Yvonne Reports: The Media Biz

Where’s L.A. Times Video?

Missing Video player/links on LAT homepage, it used to be where L.A. Now is located (image via LAT.com)

It could be an ominous sign of the times or the beginning of a new video project, but just when most newspaper sites are vamping up their online video departments, the LAT seems to have stripped their video player from their homepage. The “Video” link that used to be located on the left-hand menu column has also mysteriously disappeared.

Oddly though, videos are still being produced (to a degree), but they’re hardly being promoted and they’re being embedded within articles, such as a LAT critic Kenneth Turan’s movie review of Public Enemies.

Their “new” video player looks like this:

LAT 'Public Enemies' video review (image via LAT.com)

which is hardly an improvement by any means. What was once LATimes.com/video now automatically routes you to LATimes.com/videobeta, a quick and dirty compilation of online videos.

So what’s going on at the LAT? Have they given up on online video or are they investing in something bigger and better? I have my fingers crossed for the latter, but if anything, their YouTube Channel remains intact. If anyone has more information, feel free to divulge. Otherwise, we’ll just have to sit tight and see what happens.

Twitter lied, and Ads still Rule

Published June 27, 2009 Ads , Future of Journalism , Internet , Media Trends , Monetization , New Media 1 Comment
Tags: Twitter, ad-based business model, New Media, GlamMedia, Tinker.com, Apps, iPhone Apps, TechCrunch, Ads

Tinker model (image via GlamMedia)

A little over a month ago, I published a post about Twitter co-founder Biz Stone forgoing the use of ads as a revenue model. In his words, he described ads as being “just not quite as interesting to us.”

Well, Twitter lied.

TechCrunch has recently confirmed that a new media agency called GlamMedia approached the microblogging enterprise about building “an advertising network powered by Twitter.”

Of course, it hasn’t been confirmed that the folks at Twitter have accepted GlamMedia’s proposal, but why would Twitter turn down a way to make money (even if ads are dull)? So, here’s the basic premise:

GlamMedia is a company that “connects premium brand advertisers to targeted niche audiences online” through the use of social media networks. They are essentially the middle men that connect thousands of traditional content publishers and professional bloggers with advertisers. Tinker.com is a new project they launched where microbloggers, aka Twitterers, can “find, follow, filter, create, and share events and breaking news.” Not only is it a resource for users to search what people are twittering about, but it’s also a method for advertisers to target users.

Thus, similar to Tinker, GlamMedia proposes to use the Twitter apps network to connect social apps with brand-name advertisers.

Since the emergence of iPhone apps, the development and monetization of apps has been on everyone’s mind. News, new media, and tech companies are all looking for a way to maximize their apps, and it seems like the good ole’ ad model hasn’t completely disappeared.

Everything is still in its developing stages between GlamMedia and Twitter, but it seems like some type of ad-oriented model has worked for Glam and they want it to work for Twitter too (considering they would get a slice of the revenue). So if Twitter, the company that no one believed could be monetized, takes on advertising, and, better yet, it works; then what does that mean for other media companies?

What does that mean for journalism?

What Jacko’s Death says about TMZ (and the media biz)

Published June 26, 2009 Entertainment , Internet , Media Trends , New Media 4 Comments
Tags: AOL, Blogs, Breaking News, Celebrity coverage, Death of Michael Jackson, Jacko, King of Pop, Media Industry, Michael Jackson, MJ, TMZ, Websites

Michael Jackson (AP image)

Yesterday around 4:30 in the afternoon, reports surfaced the web claiming that the ‘King of Pop’ had suffered a cardiac arrest.

This was serious, breaking news. Everyone needed to know about the fate of pop culture icon, Michael Jackson, and those that turned to the AP or the LAT for the latest developments were sorely disappointed.

By 5:20PM, TMZ, a celebrity news site owned by AOL, broke the news about Jacko’s death and later dominated the competition on MJ coverage.

Although they have a television show, TMZ is very much a new media phenomenon. Unlike its traditional counterparts, TMZ applies a blogger-esque type of entertainment reporting that’s quick, dirty, and often inaccurate. But Jackos’s death marked a new day for TMZ…and the media industry.

Those who regularly work the streets of L.A.’s entertainment news industry know that a major element of TMZ’s success is its monopoly over sources in the LA court system and law enforcement agencies. They invest a lot of their manpower and resources to this “beat,” and so far they have reaped the rewards. Not only do they have the most extensive coverage of celebrity divorces, criminal misdemeanors, and other legal transactions in LA, but they are often the first to break the news.

This is not to say that TMZ is an infallible source of entertainment news, because it’s not. Most people, apart from Harvey Levin and his minions, still question TMZ’s legitimacy and accuracy, as it is often compared to other tabloidy, celeb gossip sites like Perez or Gawker. Yet, the reality is that in an immediate 24/7 news cycle, a “blogger” site that churns out ridiculous posts like this:

a typical TMZ post (image via TMZ.com)

can also be the leading source of coverage for the death of globally renowned pop singer.

So what does this mean for the media biz?

- Do not underestimate the impact of blogs. Many “traditional” journalists still hold elitist attitudes when discussing the legitimacy of blogs. They claim that blogs would not exist without their news content. Well, not all blogs are content aggregators and even local community blogs produce their own content and generate unique coverage (often overlooked by mainstream media). Even if most blogs lack the validity of outlets, such as the NYT, there is something to be said about the way they present and distribute information, especially on the web. Many news outlets are not setting themselves up to succeed in the (I want it) NOW newscycle, because if they were, then they would be taking more innovative risks and revamping their websites, and gradually stop investing in their old, floundering enterprises. This is not new news, but for some reason it is a fact many refuse to believe.

- Accuracy and reputation still matters. When news of MJ’s death came out, the first and only phrase on people’s lips was “Is it true?” The greatest edge that traditional news outlets have over other emerging new media companies is that they have a long-established reputation for accurate and quality reporting. For example, when TMZ reports something like MJ’s death there is still a veil of doubt and uncertainty about the report, but if the AP, NYT, LAT, or WAPO published the same article, hardly any reader would question the factuality of that report. No matter how popular news outlets may be, viewer/reader trust has to be earned, and established, decades-old news companies definitely have an advantage in that area.

- The web is big enough for everybody. TMZ is one example of a niche biz model headed in the right direction. The company dominates a slice of the media biz (entertainment) and they apply their resources to a sector of the industry (the LA legal system). They are celebrity “specialists” and overtime people are realizing that they are good at what they do. The web is getting too competitive for most companies to proficiently cover every area of news, but the Internet has simultaneously enabled more niche markets to thrive.

How do you think the death of Michael Jackson has changed the media biz? Would you pick TMZ over other news sites?

Farewell TV, I shall not miss thee.

Published June 3, 2009 Google , Hulu , Internet , Media Trends , Television , YouTube 1 Comment
Tags: Digital generation, Google, Hulu Desktop, Media Trends, Online Video, Television, YouTube XL

Introducing YouTube XL (image via YouTube)

Talking heads, compulsory commercials, and a sea of terrible (reality-TV) content. That is what I think of when I think of television.

Personally- I’m over it. TV is overrated. There is absolutely nothing that I would watch on there that I cannot, and prefer to, watch online. There are many reasons for this (to be expounded in another post) but TV is overrated to the point that it has become underrated as it continues to lose viewership as we speak, especially network TV.

So imagine my rejoice when I learn that YouTube has launched a new product called YouTube XL- making online videos fit for the big(ger) screen.

It’s not a new phenomenon, watching online videos on television, but it is a new trend that is finally catching on.

The beauty of YouTube XL and other similar products, such as the recently released Hulu Desktop, a new application that makes it smoother and cooler to view videos on your computer (with a remote!), is that it has raised the expectations for watching online content. Who wants this–

How we used to watch online videos

— when you can have YouTube XL and other competing counterparts?

Besides the clean, simple interface, the navigation is simplified, the quality is superb (with HD), and my all-time, favorite perk (as a user, of course) is that there are no ads. There are no more distracting promotions and commercial time-wasters. It’s just you and a steady stream of ridiculous/entertaining/ informative YouTube videos neatly packaged for your computer screen, or even better, your TV screen.

It has been a long time coming, but it’s finally here. Online video content has evolved, and TV should feel threatened because it is seriously being threatened. Although most popular content still comes from studio production companies, the art of watching TV as a medium has definitely passed its heyday.

A question to ponder is whether media companies, such as YouTube and Hulu, are responding to public demand or setting the public trend. In this case, I believe it’s the former. The way young (and younger) people are consuming media is shifting in a much more digital, mobile direction. It’s a no brainer of course, but what does that mean for journalism?

If news outlets are increasingly moving to the web, as they should, then they can’t simply copy and paste the content that was formerly featured in their traditional mediums, newspapers, magazines, and television, and expect it to translate onto the web. Like YouTube or Hulu, they need to redesign it, repackage it, and offer users (aka the next generation) a new product that is designed for online users. A product that also crossover to other mediums like TV or desktop screens. Example: Newspapers->Web-> Mobile phones/Kindle.

It may not be the answer, but news companies needs to envision the web not as a supplementary medium, but the main medium where the next generation consumes content. Let go of tradition and embrace the new.

And with that, goodbye Television- I won’t be missing you.

Follow the “Google Wave”

Published May 30, 2009 Google , Internet , News Leave a Comment
Tags: E-mail, Google Wave, Instant-Messaging

Google is redefining the meaning of “instant” on the world wide web.

Google Wave has recently announced a new “communications platform” that transforms how we e-mail, instant message, send attachments, share documents, and everything else that involves information sharing. One of the main highlights is that chat, e-mail, and everything else that can be exchanged over the web can now be conducted instantaneously in real-time. If you’re typing in an e-mail/IM conversation box, the other person/s on the receiving end can see what you’re typing literally AS you’re typing it. So long “Yvonne is typing…” disclaimers, because in Google Wave there is no time lag…at all.

This instant-messaging perk applies to sharing photos, attachments, editing documents, and more. And to spare you from sifting through the 1 hour and 30 minute video presentation above (it’s definitely interesting if you have the time), here’s a quick walk-through of Google Wave from PC World.

Unfortunately, the product won’t be launched until later this year, but I’m already looking forward to it. The developers are the same guys who created Google Maps, so I expect great things when the product is officially released.

What does this all mean for the media biz though?

It is a valid question because the media/news industry is intrinsically tied to the tech industry and their latest trends and developments. It is imperative that journos, photogs, editors, broadcasters, and everyone else keeps up with what’s technologically new or they inevitably fall behind (Case in point: newspapers). One of the reasons why some seasoned journalists can’t adapt to the Internet age and the Twittering effect is because they have never viewed their role as a journalist as to have anything to do with technology. Which is unfortunately false.

Thus, Google Wave may seem like a new product for the personal web user, but in reality they are redesigning the process and, more importantly, the expectations of information-sharing. People will expect to receive information even faster than before, (fortunately nothing can get faster than instantaneous) because if e-mails and IMs can be exchanged instantaneously than why not news? When it comes to news coverage- “now” and “the latest updates” no longer means watching the six o’clock local evening news program or reading the morning newspaper. It means breaking news mobile texts, short Twitter messages, and instant Facebook updates. Google Wave is only streamlining the process and commemorating our inception into an era of immediacy.

Will we all soon be blogging, reporting, and updating in real time? Who knows. But I’m following the Wave to find out.

Psh, ads? Who needs them?

Published May 19, 2009 Internet , Twitter 4 Comments
Tags: ad-based business model, media news, Twitter

Twitter co-founder Biz Stone (via Google Images)

Well, apparently Twitter doesn’t.

In contrast to the majority of American media outlets, recents reports say that Biz Stone, the co-founder of Twitter, will not be turning to an ad-based business model to support their two-year old microblogging enterprise.

Instead they will be “developing various add-on tools and services for the businesses and professional users of Twitter” to generate revenue.

Why won’t Twitter be turning to the ubiquitous ad biz model? Basically, “it’s just not quite as interesting to us,” says Stone, and “there are no people at Twitter who know anything about advertising or work in advertising.”

A straightforward answer, but an unconventional approach for most media companies in the industry. As a relatively new start-up with millions of dollars of venture capital in the bank, Twitter doesn’t have to worry about making a profit in the near future. In a way, that gives them the freedom to experiment and try new things. For the rest of us, however, we’ll have to stand by and watch. Hopefully they’ll come up with something that works for the rest of us though, because in the end no one really thinks ads are interesting.

A Niche for the Rich

Published May 18, 2009 Internet , Magazines Leave a Comment
Tags: Niche Markets, Web business models, Worth magazine

Worth Magazine - $19 a pop (NYT)

Since the Internet boom, the former business model of producing blockbuster movies and mainstream products targeting the general population has been superseded by the emergence of hundreds of niche markets targeting a smaller subsection of consumers. It’s a trend that stemmed from the ability to start your own business, shape your own brand, and self-promote yourself to millions of users with the web.

Independent music artists, movie producers, bloggers, entrepreneurs, freelance journalists, and others, have been able to make a living by targeting a smaller segment of the population, or a niche. They don’t need America to like them, they just need to attract fans with a taste for soft, indie ballads, people with a guilty pleasure for celebrity gossip, or 30 year old men who revel in all things techy, and the market is theirs for the taking.

So in the spirit of nicheness, and in light of the economic recession, Worth magazine is reaching out to wealthy, loaded, and ridiculously rich Americans who need money-management advice. According to the NYT article, the magazine will be sold bi-monthly at the cost of $18.95 per issue. It will also be printed with matte paper, include “artsy” photos, and (here’s the big one) sell $30,000 advertisement packages to financial advisors “to have their essays on wealth and biographies included in every issue.” Talk about an ultra-fancy magazine.

Surprisingly, Worth has been around the mag industry since 1992, but a chain of sketchy owners and business strategies have hindered their success. They’re currently owned by Sandow Media who are transforming Worth’s biz model to target the rich (people with an income of over $2 million).

I find it ironic, and almost endearing, that a magazine will up the prices in a time of economic crisis. $30k for ads, in a bi-monthly mag that has yet to make its presence in the personal finance industry, sounds ludicrous, but who knows, that may be pocket change for fabulously wealthy “financial advisors” out there. In this day and age, it’s been proven that niche marketing works, so we’ll just have to wait and see if Worth will do the same.

Crossing over: the ‘Tucson Citizen’

Published May 16, 2009 Future of Journalism , Internet , Newspapers Leave a Comment
Tags: Death of Newspapers, Tucson Citizen, Web-Only

Welcome, Tucson Citizen!

Today, one of Tucson, Arizona’s two daily newspapers, the Tucson Citizen owned by the Gannett Co., will be publishing it’s last print edition and will be exclusively producing content for its website.

In an E&P article, Bob Dickey, the president of the U.S. Community Publishing division of Gannett, said:

“We are pleased that the Citizen’s web site will continue its role as a place for a separate community conversation. Its staff will focus on stimulating public engagement in local affairs. We look forward to moving in this exciting direction.”

Though, I’m sure this dramatic transformation was done with much trepidation and was a result of “difficult” economic circumstances, I’m glad the Tucson Citizen is moving forward. As I hope they will soon discover and realize that when it comes to the web, the opportunities are endless.

Changing the Rules of the Game

Published May 15, 2009 Internet Leave a Comment
Tags: Media Industry, Paparazzi, Venture Capitalists

The Internet is a powerful tool.

Not only is it breaking down the walls of newsrooms, but it is transforming the rules of the game for practically every industry imaginable.

A majority of people now have the opportunity to access information and programs that were once shielded behind a corporate wall. The ability to reach millions of people is no longer a phenomenon owned by TV networks, media conglomerates, or other billion dollar industries. The power now lies in the hands of giggling babies (thank you YouTube).

Even the paps can’t catch a break.

According to an article from paidContent, People who spend their lives careers time stalking celebrities, are now being sidestepped by amateur bloggers and the stars themselves. No, surprise there.

Also in the web biz, the NYT blogged about how digital entrepreneurs may no longer need to win the hearts of venture capitalists. The lower cost of web start-ups are making it more affordable for innovators to execute their ideas. Of course, that doesn’t apply to all industries and that doesn’t mean that the requisites of sheer talent and skill no longer apply, but it is the beginning of something different. The old institutions are changing, some are crumbling, and it’s time to bring on the new.

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Jun
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Yvonne Reports: The Media Biz

Where’s L.A. Times Video?

Twitter lied, and Ads still Rule

What Jacko’s Death says about TMZ (and the media biz)

Farewell TV, I shall not miss thee.

Follow the “Google Wave”

Psh, ads? Who needs them?

A Niche for the Rich

Crossing over: the ‘Tucson Citizen’

Changing the Rules of the Game

Twitter

Top Posts

Recent Posts

Topics

Friends

Archive

del.icio.us

Pages

Meta

Twitter