Message from Michael - Twitter - March 30, 2011

Message From Michael                                 

                                                                                                                        March 30, 2011                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

      THE TITAN TODDLER KNOWN AS TWITTER

      THE GOOGLE OF INTERNET MOVIES

      FACTOID OF THE WEEK – BILLIONS OF VIDEO

      COCKTAIL CHATTER – BILLIONS OF STARS

 

 

      THE TITAN TODDLER KNOWN AS TWITTER.  Having just celebrated its fifth birthday, that’s what Twitter would be considered in human terms… a toddler.  But this is one ginormous toddler.  Hard to believe it’s just five years old, especially when you look at some numbers.  For example, after founder/ creator Jack Dorsey sent his first tweet on March 21, 2006, it took three years, two months and a day to reach a Billion tweets, and more than 18 months to reach the half Million mark in subscribers.  Now, according to its blog site, there are a Billion tweets posted every week and more than half a Million new accounts added every day.  A year ago, the service was averaging 50 Million Tweets a day.  Last month it averaged 140 Million Tweets a day.  The land speed record in Tweets came the day Michael Jackson died when there were 456 “tweets per second.”  The new record was set four seconds after Midnight in Japan on New Year’s Day when there were 6,939 “tweets per second.”  More pragmatically, the company has gone from eight employees three years ago to 400 employees now, which is still remarkably low considering the volume of messages.

There are 366 Twitterers with more than a Million followers, according to unofficial but semi-official website, twittercounter.com.  Most of those are  -- no surprise, no surprise – celebrities; Lady Gaga -- no surprise, no surprise -- tops the list with more than 9.1 Million followers, semi-closely followed by -- no surprise, no surprise -- Justin Bieber with 8.4 Million followers.  Britney Spears comes in third (7.3 Million), followed by President Barack Obama (7.2 Million) and Kim Kardashian (7 Million).  The first non-human to make the top list is Twitter itself at number 12, with 4.7 Million followers.  Interestingly, Twitter en Espanol comes in 14^th with 4.4 Million followers.  And, yes, it would be easy to dismiss some of the Twitter hype when you look at the celebrity-dominated top 100 list.  But then we’re reminded of the role Twitter played in Iraq and Egypt and Haiti.  In fact, the Haiti Earthquake came in number four in the list of top Twitter trends of 2010.  The top issue Tweeted was the Gulf Oil Spill.  Of course Justin Bieber and Pulpo Paul, the Nostradamus Octopus who predicted the World Soccer Cup winner, also made the list.  And then again, you learn about people through Twitter that you might never have heard of – such as Wired Magazine’s recently profiled Rafinha Bastos, Brazil’s answer to Jon Stewart.  A comedian and journalist with 1.8 Million followers – a fact even more remarkable when you consider he tweets in Portuguese.  Then again, there’s Rebecca Black, a 13-year-old singer from Orange County, California, who has made the Twitter ‘hot’ topic list as well as Facebook where her song has been viewed…. drum roll, please… 46 Million times.

Disclaimer:  I am on Twitter (#MessageMichael), but I have not really adopted it, like you would expect some tech savvy, cool, with-it kind of person to do. Proving that I am not as tech savvy, cool or with-it as I probably should be.  I keep promising myself to do better.  But to show that I am not a complete Luddite, business-focused social networking site LinkedIn recently announced that it has passed the 100 Million user mark.  And I, along with thousands of others, received a nice little email, noting the milestone and thanking me for my involvement.  No big deal there… but, in the email, it noted that I was member number 168,043.  So, see, I am an early adopter… on some things.

      THE GOOGLE OF INTERNET MOVIES.  A recent report from market research firm NPD Group shows that Netflix has become the Godzilla of paid (a very important word) movie providers online.  The report says that Netflix accounts for six out of every (sort of, but not really) ten movies streamed or downloaded.  The group has since had to clarify that report to say its measurements do not include free movie services, like Hulu, or movie services that come with your subscription, like HBO on-demand.  It does include Electronic Sell Through (a concept I am still trying to understand) along with IVOD (Internet Video on Demand) as well as “transactional” purchases of movies – in other words movies that aren’t part of your package deal.  Even with those qualifications, the bottom-line is that Netflix has become ginormous.  (Yeah, I had to use that word again.) And here’s a tip for you future movie mogul investors – Aspera.  As reported by Beet.TV, the small, and at this point privately-funded, start-up has become the standard bearer for delivering movies for all the big companies in Hollywood and everywhere.  The reason is it has developed a protocol for delivering huge files faster than FTP and other TCP-type protocols.  The company offers a ‘consumer’ version of its software for smaller publishers and journalists.  As a side note, while trying to figure out what EST is, I came across this interesting factoid.  The Clint Eastwood movie, Gran Torino, is Warner Brothers Home Entertainment’s most successful VOD movie, garnering $60 Million in sales worldwide, compared to the $148 Million it took in at the Box Office.      

      FACTOID OF THE WEEK.  According to a study by Intel Corporation, by the year 2015, there will be 500 Billion hours of video the Internet.  I say this way too often, but I’m going to say it again anyway – Think about that.  500 Billion Hours.  That’s more than 70 hours of video for every man, woman and child on Planet Earth.  On a very similar note, according to product manager Hunter Walk of YouTube, if the three major U.S. Networks were to have broadcast 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year for the past 60 years, they still wouldn’t have broadcast as much content as is uploaded to YouTube every 30 days.  Now, ain’t that a wowser of a factoid?  In an interview with TechCrunch, he says there are 35 hours of video uploaded every minute.  That’s up from 24 hours a minute just a few months ago.  And YouTube provides Two Billion playbacks every day.  And from a previous Message, this factoid reminder – ten years ago it cost $300 to transfer a Gigabyte of video over the Internet; Today it costs about 30 cents.  A disclaimer here.  The first figure attributed to Intel is cited by Internet backbone provider Cisco in a report on its efforts to keep up with the growing demand.  I have not seen the original cite.         

      COCKTAIL CHATTER.  Somewhere about 11 Billion miles from earth, there are two space ships winging their way through outer space carrying two records made of gold-plated copper.  The records contain a variety of sounds, ranging from a dog barking to a chimpanzee’s call, along with music ranging from Bach’s Brandenburg Concerto to Chuck Berry belting out Johnny B. Goode; Peruvian wedding music to a Navajo night chant; photographs of everything from a plane taking off to an astronaut walking in space; and diagrams showing the atoms making up DNA and maps of Earth.  A recent article in the progressive magazine, Utne Reader, noted that the first craft, Voyager 1 just recently passed a key barrier, the official edge of our solar system, meaning that it has “broken free of their human influence and moved one step closer to unknown worlds.”  The record was put aboard the craft at its launch in – get this – 1977.  It was part of a project by astrophysicist Carl Sagan.  This is the same person who created SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence.) Coincidentally I was reading some old columns by newspaper humorist Dave Barry, one of which was about the Celistis Group which created a project in 1984 whereby you could launch your cremated ashes into space.  Astronaut Gordon Cooper and Star Trek actor James Doohan (aka “Scotty”) have been launched into space.  Much to my surprise, upon investigation, it turns out the project is still going with the next launch scheduled for May of this year.  BTW, costs range from $695 to have your ashes just flown around the earth to $9,995 to be ‘buried’ on the moon and $12,500 to be sent into ‘deep outer space.’

      MORE COCKTAIL CHATTER.  Mama Mia, MTV’s Jersey Shore ‘dropped’ to a season low in the last couple of weeks, but with more than 6.6 Million viewers, it is still one of the most popular series on basic cable.  But when MTV introduced the series about young Italian Americans to Italy, the homeland of my father BTW, it caused an outrage, with one columnist saying it perpetuated the worst stereotypes of Italians, “multiplied a thousand times and Americanized.”  As I write this, I should note that I am wearing my cornicello (Italian horn of plenty) around my neck to protect me from the evil eye.        

      SUBSCRIPTIONS:  We encourage people to pass on copies of Message from Michael.  But if you would like to get your own copy, you can subscribe by sending an e-mail to Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “subscribe-MM” in the subject line.  If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter, e-mail Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “unsubscribe-MM” in the subject line. Also, back issues of MfM are available at the website, media-consultant.blogspot.com.  You can reach me directly at Michael@MediaConsultant.tv.

Message from Michael - State of the News Media - Part Three

STATE OF THE NEWS MEDIA – PART THREE

 

 

KEY QUESTIONS FACING DIGITAL NEWS:  That is the headline from the Online News section of the report.  Yes, no cute headline this time.  Let's face it.  The ones from the two previous parts were a bit of a stretch.  Anyway, the key questions are a dose of reality for news operations trying to create, if not predict, their future.  In brief, the report notes "money will, to a large degree, determine where things are going" AND "advertising alone will never generate the revenue traditional media generated."  One word keeps popping up throughout – sustainability.  Yes, as reported earlier, total online ad revenues (which includes Web and Digital advertising) jumped ahead of newspaper print advertising (by $2 Billion), but that growth is not necessarily associated with news.  On top of which, news is competing for advertising dollars in a world in which there are a lot of competitors… or frenemies (a word the report doesn't use)… or even possible partners.  Search still accounts for the lion's share (48%) while banner and display ads normally connected with news are still small.  Video ads are the fastest growing area, and have potential, but they still make up an even smaller part of online advertising -- $1.4 Billion; Or put another way, one-tenth of search and only five percent of the online total.  The report makes the case for "targeted display" as an option for online news advertising.  Targeted display is what I think of as contextual or behavioral advertising – using search habits, demographics, location and past behavior to target ads to a target audience.  "In theory" the authors say, online news could make use of such advertising approaches because they already know a lot about their customers and they are trusted.

The battlefield will be in local online ad spending which now accounts for 40% of all online ad spending – up from 34% a year ago.  Theoretically, traditional news operations would have an advantage since much of the news traffic online goes to them.  But it doesn't quite work that way.  Again, there are other competitors for online attention such as portals, search engines and other information providers.  And, again, much of the digital agenda is being set by third parties – device makers and software developers. Two prime examples are Apple and Google which control much of the content and advertising, allowing others only limited use, the report says.  An interesting side note to this is that the report says Google is much friendlier than Apple.  Only further complicating the issue is the fact, noted earlier, that the three major online measurement firms (Nielsen, comScore, HitWise) all use "different methods of counting." On a positive note, a reminder that a third (34%) say they got news 'yesterday' online – up five percentage points from a year ago.

As to mobile and applications… well, another reality check.  Apple has more than 350,000 applications.  Android has more than 90,000.  Of all the mobile and tablet owners, just 13% have used an app for local news and information.  That equates to one percent of the American population.  And of that, only 10% have actually paid for that app. Reality checks hurt, don't they?  That's not to dismiss the possibility.  After all 18-29 year olds are making greater use of apps, and, again, nearly half of mobile users (47%) say they got "some kind of news and information' from their mobile device – almost double the year before (26%).

 THE WAL-MART OF NEWS:  They didn't use that analogy but that seemed to be the implication of the analysis of AOL's move into online news. Right now, the AOL properties 'only' get an average of 3 Million unique visitors a month.  By way of comparison, the Web's most trafficked news website, Yahoo News, gets 94 Million unique visitors a month. Website Topix, which relies totally on aggregation, had 7 Million unique visitors.  So, it may seem a little premature to use that analogy.  The difference though is that AOL is staking a lot on original content creation.  Yahoo has started back into original content creation, hiring a dozen journalists, but it has had a mixed history of starting and stopping such efforts.  Still, its latest efforts have paid off with a 300% increase in original content.  Of course, that means it went from one percent original content the year before to four percent in the last year.  The vast majority (96%) is still aggregated content.  AOL, on the other hand, increased its original content six times over from seven percent in 2009 to 42% last year.

On top of which, AOL bought, or merged with, depending on your perspective, The Huffington Post.  It is a move which (my interpretation) the report seems to question.  For example, it notes that The Post had revenues of $31 Million versus AOL's $2.4 Billion.  AOL already had many more national journalists than Huffington which had all of four reporters in 2009 and a projected 18 last year out of a total of 70 to 80 mostly "curators and editors."  AOL was #3 or #4 in traffic versus The Post's #8.  The report says that what Huffington does have is an 'upward growth trajectory' and (somewhat worrisome, to me at least) "an ideological orientation that AOL did not."  In any case, the report notes in the Digital section that AOL's Patch has websites in 800 towns and communities, soon to be 1,000.  The author of the Community News section says the AOL News Network "casts a long shadow on the local news landscape." By way of perspective, the report does note that a similar venture, BackFence, failed after struggling for three years, in part because of what the report called an "unavoidable reality" – local news is expensive to produce and the audience for any one piece is limited.       

 As a side note, here's a question for you Message readers – is it just me, or is the report's  discussion of Tina Brown's appointment as editor of the combined Newsweek/Daily Beast operation dripping with sarcasm?  It notes that Brown, "the creator of the money-losing Daily Beast" brought with her… "a digital brand… a famous magazine resume, major marketing presence… (she is, they note, and in their words) "a media celebrity"… as well as financial backing from Billionaire Barry Diller.

CONVERTING COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS INTO CASH.  If you read only one section of the report, besides the overview, read the Community News section by Michelle McLellan.  Maybe it's because I was reading it at 4 a.m. after four cups of coffee, but I just found this part fascinating.  It's a combination of reality check and real hope.  The reality check – we have been "spoiled into believing" that journalism is such an important public good that people "were bound to open their wallets for it despite evidence to the contrary."  The fact is there are too many people focusing on content and dreaming that their next grant is just around the corner.  The real hope – discovering and providing what customers value.  Here the fact is there are not enough people focusing on digital innovation and trying different business models.  The point, she says, is that finding success means experimentation… as in, (though she doesn't use this often-used phrase) – fail fast and move on.  News operations need to have multiple revenue streams.  I would add (commentary) – one, that just doesn't apply to community news operations, and, two, that all news operations need to be community news operations.  She quotes the folks at community website, St. Louis Beacon, who make the point that… they're not an online newspaper but an "engine of engagement"… (which just doesn't) toss information at people but figures out how to serve them… in community conversations.. meeting new people in respectful, intelligent conversations."  And before you think I've gone over the deep edge, they say these relationships apply to advertisers and sponsors as well as readers and users.

One other point -- for my journalism education brethren, McLellan says:  "if the real job is to help journalism survive, then entrepreneurship, business literacy and community engagement needs to be as much a part of the curriculum as multimedia and digital literacy." 

THINGS I MISSED WORTH MENTIONING:  First, two firsts I missed.  For the first time, more online listeners (55%) report listening to online only audio (like Pandora and Slacker Radio) than to the streams of radio stations.  Also, for the first time, the Internet became the #1 platform of choice for news among 18 – 29 year olds in 2010.  It was the #2 choice among 30-49 year olds.  Okay, now in no particular order, the other things I missed mentioning in the two previous reports: 

According to an RTNDA survey, there are 224 stations running news produced by another station, although I have to say I sort of mentioned this in a previous report but without the specifics.  Newspaper websites reach a larger audience in 50 of the top markets, with local TV tops in 14 of those markets.  In talking about newspapers' declining revenues, the report notes that half of that decline comes from shrinking ad volume and half from declining ad rates.  Despite fears, private equity owners of media have not made substantial changes any different from traditional publisher/ owners.  And credit to the report authors for honesty, their prediction or 'possibility raising' that local owners would step in to save or salvage city news operations has not happened.  In the section about the networks' morning news shows, an important distinction is made between ratings and share.  In actual fact, the morning news has grown among people who are actually watching, but there are fewer people watching anything at those times.  There were 196 magazines started in 2010, while 176 folded.  The year before, a whopping 596 magazines folded.  Even after all its cuts, the publishers of Newsweek estimated that it cost them $17 on average to acquire a new subscriber.       

And in the area of things I didn't know (and, yes, I could fill a whole Message with that):  Retransmission fees make up an average of seven percent of the revenue for local stations.  (I should note that the networks want to get a piece of that pie back.)  This one was something of a surprise  --  According to the report, CBS News only broke even last year.  And more of a shock than a surprise, 'little' CNBC generates nearly as much revenue ($722.9 Million) as the entire broadcast division ($850 Million.)  BTW, for some reason, I didn't see any exact figures for profitability for ABC News, although there was a lot in the report about its expense cutting efforts. 

DISCLAIMER -- AGAIN:  A repeat but worth repeating -- the report contains a wealth of information, and my summaries, in all probability, do not do its justice.   

Message from Michael - State of the News Media - Part Two - March 18, 2011

 STATE OF THE NEWS MEDIA – PART TWO

 

 

IF MONTY PYTHON ANALYZED THE NEWS.  You can't help thinking about some of the skits from the comedy series as you read the report by the Project for Excellence.  Okay, I can't help but think about the skits. You know, the one in which they're collecting bodies during the Plague and one insists he isn't dead, so they give him a conk on the head to make him dead; or the one about the guy who tries to return his dead parrot for a refund, arguing that it isn't dead, just napping; or the one in which the knight guarding a bridge crossing has his legs and arms cut off but insists on continuing to fight because they're only 'flesh wounds.'  The difference is that the Python skits are intentionally humorous, while the report is unintentionally darkly humorous.

For example, if you read some of the coverage of the report, it seems like things are a lot better.  One article about local TV news was even headlined – finally, some good news.  Even the headline on the local TV section itself read – good news after the fall.  Well, not really.  Yes, the report says, the overall TV audience held steady, and yes, revenues rose sharply.  So, like the knight, local TV news operations are still itching for a fight.  Except that the newscasts in ALL the key time slots (5a -7a, 5p – 7p and 11p) were down.  The so-called prime time newscasts (10pm) lost more audience than news in any other time slot.  An example of that dark humor was that the report says a "positive sign" is that the newscasts lost audience at less than half the rate they had been losing audience.  Compensating for that loss was the addition of new time periods – 4:30 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.  Plus, the number of independents offering news doubled, although most of them were news offerings produced by network-affiliated stations trying to amortize costs and resources.  And that revenue improvement?  True, 17.5% is better than the 7.5% projected, but when adjusted for inflation, the report authors say the average station revenue has dropped by almost half in just the past nine years.    

And, yes, advertising revenues continue to fall for newspapers, and print circulation continues to fall. But despite all the gloom and doom about newspapers, the report authors note that it is still a profitable business.  Of course, its profit margin are only about five percent and that is about a quarter of what it once was, and that is about the same profit margin as you see in grocery stores which deal in massive volumes to compensate.  But hey, they're not dead.  They're just mostly dead.  Or, as the newspaper section authors put it, "the clock continues to tick on finding strong supplementary revenue streams as print seems certain to stagnate or decline even further."  

If we were to do one of those popular "by the number" summaries of the magazine industry, they would be 1/4, 3X, 22%, 70 and ½.  It is the report's comparison of what may be the most unsuccessful news magazines, Newsweek, with what may arguably be the most successful news magazine, The Economist.  You already know, of course, that Newsweek was sold for $1 and assumption of debt.  Okay, here's how it goes:  The Economist with one-fourth the circulation of Newsweek sold 22% more ad pages and generated three times as much circulation revenue per copy sold… by marketing itself as a "higher quality editorial product" even though it had only 70 writers which is half the editorial staff of Newsweek.

AND NOW FOR SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT – PERSPECTIVE.    The report notes what most of us already know, but which is worth repeating.  News programs remain the single most important source of local station revenue, accounting for nearly half (45%).  The five hours a day of news, which most stations average, brings in almost as much revenue as the other 19 hours combined.  Despite all the seeming emphasis in the media about cable, the report notes that four times as many people watch the three broadcast networks' evening news than the three cable news audiences in prime time even tough prime time audiences are larger.  And two times as many people watch the lowest rated broadcast evening program than the highest rated cable news program.

As noted in the Part One Message, the report says the future for many news operations depends on how groups embrace or enlist digital, especially with much of the digital agenda dependent on what are basically third parties – software developers and device makers.  But to put that in perspective, digital only accounts for about five percent of the average local television station's revenue.  In newspapers, digital accounts for more than twice that, but still relatively small numbers – 11.9%.

And for some further perspective on the digital direction being urged, the report notes the recurring problem that the digital audience is still not measured comparably or as reliably as more traditional media measurement systems.  For example, the digital audience in terms of unique visitors per month at newspaper sites is up from 2001, but then again, they changed the measurement system.  Even the Audit Bureau of Circulation is changing its way of measuring newspapers reach, basically meaning, the report implies, that any comparison with past metrics will either be invalid or less useful. The report authors note that while newspaper organizations insist they are transforming themselves, "the path is hardly a well-marked four-lane highway, and the effort seems comparable to chopping through the jungle with a machete."

For those who dismiss radio, sometimes called AM/FM, as old and outdated, technology, the report notes that it is still a dominant medium with nine out of ten adults listening.  People spend more time listening to news on radio (15 minutes), then newspapers (10 minutes) and even the Internet (13 minutes), but well behind TV (32 minutes.)  The problem, say the authors, is that radio is taken for granted.  So, for example, when asked which medium has the most impact on their lives, radio comes in last.

FOOLS RUSH IN WHERE WISE MEN FEAR TO TREAD:  With that headline as the preface, let me add some perspective to the debate about 'de-funding' (isn't that an interesting word) the Corporation for Public Broadcasting because of its reputed limited and liberal bias.  That argument "may" work when the discussion is about PBS's Newshour, which has 1.1 Million viewers – about a sixth of the average commercial news program.  And its digital efforts are similarly small.  To make matters worse, the report cites a quote that I am sure the PBS people wish hadn't been said, and that is that every source of income -- other than the federal government -- has declined for the program.  That argument about limited appeal is debatable at best, a complete non-sequitor at worst, though when it comes to National Public Radio.  The report notes that NPR continues to be a growing source of news for many Americans with an increase of 3% in audience to 27.2 Million weekly listeners.  Let me remind you, that is as much as the evening newscasts and more than the network morning newscasts.  And to put that in further perspective, news/talk/ information radio is the second most popular format (behind country music), but that in reality there are only 30 All News commercial stations, and most of the others are more talk than news.

However, on the flip side of that, it should be noted that eight of the top ten talk show hosts on radio are conservatives, with Rush Limbaugh (15 Million) and Sean Hannity (14 Million) leading the pack.  The top liberal talk show hosts average less than a fifth or a quarter of their conservative counterparts, with an average listening audience of 2.75 Million.  

GOOD IDEAS GONE BAD:  The report notes many examples of what seemed like the newest, latest, hottest trend that… well, just didn't quite work out.  For example, partnerships between newspapers and television.  The report says those approaches peaked in 2005 and have dropped steadily ever since.  The much ballyhooed and still often cited concept of "hyperlocal news" has proven more expensive than expected, less lucrative than anticipated and more problematic.  The partnership many newspapers have with Yahoo has been a two-edge sword.  HD Radio, which many audiophiles, or at least radio broadcasters, thought would follow in the footsteps of HD TV and become the next big thing.  Well, think again.  Both listeners and the companies themselves have lost interest.  After a surge of conversions in 2009, only 21 stations converted to HD in 2010 so that only one in seven radio stations are now HD.  Now, the report says, the next big thing will be Internet radio in the car.  The one I personally love is FM being built into cell phones.  Apparently ten percent of cell phones already have it, but nobody knows it… including me.

OH, YEAH, BTW, THE JOURNALISM:  Yet again, and as noted in previous messages, the prime focus of the report is on the 'business of journalism.'  And, yes, that is understandable… to a point.  There is at least a nod to the topic of journalism in the section "A Year in the News." It compared the mainstream media's coverage with the public interest, as measured by the blogosphere and social networking sites like Twitter.  This section makes several interesting observations, including the fact that the public continued to have interest in many stories long after the news media had reduced coverage, that the public isn't nearly as interested in the "inside the Beltway" stories which receive extensive news media coverage; and even more interestingly, despite all this, the agenda on blogs was remarkably close to that of the mainstream agenda.  For example, both maintained a consistently close watch on the economy.  On the flip side, both the mainstream media and the public interest on the Afghan war was significantly low even though, the report authors note, 2010 recorded the highest death toll in the war since its beginning.  No surprise, but the report notes that even when the agendas match, the blog conversations tended to be ideological debates. 

The two news oddities – Twitter and CNN.  Both had dramatically different agendas.  Twitter's agenda more reflected both its techie audience and its broader world audience.  The top topics on Twitter were, in order –Apple, Google, Twitter itself, Facebook, and at number five – the European Economy which scored significantly higher (7%) than the U.S. Economy (1%).  CNN was described as the "cable outlier" and "odd man out" for its agenda, which reflected its breaking news focus.  For example, most of its BP oil spill coverage (57%) was breaking news with significantly less (35%) focused on the responsibility of the federal government and the company.  For both Fox and MSNBC, the numbers were exactly reversed.  The report also noted an even 'less balanced' news agenda in general, with only two topics topping the 10% coverage mark in 2010 versus five topics in 2009.    

But nowhere… and, yes, this is a criticism… did I see any discussion about the growing issue of so-called content farms or 'content mills' which are generating reams of debatable content, or of the reader responsive form of writing in which so-called news operations base their reporting on what articles get the most hits online.  At the same time, to give credit to the report, one of the very, very cool features (and you know it's good when I use 'very' twice) is the News Interactive feature in which you can put in subjects and categories and see how various areas of the media covered them.       

NOTE:  This message is being sent by GMail, as I review my distribution list and methods.

DISCLAIMER:  I have to admit that the Message summary seems significantly more negative than the report itself.  My apologies.  There is a lot of good to report, but there is a lot of balance that needs to be added as well.  My apologies also for getting this second part out so late.  There is a lot to digest, and even then, the summary doesn't do the report justice.   

SUBSCRIPTIONS:  We encourage people to pass on copies of Message from Michael.  But if you would like to get your own copy, you can subscribe by sending an e-mail to Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word "subscribe-MM" in the subject line.  If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter, e-mail Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word "unsubscribe-MM" in the subject line. Also, back issues of MfM are available at the website, media-consultant.blogspot.com.  You can reach me directly at Michael@MediaConsultant.tv.

Message from Michael -- State of the News Media Report -- Part One

Message From Michael                             

                                                                                                                         March 15, 2011                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

THE STATE OF THE NEWS MEDIA – PART ONE

 

 

A MAN FALLS OUT OF A PLANE.  Does anybody else remember this?  It is a children's version of the good news/ bad news theme.  In semi-brief form, it goes something like this:  A man falls out of a plane – oh, no.  But, he has a parachute -- yea; But, it won't open – oh, no; but, there's a haystack below – yea; But, it has a pitchfork in it -- oh, no. And so on and so on.  The recently released State of the News Media brings back that analogy.  The bad news:  audiences declined in every news platform except the Web – oh, no;  The good news:  advertising revenue increased year to year for every sector of the news media except newspaper -- yea.  The bad news:  traditional news rooms continued to lose jobs, albeit at a slower pace – oh, no; The good news is that those losses in traditional media are being offset by hirings in new media enterprises -- yea.  The bad news:  "traditional newsrooms… are smaller, their aspirations have narrowed and their journalists are stretched thinner."  The good news:  "they are more adaptive, younger and more engaged in multimedia presentation, aggregation, blogging and user content."  You will notice there is no "oh, no" or "yea" after either one of those.  According to the report authors, "in some ways, new media and old, slowly and sometimes grudgingly, are coming to resemble each other."

MY KEY TAKEAWAY:  That last statement comes about, in large part because, in my view after reading the document, the authors have adopted a very broad definition of what is 'news.'  As you read the report, you walk away asking yourself that question – what is news.  For example, the point is made that nearly half of all Americans (47%) now get – their wording – "some form of local news" on a mobile device.  What is that 'some form'?  Again, quoting them – "news that serves immediate needs."  That is defined as "weather, information about restaurants and other local businesses, and traffic."  I should also note that the report does point out elsewhere that mobile ad spending still accounts for only 3% of total online ad spending – not all ad spending, just all online ad spending.  So, it is small, but it should also be noted that it increased an impressive 79% year to year.    

Then there is that word "curation" which we discussed in a previous Message and which comes up in the report several times.  Remember that point about new media hires off-setting traditional media lay-offs?  And remember how AOL was on a journalistic hiring spree, capped off by the purchase of The Huffington Post?  Well, after the purchase (or merger as the report calls it), 200 of those 900 new hires were laid off.  Now, aside from the fact that AOL paid $350 Million for an operation that only had revenue of $31 Million, here is the other point I would raise.  Of the Huffington Post's estimated editorial staff of 70 to 80, 18 produce content.  The others?  You guessed it.  Aggregate and curate.  The missing word or words, take your pick – create, generate, originate.

Let me add another factoid here that it gets to my point about what is news.  The number one radio category is news/information/talk.  There are more than 1,300 stations following this format, but in actuality there are only 27 truly 'all news' radio stations in the entire country.  Secondly, I would note for the umpteenth time that content farms are growing in importance and further confusing the issue.     

THEIR KEY TAKEAWAY:  We news consultants like to use the phrase "content is king" a lot.  Actually, lots of media types say that.  Some even believe it.  And while that may still be true to a varying degree, the report makes the point that how you connect that content to the customer is becoming even more critical.  In the old days, sometimes known as the 20^th Century, the news media not only created the content, they also were the means of getting that content to the consumer. No more.  Now, the report notes, there are intermediaries who are taking more than just a bite out of the advertising pie.  They are the software makers (like the people who create the Apps or develop the algorithms that gets the media message out), the aggregators (like Google, Yahoo and AOL  who bring the audience to the media), and the device makers (like the Apple iPad and Droid developers who have created a new delivery system.)  Each one adds another layer, another level of complexity, and each one wants their share of the dollars generated.  The net result, argue the authors, is that "in the digital realm the news industry (may) no longer be in control of its own future."

THE FIRSTS:  The re-formatted report has an excellent summary of 'key findings' and 'major trends' but as I read through the report, the word that stood out for me was – first, as in first time something happened.  For example, here are some points made in the report:  For the first time in at least a dozen years, the median audience declined at all three cable news channels. CNN's median prime-time viewership fell 37% to 564,000 viewers, and MSNBC beat it in total viewers during prime time for the first time. For the first time, Fox surpassed CNN in total dollars spent on the news. For the first time, too, more people said they got their news from the web than newspapers.  When the final tally is in, online ad revenue in 2010 is projected to surpass print newspaper ad revenue for the first time. Online news consumption surpassed print newspapers in ad revenue and audience for the first time in 2010.   Hires (in online-only news operations) come close to matching the jobs in 2010 we estimate were lost in newspapers, the first time we have seen this kind of substitution. Online news hires may have matched newspaper cuts for the first time. A good deal of radio listening occurs in cars, and we are on the brink of Internet radio being widely available there for the first time..  The first issue of the revamped Newsweek Magazine (combined with the Daily Beast) is scheduled for Spring, 2011.  Also, even though it doesn't have the word 'first' in it, is a 'first' of a different sort pointed out in the report – Seven of the top 25 newspapers in America are now owned by hedge funds, which had virtually no role a few years ago.

SHOW ME THE MONEY:  As part of that hedge fund involvement, the report also notes that media companies are turning to so-called "outsiders" to run their operations, and although the report doesn't say it this bluntly, the implication is that the driving force is making a profit, not making news.  Nothing wrong with that, of course, but it is getting harder.  For example, the report says that charging for online news can work "under certain circumstances" but it is a very cautionary 'maybe.'  More likely it is restricted to specialty information like financial information from sources like The Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal.  What will more likely happen, according to the report, is that the economic model for news will be "made up of many smaller and complex resources."  Although the report notes the resurgence of  auto advertising as a life saver for the news media during 2010.

NO BRAG, JUST FACT:  Two other major trends cited in the report are concerns over online measurement and content farms.  And I am proud to say, both of these issues have been raised in previous Messages.  When the different rating agencies can't even decide what the definition of 'unique visitors' is, you know you have a problem, the report says.  The result, online measurement is confusing and as long as it is confusing, it is hard to sell.  The other point about content farms plays off the fact that the report says most traditional American media is local and most ad revenue is local.  So, therefore its importance.  And that is where so-called content mills are making inroads.  But here is where it gets interesting.  The report says "no one has yet cracked the code for how to produce local news effectively at a sustainable level… (and that) the push toward so-called 'hyper-localism' has proved ill-conceived, expensive and insufficiently supported by ads."  How's that for a condemnation?        

SIDE NOTE:  You will notice from the heading, that it says "part one."  I will have two more summaries of different aspects of the report in the next two days.  Instead of trying to create one big overview, I thought it made more sense to provide three shorter summaries.       

FOOT NOTE:  You are receiving this week's Message through my Gmail account.  I am in the process of converting the Message to a contact list serv.  Also, my website, mediaconsultant.tv, is down temporarily.  I shouldn't admit this, but the honest reason -- I was trying to upgrade the site and convert to a WordPress content management system, and managed to wreck it. Oh, well.  It shouldn't, though, affect getting emails addressed to that account.      

SUBSCRIPTIONS:  We encourage people to pass on copies of Message from Michael.  But if you would like to get your own copy, you can subscribe by sending an e-mail to Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word "subscribe-MM" in the subject line.  If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter, e-mail Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word "unsubscribe-MM" in the subject line. Also, back issues of MfM are available at the website, media-consultant.blogspot.com.  You can reach me directly at Michael@MediaConsultant.tv.

 

--

Michael Castengera

MediaConsultant.tv

NewsProfs.tv

Message from Michael - Transmedia and Charlie Sheen - March 9, 2011

Message From Michael                                 

                                                                                                                        March 9, 2011                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

      THE SWEET TRANSMEDIA FROM TRANSYLVANIA

      A BORDER FENCE THAT IS BEING TORN DOWN

      APT APPS

      I WONDER AND I PONDER

      CHARLIE SHEEN

 

 

      THE SWEET TRANSMEDIA FROM TRANSYLVANIA.  In our never-ending quest to keep readers of the Message up to date on media trends, let me introduce you to the term ‘transmedia’, although many of you may already be familiar with it.  Its ancestors were Annette Funicello, Boba Fett, Gundam and Pokemon.  They gave birth to The Beast, The Matrix, and The Dark Knight, and their grand children are the Old Spice Man, Jay-Z and the re-united Ken and Barbie.   All of these are (old terminology) cross-media campaigns.  And all of these represent steps in the evolution of ‘transmedia’, according to a report by marketing communications group JWT Intelligence.  Heck, the only ones missing are Rocky and Dr. Frankenfurter, and their androgynous appeal may be a more fitting metaphor for transmedia.  According to the report, transmedia is an evolution of the integrated marketing model, with “narrative threads tailored for different channels” and in which “borderless story worlds are arcing over various platforms in innovative ways, providing consumers with multiple entry points that encourage deep engagement.”   How’s that for some verbiage?  Okay, put aside all the Manhattan Avenue speak, and here’s what you get.  The transmedia concept simply recognizes the fact that we live in a multi-platform media world that practically requires multi-tasking to cope with the multiple messages.  Underlying it all though is the content, but content conveyed through good story telling.  The challenge is to make sure that the story is appealing and applicable to newspapers and magazines, offline and online media, mobile and mobile apps, games and gaming, toys and puzzles, gadgets and widgets, social media and social networking, virtual worlds and augmented reality.  When you list all the media forms, it becomes almost overwhelming, doesn’t it?  All right, maybe not you, but it does to me.

The report says 2011 will be the year of the ‘transmedia toy’ and it cites Moshi Monsters as an example of transmedia marketing and story telling in action.   It is built around social online gaming, but adds in TV and Online Video, along with apps, books, magazines, and video games, trading cards and toys.  The report says half of all British kids between the ages of 6 and 12 and one in five U.S. kids have adopted a Moshi Monster with one Million virtual items sold daily.  Transmedia may be the big buzz word for 2011, but the report makes clear that it is not just a fad, but the new reality.  Further proof, the sometimes staid Producers Guild of America has approved ‘transmedia producer’ as one of its credits.  It describes a ‘ transmedia producer’ as someone who maintains ‘narrative continuity across multiple platforms… creates new storylines for additional platforms and spearheads interactive elements.’  As always, my one paragraph summary doesn’t do justice to the report.  You can find it by searching for TrendMediaRising and JWTIntelligence.

      A BORDER FENCE THAT IS BEING TORN DOWN.  The border between the ‘online world’ and the ‘physical world’ is getting “fuzzier,” and that represents an opportunity for marketers to increase consumer engagement, say the folks at JWT.  In a recently released PowerPoint spelling out a checklist for social media use, the group says there are four things to watch in social media.  One is where the online world is driving real life actions.  Example:  The recent Grammy Awards which used a geolocation-based app called MusicMaker which allowed music fans to attach stories about how a song influenced their lives.  Similar but slightly different -- Another thing to watch is “gamification” in which game mechanics are added to social media campaigns.  Example: Jack in the Box’s virtual coin jar in which people added a nickel when they ‘liked’ Jack.  A randomly selected fan eventually won $11,000.  The concept of “hyper-personalization” which acknowledges the fact that people expect their social media to be personalized.  Example:  The Old Spice Man campaign which culminated in a series of personalized YouTube vignettes.  And, lastly, but not lastly, the concept of F-Commerce which is basically the continuing development of selling through Facebook.  As long as I am making note of JWT reports, the group also produced a “100 Things to Watch in 2011” report.  I touched on it briefly at the end of last year, and I intend to re-visit it, but if you have the time, it’s worth the read.  Note to Readers and the Federal Trade Commission – I am not being paid to hype JWT.  Promise.  They just happen to have produced some very good reports.

      APT APPS.  How’s that for a simple headline?  And it’s very apropos.  Sorry, I just had to do that.  I love alliterations.  Publisher MediaPost has created The Appy Awards which is the first ever ceremony recognizing the growth of social, mobile and web-based applications as the hot thing in new media.  The winner of best in show was Flipboard which is self-described, and accurately, as a “personalized social magazine” allowing you to share your friends and your friends’ stuff on Facebook and Twitter.  There were multiple winners in a wide variety of categories.  For books, the winner was Teddy’s Day which brings your kids an interactive story.  In the education category, the winner was Rock Prodigy which teaches you how to play the guitar.  In news, the winner was one of my favorites, Newsy which brings you a multiple source, multiple view of the leading news stories. In music, the winner was Mog.  Talk show host Oprah won the lifestyle category with the app for her magazine.  Healthcare provider Humana won in the medical category.  And the travel category winner was Urbanspoon which provides you the restaurant menus of cities you may be visiting.  I had never heard of it, and that’s kind of the point of visiting the Appy Awards site.  So, go visit.

      I WONDER AND I PONDER.  And when I do that, I attend (at least, online) the TED conference.  The conference which just ended in Southern California brings together an eclectic mix of speakers like Bill Gates and artists like Parisian JR.  They deal with topics as diverse as the social revolution in the MidEast to how to break boards with your hands.  All reflecting the title theme of Technology, Entertainment and Design.  The lead presentation was from Artist JR who talked about how he puts the faces of various people on massive canvasses around the world, in places as diverse as Palestine and the slums of Rio de Janiero.  He, along with TED, are launching a global art project to do the same with contributions from people around the world.  One of my favorite TED activities was a tribute to Johnny Cash, created through multiple images provided by a variety of people.  Anyway, just a heads up for my savvy Message readers who might want to see what the innovators and idea creators of the world are doing.

      MORE BATTLE LINES BEING DRAWN.  This time between Facebook and YouTube.  The two groups threw announcement hand grenades at each other.  Facebook will soon begin distributing movies from Warner Brothers Entertainment, starting with The Dark Knight.  YouTube has acquired Next New Networks, which used to produce original content but which now primarily builds ads around Web shows produced by its ‘network’ of video-producing affiliates.  Interestingly, in the story in AdAge Digital, YouTube stresses that the move does not mean they are becoming a ‘media company’ while the headline on the story about the Facebook move reads “meet your new media company.”  In other words, they are becoming media companies.

      COCKTAIL CHATTER:  Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation has become the first major media company to become carbon neutral across its global operations.  In a memo to his staff, Murdoch said the effort, launched in 2007, will save the company Millions of dollars while also contributing to environmental sustainability.            

      CHARLIE SHEEN.  No, I have absolutely nothing to say about the star of Two and a Half Men.  I just didn’t want to be the only media outlet not doing a story about him.  Besides, I don’t want to miss out on some of the huge ratings some programs are getting or the massive online views others are getting from his… get this… 2.3 Million Twitter followers.             

      SUBSCRIPTIONS:  We encourage people to pass on copies of Message from Michael.  But if you would like to get your own copy, you can subscribe by sending an e-mail to Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “subscribe-MM” in the subject line.  If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter, e-mail Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “unsubscribe-MM” in the subject line. Also, back issues of MfM are available at the website, media-consultant.blogspot.com.  You can reach me directly at Michael@MediaConsultant.tv.