Ο τελευταίος χρόνος, αποδεικνύεται ως ο χειρότερος για την τηλεόραση, αφού οι μετρήσεις του κοινού έχουν καταρρεύσει. Σύμφωνα με έρευνα του Citi Research, από το Σεπτέμβριο του 2011, η θεαματικότητα στην επίγεια και στη δορυφορική τηλεόραση, έχει πέσει κατακόρυφα, με μία μικρή εξαίρεση την περίοδο των Ολυμπιακών Αγώνων. Στην Αμερική, περίπου 5 εκατομμύρια συνδρομητές κατάργησαν […]
Θυμάστε το πανέμορφο pre-roll από τη Wind που είδαμε πριν ένα μήνα; To video είναι πολύ ατμοσφαιρικό και σε αυτό συμβάλλει πολύ και η μουσική, κάτι για το οποίο ρώτησαν πολλοί σχολιαστές στο YouTube για να λάβουν την απάντηση πως η μουσική γράφτηκε αποκλειστικά γι αυτό το διαφημισστικό. Τώρα ήρθε η συνέχεια με ακόμη ένα […]
What kind of Internet do we want?
Some might consider this a vague, daunting and even ambiguous question, but it begs for an answer. Anyone who has been online for a long time knows how interesting, diverse and different the Internet – as a medium – was (and can still be). It was very different from anything that we had seen before. In my second book, CTRL ALT Delete, I frame it in a more simplistic way: traditional media was very passive (it was created, edited and distributed for us and we consumed it in a very passive manner). Sure, there were “letters to the editor” and more, but most of this interaction was still strictly regulated by the media owners and highly edited to fit a specific format. While there is nothing wrong with passive media (I like to sit back and soak in an episode of Charlie Rose as much as the next dweeb), the Internet brought with it a dramatic change: active media. From sitting back to leaning in. From looking to touching. From consuming to creating and curating. In fact, it hasn’t been all that long since the Internet has been commercialized, and yet here we are at a fascinating moment in time when all of it can come crashing down in a massive heap of mediocrity.
Traditional media wants to becomes active. The Internet wants to be like television (and become passive?).
What used to be the most charming thing about the Internet is quickly becoming somewhat homogenous and frighteningly similar to prime time television. It used to be that blogging opened up our minds to individual perspective. We would share these online diaries, comment on them, dissect them and more. It used to be that the trendy topics on Twitter was a driver of new ideas. Things, events and ideas to explore. The stuff you would never find mentioned on CNN. Now, the trending topics on Twitter tend to look an awful lot like the breaking news tickertape graphics that scroll across the CNN screen. Podcasting used to be the home of independent and niche thinking, but the most popular podcasts today are mass media re-iterations of their content. Where has the diversity of these ideas gone?
That’s not a slight against either media personality. I’m a huge fan of all things Huffington Post (I contribute there regularly and Arianna was kind enough to endorse CTRL ALT Delete), but we are no longer seeing much diversity as consolidation and global behemoths battle for Internet supremacy. Look no further than Business Insider‘s The Future Of Digital 2013 slide titled, Value (and power) are still very concentrated. What you will see is that the market value online is divided up like this:
Compared to “old media”:
- Disney = 24%
- Comcast = 24%
- 21st Century Fox = 16%
- Time Warner = 12%
- Time Warner Cable = 7%
- Viacom = 8%
- CBS = 7%
- News Corp = 2%
It’s not a true apples to apples comparison, but you get the idea.
Sure, Amazon is one of the world’s largest retailers, but they’ve also just announced more original programming like Betas and Alpha House (kind of like their own, little cable network). At the same time, Apple is still pushing iTunes Radio and Yahoo is making all kinds of waves this week by announcing that Katie Couric will be joining the company as their “Global Anchor” (does anybody know what that title even means?).
It’s a strange world.
Newspapers, magazines, radio and television companies are all scrambling to figure out how to be more like the Internet, digital and active media to make themselves more relevant, while these online companies are developing television shows, buying newspapers and poaching television celebrities. What’s going on here? We had too many people laughing at Google for things like Google Glass and driverless cars while we’re handing out belly rubs and lollipops in the boardroom any time new media does something so very traditional.
My kind of Internet.
I don’t know about you, but my kind of Internet is all about innovation, new platforms and the ability to do things with this technology that you can’t do on a television or in a magazine. I love television, radio, newspapers and magazines, but I want the Internet to do a whole more. In fact, I expect more of it. My hopes are that Pinterest can grow to the point where they can build whatever the next Instagram could be. That they push the frontiers of how we define media and what the media channels of the future might look like. If all they do, is scale and bring on Martha Stewart to run a bunch of boards, it’s going make me bored. We need the folks at Reddit to re-imagine the quirky corners of publishing, news and tidbits that will never have the mass appeal and scale to reach The New York Times. We don’t need another Lady Gaga AMA. We need these new media companies to focus on the “new” and to keep pushing whatever their agendas are to be unique, different and not the same old, same old.
I am hoping that we get the Internet that we need… and not the one that we deserve.
Τον γύρο του Internet έκανε η πρώτη από τις δύο φωτογραφίες για το Halloween στις 31 Οκτωβρίου. Η Pepsi ντύθηκε «τρομακτικά» βάζοντας μια μπέρτα με τη συσκευασία της Coca-Cola. Με τη δεύτερη εικόνα όμως έκανε το comeback η Coca-Cola δύο ημέρες αργότερα, αλλάζοντας απλά το copy. Και ξέρετε, εμείς λατρεύουμε κάτι τέτοια παιχνίδια… Ειδικά όταν […]
Have you seen this episode of Charlie Rose?
It originally aired on July 25th, 2013. It’s a great piece of video content to watch. These a traditional media personalities starting to better see just how much disruption the world has been through… and…
TweetIt’s time for this week’s Marketing Companion, in which my co-host Mark Schaefer and I discuss the recent purchase of […]
It doesn’t matter if your logo is an exploding unicorn that’s about to cover the multiverse in rainbows. It doesn’t matter if you have a catchy brand name that’s so memorable, your next door neighbor, the one who has managed to live without internet access for the past twenty years, is enthusiastic about it. And it doesn’t matter if your tagline is so awesome, it is promptly co-opted in the latest Summer Hollywood flop. All of these things will play a role in your success later, but without good publicity they are and will be entirely irrelevant. So it’s your mission now to get your story straight in order to get that publicity as you build out this other stuff.
I’ve been working in PR since 1999, even going so far as documenting my misfortune as a Millennial during the peak of The Great Recession in the pages of the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and Newsweek just to stay in the news. In that time I learned everything was secondary to a good story. If you don’t have that, regardless of whether or not you want to make the world a better place or possess the technology to do so, it simply won’t matter unless people know about it. And conversely, if you’re a broke Millennial living with your wife’s parents in South Glens Falls, New York, the opposite is true. You could have nothing and offer nothing while still making appearances in the national media; thus again validating what I’m saying to you now: don’t underestimate the power of a good story. It’s all you need to get that much-needed publicity.
It’s rare that your startup is going to have an opportunity like Google or Facebook did, where they were both able to grow extensively because they were founded in hotbeds of viral activity (elite universities with proactive alumni bases). I’m not saying it can’t happen, but I’m going to tell you that it is unlikely that anyone will know you exist or play with all your cool stuff unless they know about you via an external and trusted source, and nine times out of ten, that trusted and external source is going to be a media outlet like the Wall Street Journal, not an active alumni base.
If you’re a startup, and you haven’t yet figured out what your story is, the reason for your existence, and what exactly you can do for other people, there’s nothing I or anyone can tell you that’s going to make a difference in the failure or success of your enterprise. Too often, startup founders get caught up with themselves.
Sometimes, this can make a ton of sense. Like if you’re Tyler Spalding at StyleSeek, whose company delivers highly personalized product results while adhering to a super strict code of ethics about how that personal information is treated by the company. It makes total sense for your CEO then to be front and center as a privacy advocate because they’re there to tell the rest of the world, through their story and advocacy, that there is a better way forward than the fear, paranoia, and distrust we all now exhibit toward private companies and the federal government when it comes to the use of our data.
But this need for the founder and CEO to be front and center should be be a rarity. Startup founders are not overly relatable for a number of reasons. Often they will tell you a story of their frustration and that’s what lead to the creation of the company. That’s simply not good enough to sell the company to the press consistently over the long term.
So the story of the company in most cases needs to be separate from the story of the founder, and with that in mind, the heart of the matter is that the story of the company needs to be centered around the purpose for the company’s existence, not what issues the founder had. The press is more concerned about the why of the company’s existence and readers of the press are more concerned about knowing what your startup can do for them. What the founder thinks is does is often irrelevant outside of the Valley.
If you can get that part figured out, you can then flesh out the rest of the story. “We exist because X.” “We hope to achieve X.” “This is how we plan to get to X.” Very simple, very basic points. Points that can later be recycled and repeated, almost ad nauseam, to the press as talking points about the company that employees can use and have readily available. It’s only once you have your story straight that the other stuff like logos, design, and tag lines makes sense to talk about. Without the story, you have no guide, no one knows what you’re about, and the press won’t go anywhere near you. You can fix that. Go do so and worry about the other stuff later.
Image by Slavoljub Pantelic.
New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.
Κάτι διαφορετικό αποφάσισαν να κάνουν οι παραγωγοί της σειράς Hannibal που παίζεται αυτό τον καιρό στο NBC. Η σειρά είναι στο 6ο της επεισόδιο από τα 13 που έχουν ανακοινωθεί, αλλά αυτό που έκανε διαφορετικό είναι στο 4ο της επεισόδιο, Ceuf. Το επεισόδιο ήταν προγραμματισμένο να προβληθεί λίγο μετά το Μαραθώνιο της Βοστώνης, αλλά λόγω [...]
Ο CEO της Unilever πιστεύει πως τα social media σύντομα θα είναι «πιο σημαντικό εργαλείο για brand adoption απ’ ότι η τηλεόραση».The post O CEO της Unilever για τα social me…
TweetApple is an enormously successful company, and as such has spurred a cottage industry in business writing as we all [...]