No big deal-I’ve been called worse. I just started following you on twitter and I will definitely take you up on that discussion about the hype cycle and the other ones you referenced.

Thanks again for contributing.

Thanks so much for contributing to our blog. It’s great to see you here!

I do believe that content is central to the success of any platform or channel and with some channels I have been able to showcase how the quality of the content actually moves the channel through its cycles.

I hope the new media lifecycle catches on.

Thanks again!

Really wonderful references to other life cycles. I’ll dive into those deeper this week!

I really need to think through the issue you’ve posed: does a new media platform go through all the phases of its life cycle? Great question. Let me do some heavy analysis and get back to you!

Thanks again!
- Andrwe

I think you might go back to the original technology adoption life cycle by Bohlen, Beal and Rogers (1962) to compare your cycle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_adoption_lifecycle

and on the concept of diffusion of innovation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations

As the Gartner cycle (1995) includes the possibility that all does not go well with technology adoption, while it seems to me your cycle assumes a technology will go through every stage of the cycle. I suspect Gartner’s hype cycle was inspired by Geoffrey Moore’s (1991) technology adoption model as described in his book Crossing the Chasm. I know I was inspired by Geoffrey when I wrote about companies crossing a chasm in my 2005 study on corporate blogging.

So if I was comparing your model to the Bohlen, Beal and Rogers model it might work, but if I compared to Moore or Gartner, the key missing ingredient is the possibility that a product might stall and not succeed in going through all of the stages of development. Could you add that and maybe something new in addition?