Yesterday, I participated in the Wemedia event, but my overall impression of the conference was more 'them and us' than 'we'. Most people were more interested in how we "consume" media than how we influence, participate and create it, and the role of blogs and social media was reduced to a tired discussion about how they affect mainstream media.
There was a reluctance to deviate away from the traditional broadcast model where a select few control the flow of information to masses, and no discussion of participation or direct accountability; much of the focus seemed to be on blogging versus professional journalism which I feel missed the point. Blogging and professional journalism fulfill different needs and rather than competing in fact complement each other. Mainstream news focuses on broadcast whereas the blogging is about participation and what needs to address is how these different forms of media can interact to provide a much richer, broader view of the world and the people in it.
Yesterday, those lucky/wealthy enough to attend where asked if you had the power what would you change ? which was greeted at the official conference with a deafening silence that illustrated the non-participatory nature of the event. At the much more interesting wemedia fringe event, however, there seemed little need to even ask the question - people were talking about it anyway.
My guess is that the Mainstream Media was vastly misrepresented at the event. You had CEOs and Chief Editors talking - I wonder where the journalists, desk chiefs etc. were...
Oh! And why Digital Assasin. I thought the term just made MSM even more uncomfortable.