Sorry I didn’t respond earlier.

Anita Elberse does actually say, after describing the flattening of the tail, that “it is therefore highly disputable that much money can be made in the tail.” I don’t see how this conflicts with my statement that “So a purely long tail business model is unlikely to make money.”

With Duncan Watts I’m not sure what you mean by his reference to the Long Tail, but I guess when I said the Tipping Point theory had been debunked, I was going along with the article title: ‘Tipped over: social influence “tipping point” theory debunked’.

I think I was also probably influenced by the parts that read ‘As it turns out, according to Watts, it’s just not true. There are exceptionally well-connected folks out there, but they’re so swamped by ordinary individuals that they can’t account for genuine cultural cascades, which result not primarily from the activity of social “hubs” kick-starting trends and broadcasting them to the masses, but average Joes and Janes passing them on to other average Joes and Janes.’ And the bit where it says ‘When I interviewed Watts back in 2004, he dismissed Gladwell’s theory: “We knew 50 years ago that this model was wrong.”‘

Perhaps he’s just concentrating on the key ‘influentials’ as you say. So, I’ve amended the post, from ‘all wrong’ to ‘partially wrong.’

However, they do make us think and ideally critically reflect on the ideas proposed. When there’s so much criticism of how the online world is reducing our ability to engage in such valuable activities, thinking about and debating concepts has to be healthy, even if we end up saying “yes but no but”.

In fact, behind the headline coverage, it actually supports the Tipping Point in that Watts models showed those ideas that did go through an influential spread further and faster.

And by the same token Anita Elberse’s work doesn’t disprove The Long Tail theory – just the exact relationships between the ‘head’ and the ‘tail’
http://conversationstarter.hbsp.com/2008/07/the_long_tail_debate_continues.html

Having said, I am sure not of these theories or their debunking are perfect, and I strongly support the dialogue that both produce. Making people think is always the goal. Thanks for gathering these.