The annual Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism’s “State of the News Media” report is out and lostremote’s Steve Safran posts some highlights here. I’m reading the entire report but found something interesting on the Pew website. No radio. Sound with no pictures is now called “AUDIO.”
Is that significant? I think it might be but I’m not show how. If this were to catch on, it might become a problem for a few of our networks (Radio Iowa, Wisconsin Radio Network, Nebraska Radio Network, South Carolina Radio Network) down the road. Will I live to see a time when “radio” is an anachronism? Hard to imagine, but…
“Through a deal with the N.C.A.A., Thought Equity Motion has digitally diced every tournament game this decade from the Round of 16 forward into all of its notable plays, and assigned a Web address to each of them. It lets fans watch any of the games, or thin slices of them, and link to social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter or to their blogs. They call it the Vault.
“The old idea in the industry was to protect the archive and drive fans to the broadcasts,” he said. “Now, people are saying, ‘Internet video is a real business.’ ”
“If you are selling a scarcity — an inventory — of any nonphysical goods today, stop, turn around, and start selling value — outcomes — instead. Or you’re screwed. Apply this rule to many enterprises: advertising, media, content, information, education, consultation, and to some extent, performance.”
“Relationships. That’s what the business of media must become. In our New Business Models for News, we began — just began — to project the value of the relationship a new media service can have in its community: creating events; educating; gathering and selling data; selling goods directly (as the Telegraph does, quite successfully); running networks to help others succeed; saving money by collaborating.”
“Information is not a scarcity, or at least it isn’t scarce for long. Yes, when I don’t know something, then the answer is scarce. But now it’s much easier to get that answer; Google will have it in .3 seconds and if it doesn’t and if enough of us ask it, then someone at Demand Media will write it for me and the rest of the world for $20. When news is new, its value is scarce (as Thomson Reuters Tom Glocer says, his information has its highest value in its first 3 milliseconds); but then that value deflates.”
Roger Gardner offers a good example of the idea in headline.
“Jefferson Bank, in Jefferson City, Missouri, has the banner on the business section of NYT. Of course, they don’t buy it everywhere, NYT knows where I am, so it inserts the local ad. Interesting to me is who sold it to Jeff Bank and how?”
Let’s say you sell yoga supplies and would like to advertise locally. But the newspaper, radio and TV stations don’t offer any programming or content relevant to your customers. The local media can’t afford to produce that programming for the few hundred people into yoga.
If you have a great database of readers (as the NYT certainly does) … and an ad network that can pull from yoga shops all over the country… you can serve up ads like the one above.
I think a more practical approach might be for the yoga shop owner to create his own content and community. We’re seeing that happen every day. Or, if they just don’t have the time… others will create that branded content for them. But the result is more and more business becoming “media” creators.
As far as I know, I did the first live video feed from a committee room at the Missouri state capitol. I know, you’re asking yourself why would anyone bother. You could ask that about a lot of important-but-not-too-interesting news.
We’ve been streaming audio of debate in the Missouri House and Senate for 8+ years and recorded audio of lots of hearings, but never video. Finally all of the pieces of the puzzle seemed to be in place: hardware, software, wifi.
I used a little Logitech webcam (on the tripod); the Casio Exilim for back-up (on the small tripod) and ran it (the LogiTech) through CamTwist up to USTEAM. I think I can skip CamTwist next time. You can sample a few seconds below.
It ain’t CBS but I didn’t have wait on the sat truck, either. Next time, I might just try this on the iPhone if I can get close enough.
First, I am assuming this was a paid commercial. And I’m assuming Domino’s Pizza paid a premium. The ultimate “live read.” As I watched, I realized I was paying very close attention, trying to figure out what I was seeing.
Whose idea was this? The show’s writers? You damn well better have good writers if you’re going to try this. Was it Domino’s idea? Their ad agency?
My next thought was, this is a one trick pony. You can’t do this every night. Or even every week. But then it hit me, you wouldn’t need to. This segment had 100% of my attention. I clearly got the message that Domino’s Pizza was trying to make their product a lot better. I don’t need to see some mindless 30 second spot over and over.
This… whatever it is… didn’t insult my intelligence. It played to it in a tongue-in-cheek manner ideally suited to those who watch The Colbert Report. I have no trouble imagining an advertiser paying big bucks for this.
In an essay titled The Age of Media Agnosticism, Steve Rubel cites a study by the Poynter Institute that identifies seven classes of news consumers and the beginning of a “new era of media agnosticism.” First, the 7 types:
Traditional: those who devote a set amount of time to their news habit every day;
Passive: multi-taskers who don’t devote time to news but have an “ambient awareness” and tune in as their interest is piqued;
Pursuit: people who seek out a specific piece of information, such as the full version of a story they heard about;
Social: under 30-types who rely on the news to “find them” via social networks;
Partisan: individuals who turn to select news providers based on their own outlooks (e.g. DailyKos or FOX News);
Continuous: “information addicts” who are always plugged in; and
Post-traditional: news consumers who get it all online and have “loose loyalties” for certain sites.
I’ll put myself in one or both of the last two types. And for those of us in or near the news “business,” Mr. Rubel’s final takeaway:
“Faced with infinite choices, powerful search tools and equally helpful friends, we’re adapting our habits and becoming less loyal to general sources than we once were. Many rely on the news to find us rather than our needing to seek it out. Those who do hunt for news are likely to do so via a single outlet of their choosing and/or a search engine, or even YouTube.”
“Your honor, the defense will stipulate that Senator McCaskill’s Facebook page is in no way an act of journalism and might be self-serving and total horse shit.”
“So noted. The page will be entered as Exhibit F.”
Something about “my news feed on Facebook” made me stop. Politicians have been grinding out news releases since the dawn of time but same-day video news feeds? My natural instinct is to scoff at the idea of a “news feed” by a politician. But do I trust the senator more or less than Fox News? Hmm.
I’m old enough to remember when just being on TV meant you were honest and trust-worthy. Now whom do we trust?
My point here is that from now on, we’ll get the “news” from lots of people in lots of ways. Trust will trump the medium.
“Michael Rosenblum’s been around the local news biz for decades, along the way helping create New York’s all-news NY1 and Al Gore’s Current TV. Rosenblum’s consulted for stations across the country and around the world, and yet he believes the model that’s kept local news alive since the 1950s is broken, and the only way to repair it–drastic changes in the way news stations operate–just won’t happen. Rosenblum tells LocalNewser’s Mark Joyella local news is like GM: sticking with a recipe that put them on top five decades ago, but will drive them to bankruptcy today.”
My favorite line: When Google does news in New York, it aint gonna start in the CBS building with a chopper. Or something to that effect. Video runs about 2 1/2 min.
“Those of us who covered media were told for years that the sky was falling, and nothing happened. And then it did. Great big chunks of the sky gave way and magazines tumbled — Gourmet!? — that seemed as if they were as solid as the skyline itself. But to those of us who were here back in September of 2001, we learned that even the edifice of Manhattan itself is subject to perforation and endless loss.”
“Somewhere down in the Flatiron, out in Brooklyn, over in Queens or up in Harlem, cabals of bright young things are watching all the disruption with more than an academic interest. Their tiny netbooks and iPhones, which serve as portals to the cloud, contain more informational firepower than entire newsrooms possessed just two decades ago. And they are ginning content from their audiences in the form of social media or finding ways of making ambient information more useful. They are jaded in the way youth requires, but have the confidence that is a gift of their age as well.
For them, New York is not an island sinking, but one that is rising on a fresh, ferocious wave.”
Hard (for me) to read this not feel a little … wistful… on behalf of the old guard. But Mr. Carr clearly sees the glass as half full.
“Your honor, the defense will stipulate that Senator McCaskill’s Facebook page is in no way an act of journalism and might be self-serving and total horse shit.”