musing summarizing magazine info I used to think about this (and even do it a bit) when reading Vanity Fair some years ago
→[More:]
basically these stories are chuck full of info; nouns, stories
So is there some value to actually learning from them, like storing them in a database or wiki etc
I got a bunch of fashion/lifestyle magazines yesterday and started musing this again cause I want to do something online in this field (
previous thread)
One thing gets ruled out for sure, you can't actually do detailed summaries of every noun and bit of info (X is a piece of clothing available at Y store for $34.50) cause that's exhausting and say you were going to organize this all publicly, 5 magazines, you'd quickly get into diminishing returns with transient info. (plus there might be IP concerns with detailed summaries of magazines that just skip the prose)
Now we can always collate the important info. Here's a list of stores for this brand! Let's put this online and cross-reference it with our DB. Be a source of data.
What I wonder about, and used to wonder about with VF, is names. Reporting in magazines is chock full of names and histories. Is there something creepy about starting to organize them all privately? One one hand, I'm not changing private contexts to public contexts personally--this info is already in these widely-published magazines. This guy works at this company before which he worked at that company. He was involved in this lawsuit. Now he's an expert at that. But then thing is when you start putting it together, serially, you end up with a big dossier of individual histories so the way the diffuse contexts of information gets collapsed into consolidated info can be surprising. But if you think about it, what do journalists really do? They must have background files on things and people. They don't approach everything in the dark and start googling the person right then.
What do you think?