David Worlock is so damn smart! Don’t make the mistake of thinking this piece of analysis is in any way limited to the legal arena. It makes considerable sense in any profession or industry facing change and disruption (that’s all of them):
We have to recall that Messrs Dow and Millerchip left Slaughter and May where they had been working lawyers in search of efficiencies . In other words , they were not the editorial/academic lawyers normally employed by publishers . This says something about the sort of people Thomson Reuters and Lexis will need to employ to get this huge transition right .
David is so often on the money, and he nails it here, but crucially the first quote I’ve pulled is only part of the story:
In consumer publishing it is really hard to find examples of players once great in print who are now able to operate in network terms with a similar facility .
There’s much more more:
I also feel that the portfolio days of B2B have drawn to a close. Investing in disparate service elements in niche markets no longer adds sufficient value to be justified , and if the future really is around workflow emulation, as this column has been suggesting, then the niche positions do not cut it without a great deal more content and software.
Great post by David Worlock this. Touches on porn and dark communities of subscription based information. Best lines of the piece though are below:
What we are not getting our heads around is the relationship of the mobile network , mostly owned and controlled by third parties , and the Internet. It is a real issue , and one that must be tackled before access and tariff barriers become the real issues
Reading David’s pieces always brings a fresh perspective. This one is no different.
The sector has never seen a company like Google for using its wealth to pursue opportunity outside of its core markets . From YouTube to Android , from DoubleClick to Aardvark , from Google Earth to Google Energy , the company sometimes seems to be restlessly evading its destiny while remaining 98% tied to advertising for its revenues .
For its destiny is surely now reasonably clear . There will be a decline in search as an apps orientated world moves more fundamentally towards solutions . Already Google is feeling some of this , as well as the continuing movement of advertising markets away from the traditional way of contextualization. There will be continuing pressure within solutions created for professional and business services for search to be customized to need , and good enough for active purposes ( which may be better or more targeted or more rigorously selective or more representative of niche user groups than public search environments ) .
Just when you think you’ve gotten up to speed David has a way of throwing you with his posts.
Last week’s seminar on “Ready for Web 3.0?” organized by ALPSP and chaired by Louise Tutton of Publishing Technologies was just what the doctor ordered in terms of curing us of the idea that we still have time to consider whether we embrace the semantic web or not . It is here , and in scholarly publishing terms it is becoming the default embedded value , the new plateau onto which we must all struggle in order to catch our breath while building the next level of value-add which forms the expectation of users coming to grips with a networked information society today . And from the scholarly world it will spread everywhere.