Learning content is typically owned and hosted by an author, organization, or institution. When the institution doesn't own the content (i.e. the lecturer's notes, learning object), it mediates the resources owned by others (textbook). In reading this article on where the music industry went wrong (hint: they misjudged how customers wanted to interact with their music), I was reminded of how short-sighted we are in our relation to learning content. We expect learners to come to us for content (at best, I would argue they should come to us for interaction around content). Our content should come to them in their own space. YouTube understood this early. Instead of expecting viewers to come to the YouTube site, a blogger could embed the player directly into their own site. How difficult would it be for an organization to create a YouTube like "player" that allowed individuals to pull learning content into what ever space they spend the most time (MySpace, Facebook, etc). Obviously, not all learners want their social spaces polluted with learning resources...so we can still provide the centralized site (like YouTube does) where learners can explore content in a more traditional, categorized manner (we current call that WebCT or Blackboard...but these sites are closed, permitting a one-way flow - "learner in" but not "content out").
In a sense, I think learning misses the element that Ze Frank describes as "conversational energy". It's not the content, it's the connection (expressed in conversation, dialogue, relationships). Teaching is an invitation to engage learners in a dialogue. Learning is what happens once we are engaged.