I completely agree that user assembled experiences will never be the “whole enchilada” but I do think they will increasingly become the norm. My GUESS is that the open, fragmented, user assembled, stream model will soon (within the next 10 years perhaps) be the primary way media is experienced while the heavily planned, packaged, rigid, issue based, editorial calendar model will begin to seem solipsistic, closed, and unresponsive to external stimulation — Rocks amidst a thriving ecology of interaction; cold and dead artifacts that once flowed with a molten intensity yet now have cooled to the point where from time to time they provide a fleeting utility, but rarely ignite true wonder.

What I’m waiting to see isn’t the next new reader to hit the market - I’m waiting to see the monthly magazine that ditches it’s editorial calendar and produces each issue based on the responses and reactions to the last. I’m waiting for the monthly magazine that values emergence, innovation and improvisation as primary editorial methodologies. I’m waiting for the monthly magazine that realizes they are participants in a larger conversation and not just reading scrolls from the mountain top. I’m waiting for the monthly magazine that recognizes that selling display ads will never fully fund the work they do and starts to truly nurture the actual relationships between their constituents. And most of all I’m waiting for the monthly magazine that can (with quickness and agility) internally produce the multitude of of outputs, platforms, and streams in which all of this takes place

The change that necessitates these kinds of reactions from publishers really has nothing to do with print or digital technology - this is social and cultural change that may be technologically driven, yet is not purely technological in its nature. Advancing technology is a cause and not an effect - it’s a red herring that is distracting publishers from the truly amazing sociocultural shifting at work.

My advice to publishers - for whatever it’s worth - is to stop obsessing over technology and start obsessing over how that technology is affecting people. After all, the real change isn’t in people’s hands - it’s in their heads.

I like what you say about how a lot of content distribution is now decentralized, peer to peer, and often assembled by users not publishers. I agree with you on all that. But I do not believe this will become the whole enchilada.

There are many content experiences that are better consumed in a designed and packaged form. Many years ago I worked on a project to develop programming for Time Warner’s Cube system. At the time, many thought consumers would watch more TV shows it they could pick how the shows ended. This was a massive flop. Some experiences loose value when they are self directed. Also, if you ae new to a topic an expereince guided by an editor can be far mroe valuble.

Decentralized, network oriented, peer to peer communication is good…but not or everything.
Designed prepackaged media environments are good…but not for everything.

If there is one thing we have learned about the digital media world is that choice is king. Consumers are going to choose what works best for their specific needs.

Bring on the digital readers!