Known Associates
By: Shelly Brisbin
In this month’s issue, you can read a news story about the founding of The Association of Downloadable Media (ADM) a group founded by representatives from 15 major organizations involved in podcasting. the heavy hitters on the steering committee represent Apple, NPR, PodShow, PodTech and others. The goal is to develop metrics for measuring audience and advertising effectiveness.
Soon after the ADM’s announcement hit the wires, some podcasters began questioning whether the ADM’s model (high-powered board, hefty membership dues, corporate-focused mission) was truly best for the nascent podcast industry. Podango’s Scott Bourne blogged about it, and says he received more than 70 positive responses within 48 hours of his first post. That discussion of the need for a bottom-up association for the podcasting industry follows discussions that have been going on since last year’s Podcast & New Media Expo (PME), says Bourne.
Now, the conversation has spawned an alternative to the ADM, under the working title Association of Podcasters & Online Media Producers, It has its own list of heavy-hiter backers, including Michael Geoghegan of GigaVox, Leo Laporte of the TWIT.TV, Michael R. Mennenga: of Farpoint Media, and Gretchen Vogelzang of The MommyCast.
The group has put up a survey asking your opinions about how a podcasting trade group should be organized and run. You can take the survey (which asks for your name and affiliations) through August 13. Be warned that many of the early questions are unabashedly leading.
To wit:
An organization serving the podcasting and new media communities should embrace “web 2.0” ideologies of openness, community involvement, and maximized individual contribution as it forms and operates.
Strongly Agree……Strongly Disagree
Survey results will be sent to all respondents, and publicized widely via Bourne’s blog, and via other media outlets. Both the ADM and the alliterative group plan organizational meetings at this year’s Podcast & New Media Expo, to be held September 28-30, in Ontario, CA.
Finally, this blog will not take a position in support of one industry trade group over another. For one thing, the diverging points of view feel too much like a family squabble. Not something to be gotten in the middle of, not by me. Perhaps the two groups will eventually find common ground, perhaps not. Now’s the time for ideas and arguments, organization and goal-setting. We will cover both groups, and any other related developments, and, assuming there are no schedule conflicts, I’ll attend both organizational meetings and let you know how things go.
August 7th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Thanks for posting a link to the survey. It’s unfortunate that you took one question on the survey - isolated it - and implied that it was somehow sinisterly devised to be leading. Hopefully your readers will take the entire survey and the opportunity to share whatever they like or don’t like about our ideas regardless. And I truly hope you will take no position of support of one group over the other, but given the tenor of your post here, I am not sure I see total evidence of that promise.
August 7th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Hi Scott,
Even if I had chosen to take a position FOR the group you’re helping to organize, I would have felt it important to point out that some of the survey questions are leading. Because they are. And I don’t think those particular questions will be helpful to you in gathering the information I know you want from the community about what they want from an industry association. People are smart. Give them open-ended questions and you’ll attract more engaged, independent-minded folks who are motivated by all the great goals you espouse for the organization.
August 7th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Shelly we have given people the opportunity to provide us with any information they want to. The survey has to have a starting point and an ending point - there has to be some goal post. You took one question, made it look like there were only two answers (when there are more than two since you can select a range) and you seem to have an issue that you decided to bring up in a blog post not when you had me on the phone. Strikes me that what you were doing wasn’t out of a desire to be helpful. Hopefully, any bias you have against us won’t transmit to the people reading the survey.
August 8th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
“Finally, this blog will not take a position in support of one industry trade group over another.”
Shelly, I had to laugh when I saw your statement. In the August issue of Blogger & Podcaster magazine, 4 entire pages were dedicated to a trade association called the International Blogging & New Media Association.
Page 25: Ad for BlogWorld & New Media Expo, run by IBNMA
Page 34-35: Ad and membership application for IBNMA
Page 45: Column (or ad?) by the president of the IBNMA
That is 4 full pages out of a 48 page magazine dedicated completely to one trade association. And each issue seems to be about the same. That’s a lot of by any standard.
So a couple questions, since you brought up the subject of neutrality:
1. Is IBNMA a paid advertiser of the magazine?
2. If the answer is yes, is that why their president gets a
coveted columnist slot?
3. If the answer is no, then why is IBMNA getting so much space each month when there are so many other industry associations that would be happy to get the free coverage?
4. And is there any business relationship between your magazine and IBNMA and, if so, what is it?
Thanks in advance for your addressing these questions.
August 9th, 2007 at 7:27 am
[…] « Known Associates […]
August 10th, 2007 at 5:37 pm
[…] Does anyone else find this deja-vu-ish? “UK armed forces banned from blogging” . . . Blogger & Podcaster: Shelly asked some pointed questions about a dust-up in the podcasting community over standards and […]
August 10th, 2007 at 5:37 pm
[…] Does anyone else find this deja-vu-ish? “UK armed forces banned from blogging” . . . Blogger & Podcaster: Shelly asked some pointed questions about a dust-up in the podcasting community over standards and […]