.futurist.com/2007/12/05/media-megatrends/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.futurist.com/2007/12/05/media-megatrends/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://www.futurist.com/2007/12/05/media-megatrends/#comment-30806</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2008 13:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futurist.com/2007/12/05/media-megatrends/#comment-30806</guid>
		<description>This is a very interesting topic.  I have been research changes in media and how the iPhone will blur the producer/user line with potential advancements in software and cellular tech.  This plus the release of Google's Android Open Source operating system opens a whole new realm of possibilities in media.

On the concept of trust, we crossed that boundary in the 1980's without even looking back.  Very rarely, since my day son the NSFnet, did we question the content although perhaps we should have.  Trust is implicit in how we feel about the person telling it.  The web simply allows us, at times, to put lipstick on the pig and make the information look credible.  How to develop trust in digital media is probably best handled by the social networks themselves.  For example, I know I trust certain sellers on Ebay more than others based on comments and the ratings they get.  Do I know that these are not just friends trusting friends (i.e working the system)? No but as the ratings and comments go up across a varied geography I get a sense of security.  The same would need to apply to eMedia also although how much do we really trust Fox or MSNBC when all is said an done?

If someone could figure out a way to make money being a media watchdog and then posting a trust moniker on certain news sites, it might add to credibility, that plus listener/readership voting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a very interesting topic.  I have been research changes in media and how the iPhone will blur the producer/user line with potential advancements in software and cellular tech.  This plus the release of Google&#8217;s Android Open Source operating system opens a whole new realm of possibilities in media.</p>
<p>On the concept of trust, we crossed that boundary in the 1980&#8217;s without even looking back.  Very rarely, since my day son the NSFnet, did we question the content although perhaps we should have.  Trust is implicit in how we feel about the person telling it.  The web simply allows us, at times, to put lipstick on the pig and make the information look credible.  How to develop trust in digital media is probably best handled by the social networks themselves.  For example, I know I trust certain sellers on Ebay more than others based on comments and the ratings they get.  Do I know that these are not just friends trusting friends (i.e working the system)? No but as the ratings and comments go up across a varied geography I get a sense of security.  The same would need to apply to eMedia also although how much do we really trust Fox or MSNBC when all is said an done?</p>
<p>If someone could figure out a way to make money being a media watchdog and then posting a trust moniker on certain news sites, it might add to credibility, that plus listener/readership voting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
