Betsy Bair, editorial director of The Meetings Group, wrote an interesting editorial in this week's MeetingsNet Extra e-newsletter about how strange it is that she, and I, and other industry magazine editors are getting so much air time on MeetingsRadio.com lately, instead of meeting planners.
Then I read Editors as Experts on the B or Not 2B blog, and I began to think, well, maybe editors should be pundits, at least in the business-to-business world. Does our talking on panels at industry shows, gabbing on the radio about issues you all face, or getting quoted in the newspaper do you guys justice? Should they go straight to the source, or should other media who don't know meetings from a hole in the wall come to us to give them an interpretation and analysis of what's going on in the business? I can argue both ways: On one hand, because we talk to so many people and do so much research, we might have a bigger picture view, and we might be able to communicate it in a way that other media types can understand. On the other, we're not in the trenches every day, doing what you do, so our knowledge is all pretty much second hand.
Any opinions?
Betsy Bair, editorial director of The Meetings Group, wrote an interesting editorial in this week's MeetingsNet Extra e-newsletter about how strange it is that she, and I, and other industry magazine editors are getting so much air time on MeetingsRadio.com lately, instead of meeting planners.
Then I read Editors as Experts on the B or Not 2B blog, and I began to think, well, maybe editors should be pundits, at least in the business-to-business world. Does our talking on panels at industry shows, gabbing on the radio about issues you all face, or getting quoted in the newspaper do you guys justice? Should they go straight to the source, or should other media who don't know meetings from a hole in the wall come to us to give them an interpretation and analysis of what's going on in the business? I can argue both ways: On one hand, because we talk to so many people and do so much research, we might have a bigger picture view, and we might be able to communicate it in a way that other media types can understand. On the other, we're not in the trenches every day, doing what you do, so our knowledge is all pretty much second hand.
Any opinions?