Continuing from my previous post (sorry for the delay but Dave Lee and I were burning the SFO midnight oil to get an article in by deadline), here's my second bone of contention. The content of blogs, podcasts, IMs, etc. can be offered up to an interested and engaged public. But, as such, it's just grist for the learning mill - it's not yet learning. Until the person on the receiving end of these technologies actively engages in a process of assimilation/reflection/application with the latent sources of knowledge, learning is still an unrealized possibility.
I sometimes think the misconception about learning is a symptom of an information-rich world. It's easy to assume that if you have a lot of content, you have a lot of learning. Ninth-grade science (not the last course I took on the topic but one most folks have encountered) taught us about potential energy. The wood pile could (when ignited) provide a roaring fire; unlit it was just a lot of lumber. Those are two distinctly different states for the same commodity. The relationship of information to learning is more fluid as I think about it . . . a continuum with many phase changes along the way. At one end, the communicator sends a message . . . in between the recipient grabs it, chews it up, matches it to existing schema, dialogues about it, tries it out, makes it her own . . . voila learning - and maybe some life altering transformation!