Follow the Money

Several people have already dissected this David Coursey anti-podcasting article. Mike Dunn, for example, really ripped a new one on it and Coursey (citing me and the term “knee jerk off” in the process). Check out the anti-populist condescending sentiment in this:

Personal Podcasting, like personal blogs, is a fad and will fade. Just like personal sites were a fad in the early days of the Web. People experiment because content creation can be fun, sort of like finger-painting was back in preschool, but people also run out of creative energy, and the maintenance of a site, blog or Podcast becomes a chore. And the content gets boring, and the audience goes away.

Pretty much, anyone that I’ve seen express this sentiment is in the business of being more authoritative than the “common man” and whose livelihood is threatened by a world in which they are not elevated about the hoi polloi. The stupider and more condescending the argument (such as self-expression as “finger-painting”), the more desperate it sounds. David Coursey, if you want to prove you are better than the citizen media produced by the great unwashed, you might want to write better stuff than this phoned-in, auto-pilot stuff.

10 Replies to “Follow the Money”

  1. I do not see anything wrong with the analogy of finger painting, Dave. I do find YOUR remarks rather condescending, however. Grow up. and give some consideration to what the guy says. No one has a crystal ball. Niether of you have any idea where this is headed.

  2. It sounds more like a statement about his own childhood than anything else. I can understand his skepticism to some extent, but the insult by commparing it to finger painting is clearly a jab meant to cause the effect he is expecting.

    You can’t stop a movement, especially if it’s a bowel movement!

  3. John, let me ask you a question. Who do consider more mature, the kid in the sandbox or the kid kicking around in it and telling the other that sandboxes are for losers?

    I believe Dave did give some consideration to what the guy had to say. He considered and thought, “Wow, what an asshat.” I believe this to be true becasue it mirrors my own experience.

    You are absolutely correct in the statement, “Niether (sic) of you have any idea where this is headed.” Which leads one to wonder why Coursey would feel the need to try to piss in the podcasting Post Toasties unless, of course, he had something to lose if it succeeds. Which is what I think the point of Dave’s post was.

    You have an odd way of saying “I agree with everything Dave said”, but I’m sure he appreciates it.

  4. “Anti-populist”? Don’t make me laugh out loud. Who is Slusher? The podcast propaganda minister? Guess there is no room today for soiling the holy alter of podcasting. All bow-down and worship the gods of geekdom now.

    If Coursey can be accused of anything, it is of being “anti-vanity”. And he has made a convincing case for the state of podcasting content today. That is not the same as dumping on podcasting in general and I think he argued that well.

    It’s funny how, when pointed out, the vanity in us all gets so vehemently rebuked. The pointing out that is.

    Lesson, Dave: Don’t start acting like the establishment you so cutely and often critique.

    John, does this sound like a funny way to agree with Dave, too? I think you have some snad in yer eye, son.

  5. Mr. Devoe: No that doesn’t sound like a funny way to agree. It doens’t sound much like anything, in fact. I would love to understand your point, I just can’t find it.

    Your “gods of geekdom” bit, as scathing a criticism as it was, is a bit weak considering the source. Let me remind you of some words from a sage individual:

    A weblogger that dismisses podcasting as inflicting tripe on the world is like someone dressed as Mr. Spock giving Dr. Who fans shit for being dorks. If you can’t tell that you are soaking in the same broth, perhaps you aren’t as insightful as you let on.

    I believe those words are applicable to both you and Mr Coursey equally. I’m not sure if either of you are webloggers, but that really doesn’t matter. I’ve read your comments and Mr. Coursey’s articles and tripe spewers art thou both.

  6. James…..I called you “John”. You did not get that either. So far you have not gotten much.

    You and your pal (mentor? guru? maharishi? zen master?), Slusher, have not answered the critique with anything other than name-calling. Silly boys. We are talking about c-o-n-t-e-n-t, spelled with a “c” and how it often has a tendency to fade. Read: “podfade”, to quote a Scott Fletcherism.

    Example: Chronicles has just faded off my aggregator. BTW, Madge dismissed podcasting as a bowel movement in her post. Do you agree with that or accept it?

    I do blog. But you’d be out of your league posting on my site.

  7. John, if you want to get higher priority, try acting less trollish. I’d respond to your critiques but I don’t actually find anything of substance to respond to. You call names and then accuse others of name-calling, etc. Coursey didn’t argue anything convincingly. As Mark says so eloquently in the article tracked back above, he’s not even correct about the present day, which makes the odds longer that he’s correct about the future. No one knows how this will play out, but when he says podcasts will stop just like blogs did, that pretty much says it all about the correctness of his prediction.

    My point is consistent with what I’ve said all along, which is the opposite of what you are imputing to me. My message all along has been “You can do this to, and someone wants to hear what you have to say.” Every day I hear voices that previously weren’t speaking to me. Coursey claims that will stop because this is hard work best left to the pros. I claim that self-expression is for everyone, empowers the audience, and that an empowered audience is a better audience.

  8. Dave, you and I have more common ground now. I falsely attributed calling Coursey a knee jerk off to YOU. (Although i believe you may have claimed to have coined the expression/word.) At least you are taking the time to expand how you see the issue at hand.

    Like you, I have consistantly recognized the significance of empowerment from podcasting. My problem with this thread has been the way Coursey’s underlying theme is being entirely dismissed as tripe. Even Madge saw something of value in his skepticism.

    I do not agree with Coursey in his predictions in any way whatsoever. That part of his argument is weak and not supported. On the other hand, his touching on “vanity podcasting” shows some promise, had he expanded HIS view more adequately, IMHO. He is not the first to point out the role of vanity in this whole arena. A more suitable analogy might be the tendency to have one’s poems or biography published by a business which strokes the ego of the wannabee artist. I could draw much better analogies there upon taking a look at some of the fringe enterprises popping up to sell podcasting as THE NEXT BIG THING.

    Meantime, I go back to my point. I like your blog and the people here who support it. It your gig, but I prefer you not diminish it in my eyes by acting like the same media establishment you have criticized. The people who built those media empires didn’t have tools like we have. Coursey is a lemming with an attitude but nevertheless has said something of value. If you believe in empowerment, give him that much. You seem brighter than to deny him that.

    My sincere apology for acting trollish. That was discourteous indeed.

Comments are closed.