<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Brain Traffic Blog - Latest Comments in For content problems, technology is not the thing.</title><link>http://braintrafficblog.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://braintrafficblog.disqus.com/for_content_problems_technology_is_not_the_thing/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:24:48 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: For content problems, technology is not the thing.</title><link>http://blog.braintraffic.com/2009/08/for-content-problems-technology-is-not-the-thing/#comment-20111129</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Spot on. Choosing one technology over another in order to solve obscure, poorly documented needs, quickly turns into a more or less relevant shouting contest over who thinks which features are most important, and which tool shines best.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question people should ask is "why are we on the web" and "what do we want to achieve there". Then make a plan.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If only..&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;That said, changing platform simply to get away from something else *can* be a good thing, as long as you don't marry the new platform. It might help us solve critical issues while letting us move on with our content work. It's not all bad.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tormod Guldvog</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 06:24:48 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: For content problems, technology is not the thing.</title><link>http://blog.braintraffic.com/2009/08/for-content-problems-technology-is-not-the-thing/#comment-15314992</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your comments, Old Friend.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I re-read my post, and I see where I didn't choose my words carefully. Of course a CMS can help folks who struggle with the logistics of content creation, delivery, and governance. Thanks for catching me on that. What I should have said is that, without a governing strategy that is built on people and process, it's not going to fix their problems.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Right on!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sean Tubridy</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:27:48 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: For content problems, technology is not the thing.</title><link>http://blog.braintraffic.com/2009/08/for-content-problems-technology-is-not-the-thing/#comment-15125603</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Good post, but I would suggest that your claim is overstated. It can't solve *anything* related to delivery and governance? If your content development process is humming along just fine, but you can't get content published in a timely, regular fashion because an antiquated IT release process? Most any CMS can help you with that, as long as your users can use it. Or by the same token, if you need to able to frequently update your site with small but important changes...say interest rates, for example. I'm talking about things that can be filed under site maintenance. A CMS will pay immediate dividends, whether your internal processes are screwed up or not.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I like your overall point, though. A CMS is not a salve for process or staffing problems within an organization. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">An Old Friend</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:25:48 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: For content problems, technology is not the thing.</title><link>http://blog.braintraffic.com/2009/08/for-content-problems-technology-is-not-the-thing/#comment-15108977</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Amen! Great post and thanks for the shout out to the CMS Myth (and the kick in the rear to start writing more often!).  :-)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jeff Cram&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jeffcram</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:31:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: For content problems, technology is not the thing.</title><link>http://blog.braintraffic.com/2009/08/for-content-problems-technology-is-not-the-thing/#comment-15103852</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Great post...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dwayne Fishel</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 20:42:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: For content problems, technology is not the thing.</title><link>http://blog.braintraffic.com/2009/08/for-content-problems-technology-is-not-the-thing/#comment-15078818</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Great post, Kristina!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Joe Bachana</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:39:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: For content problems, technology is not the thing.</title><link>http://blog.braintraffic.com/2009/08/for-content-problems-technology-is-not-the-thing/#comment-15074904</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Totally, agree Kristina.  Also agree the The CMS Myth should post more often!  ;-)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Chris Herring</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:26:26 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>