by Summary:
Interesting stuff from the One Handed Economist From Intellectual to influencer: “In the case of the public intellectual, the institution was the academy and the role was thinking. In the case of the public influencer, the institution is the corporation and the role is marketing. The shift makes sense. Marketing, after all, has displaced thinking as our primary culture-shaping activity, the source of what we perceive ourselves to be.” How true does this seem?
Topics:
Dan Crawford considers the following as important: history, Journalism, politics
This could be interesting, too:
Interesting stuff from the One Handed Economist From Intellectual to influencer: “In the case of the public intellectual, the institution was the academy and the role was thinking. In the case of the public influencer, the institution is the corporation and the role is marketing. The shift makes sense. Marketing, after all, has displaced thinking as our primary culture-shaping activity, the source of what we perceive ourselves to be.” How true does this seem?
Topics:
Dan Crawford considers the following as important: history, Journalism, politics
This could be interesting, too:
Joel Eissenberg writes They’re coming for Social Security
Bill Haskell writes Cannon ball don’t pay no mind . . .
Angry Bear writes Silence of the Lambs . . . Congress
Eric Kramer writes Do Democrats and progressives need a marriage counselor or a divorce lawyer?
Interesting stuff from the One Handed Economist
From Intellectual to influencer: “In the case of the public intellectual, the institution was the academy and the role was thinking. In the case of the public influencer, the institution is the corporation and the role is marketing. The shift makes sense. Marketing, after all, has displaced thinking as our primary culture-shaping activity, the source of what we perceive ourselves to be.”
How true does this seem?