Internet Newspapers

As Green is the new buzzword and digital is replacing print, it is not unusual to hear news that newspaper print advertising continues to decline. From Bloomberg, "U.S. newspapers suffered their worst drop in print advertising sales since industry record- keeping began 57 years ago, hammered by the housing-market slump and competition from the Internet." But the death of print, seems to be not the end of newspapers, but simply the end of one delivery method for another.

The web continues to bring us the news at a much faster rate. And aggregate sites, like the Huffington Post, provides us a blend of fact and opinion from recognizable names. Web versions of print, like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal are still considered to offer expert news sources, unmatched by others. But like email vs snail mail, we want our news delivered lightning fast and not simply once a day.

The newspaper industry has gone through this type of change before. Years ago, the afternoon edition was considered the ultimate way to stay informed of the activities from earlier in the day. Readership changed as the morning edition provided similar information through faster printing mechanisms, so that late news was included in early editions. The afternoon paper has gone away.

And so, the combination of factors: technology, green environmental issues, lifestyle changes, and others may lead to the death of the print edition. And while smaller batches may be printed, more and more people will purchase digital subscriptions or agree to see ads in exchange for downloading the news. Which sites become more popular to view or subscribe will ultimately depend on marketing activity: demonstrating brand value, building author/writer expertise, and viral buzz.

And what will the device be to view these sites from. Well... mobility and size rank up there; download speed is key and security/privacy of the subscription matters. Will Kindle or iPhone or Blackberry or laptop or someother technological innovation be it? The landscape keeps changing. But if I were print newspaper, I'd be looking ahead toward this transition and start to offer a digital stream. And if I am a bookseller, I'd get on this quickly too. Borders is up for sale, Barnes & Noble is looking over their shoulder, and Amazon is already there.

Social Nets as your Address Book

I have come to find myself relying on my online social nets as my address book. Someone has a birthday - Plaxo and Facebook remind me and I click from the site to send them a message or write on their wall to wish them well. If Linked In reports a change to a job, new title or new company, a quick click lets me acknowledge their success. I know longer have to remember special events, these sites prompt me in advance to take action if I choose.

And while it is nice that birthday wishes are being spread around, the level of information being shared could become a slippery slope. Should I put my personal activities on a social calendar only to have others hope that I have a successful root canal or fun manning the snack bar at the local little league game. How much sharing should be allowed. What is private anymore.

The article attached talks about Business Week's partnership with linked In that allows BusinessWeek.com users to access contact and company information and find people they know via LinkedIn connections. As a networking tool, it provides great information and opportunity. With regard to privacy, we are all an open book.

Net Neutrality Solution

Well the old adage goes, if you can't beat them, join them. Comcast seems to have recognized that the best way to resolve net neutrality issues is to work in partnership with BitTorrent to find a solution to the issue of bandwidth hogging.

Will this new partnership curtail the FCC efforts to resolve net neutrality claims; probably not in the short run. But if a technological solution can be found, it may delay action to allow a business approach to run, as opposed to a legislative one. It reminds me of the day multiple files were zipped into smaller packets for easier emailing. Clearly those that understand bits and bytes are looking to that type of quantum change to reduce the size of the files so they are easier to transport.

Bandwidth continues to be the ultimate issue and efficiencies of the infrastructure is needed. We are moving away from hardware storage of content. CD and DVD sales are declining. Audio files are small compared to video files. And as more people move toward downloading large video files, bandwidth issues will become more challenging. Mobility of content is key; holding data on ipods and other portable devices is far easier to carry than cases of cds and dvds. It is the natural evolution of the product.

Product Placement Rules

Tivo killed the ad inserted spot. VOD tries to disable fast forwarding, but people always find away around it. Success in monetizing content requires smart advertising and a keen understanding of how much is enough. The article in the New York Times demonstrates that branded entertainment can fund projects and can uniquely break through the clutter to get noticed. As the article suggests, "Integrating a brand or product into the plot of a movie, a TV series or a video game is intended to thwart the increasing ability of consumers to zap, zip through or otherwise dodge — so to speak — traditional advertising tactics like television commercials."

Certainly these are not new ideas. The golden age of television was all about sponsors who integrated their messages into the title or plot of the show. Uncle Miltie and his Texaco Theatre, the Jack Benny Program weaved products like Lucky Strikes and Jello.

Ultimately, the success of the sponsorship and promotion rests on the appeal of the content. Viewers will watch "Soccer Mom" if the storyline appeals, the actors are engaging, and the interest is peaked. First and foremost, the content must be engaging and interesting; otherwise, it becomes seen as a long commercial message to avoid.

Strike Effect? Online Video Jumps In February

Well, people are not bored with online video. In a short month, video usage jumped back up in February, slightly higher than December. Silicon Alley Insider reports the topline Nielsen VideoCensus info for the last three months, including avergage time spent viewing per month:

December - 6.2 billion/130 mins
January - 5.9 billion/124.4 mins
February - 6.3 billion/130 mins

At the same time, Nielsen broadcast TV ratings were down 20% in February, perhaps finally due to the effects of the writers strike and lack of original programming on TV. My family, like most I believe, were tuned in many nights in a row for all the American Idol shows. Will online viewers be as loyal to their web shows as they are to their TV shows. An these usage numbers need to be dissected further to determine what types of video are of most interest.

I am a fan of short form video on the web, but I wonder if the low barrier to entry will simply create more glut and less quality. Will the 80/20 rule apply and the vast majority of views come from aggregators like Hulu, Joost, You Tube, and perhaps also broadcast websites. Or will the glut of bad video create dissatisfaction which in turn causes people to start to turn off online video for other activities like gaming. All bets are on...

Is Amazon's Kindle Taking Off

The more I see people carrying Amazon's Kindle on the train, the more I think that this could be looked back to be to books and reading what the Apple iPod was to music. The announcement that Tribune is delivering a new political magazine exclusively for this platform indicates that others see revenue opportunities from a subscription service. And Tribune is said to be creating more virtual magazines across topics like finance, travel, food, etc.

Would people buy Fortune Magazine for Kindle even if similar content is available for free on the web. Does Kindle morph into a web based reader. Will people be willing to stop buying books for electronic copies. And should Kindle come with an audio book component to add even more value. Amazon recently purchased Audible, so anything is possible. Newspaper and Magazines seem to have the bigger challenge in an online world to get virtual subscriptions when content is available free. How online content differs from subscription will determine viability for these products.

DOJ Approves XM Sirius Merger

While the Department of Justice has approved the merger of Sirius and XM Satellite, it is now the FCC's turn to rule. Given technological changes from the internet, including Apple and the ipod, free radio, and even direct to home companies like Dish and Direct TV, the FCC should let this merger proceed. The landscape of enertainment is changing...

Web Games On For Nets

Want to increase the number of hits to your site, want to improve the stickiness of the brand, want to keep your audience coming back for more, then online gaming seems to be the cure!

Tha data being released indicates the growing demand for casual games as well as its interest across most demographics. As the article points out, “If you look at our audience — which ranges from pre-schoolers to parents — gaming is the No. 1 thing from an entertainment perspective online,” Youngblood said. “So if we're to be relevant to this audience, we have to make sure we're offering content that they want.”

What struck me most interesting was the revenue coming from games. While online advertising is not discussed, it is clear that there is a benefit measured by usage of these sites. Nickelodeon saw over 20 million users come to their site in January.

Most surprising was that people were also subscribing to game sites "...DirecTV has signed up more than 135,000 subscribers with interactive boxes to its $5.95 per month service, which offers such casual games as Monopoly, Slingo, Scrabble, Solitaire and poker." A pretty piece of change to Direct TV; if I do the math, that is providing almost $10 million dollars of revenue from these gaming sites!

Gaming seems to work on all levels, as applications on social networking sites, as brand builders, and as I have come to learn, as ways to build and grow affinity and loyalty programs with customers. Across devices, gaming is the impetus for change in the entertainment landscape.

Nokia Morph - the phone of the future

Concept video from Nokia of a futuristic cell phone that utilizes nanotechnology to combine function and form. It repels dirt, stretches to different forms, becomes wearable, and recharges from the sun. Definitely science fiction but fascinating to think what the cell phone could become. Watch an original episode of Star Trek; back in the 1960's, who would ever expect that the communication device used on that show would be exactly the kind of phone we use today. Makes you hope that this kind of phone could exist one day.

Second Life Voted Last Year's Most Over-hyped Trend

According to a poll of attendees at an Ad Age Digital Media Conference, Second Life was voted the most over-hyped media trend. While I have not found much interest in it personally, I have watched my son create avatars inside Club Penguin, Pirates Online, and to a certain extent, through Webkinz. Each allowed him to play in a virtual world and interact with others. Luckily for me, on a very limited level.

And while he sporadically goes to them, the impetus is the gaming, not the exploration. I believe for that reason, Second Life, as it stands today is over-hyped and is more fad than future. Content providers that create multiple platforms for their brands will find more success coming from these online worlds. Watch Hannah Montanah or Pirates of the Carribbean, then interact in their space. Move from TV to VOD to Wii to PC, but stay with the content. That loyalty can equate to revenue and allow brand messages to break through the clutter.

Can Social Networks Make Money

My previous post looked at the growth of online advertising and the likely places for success. The article in The Economist suggests that sites like My Space and Facebook, while becoming an integral part of the online experience, may not be the place to find revenue.

One of the most interesting quotes from the article believes that "it is entirely conceivable that social networking, like web-mail, will never make oodles of money. That, however, in no way detracts from its enormous utility. Social networking has made explicit the connections between people, so that a thriving ecosystem of small programs can exploit this “social graph” to enable friends to interact via games, greetings, video clips and so on."

The article looks at email as a similar business that has yet to find a strong revenue model. My Space has the power of Murdoch behind it, but no one has been able to build strong synergies. Facebook tried to grow an ad model through Beacon but got chastised by its critics and users for invasion of privacy.

As extensions of core brands, social networks can build loyalty and enhance relationships, but it will be fascinating to watch who can prove that there is a revenue model to profit from.

Online Ad Spending to Rise 23% in 2008

I always wonder when I read about advertising spending whether increases in advertising is a result of overall growth, or if these dollars are simply moving from one pocket to another. Prior to online, I paid attention to the rise in cable advertising vs broadcasting and if one was taking from the other. So this growth projection of 23% is great unless the companies that survive on ad dollars are overall seeing dollars decrease from their other pocket.

The writers strike was about getting their fair share from this source of revenue. It seems most of the dollars are actually coming from search...hooray Google. But there is money from online video as well - "-- Rich media/video ad spend is set to keep growing as a percentage of online ad budgets, rising to 18.5 percent in 2012 from 10.2 percent in 2008."

One thing for sure, online advertising is far more measurable. Specific purchase behavior can be tracked and documented to show the ROI. In this new media world, Big Brother is watching. George Orwell was right.

Online Gaming Adds to the Multi Platform Approach

Robert Iger, President of Disney, recently said that the web is replacing children's TV. “In the years ahead, broadband on the computer will be the primary source of entertainment for kids,” he said. “It’s just as important to them as the TV set now.”
While behavior patterns are always shifting, online gaming allows for a more engaging relationship. As a parent, the computer has clearly become an important part of my kids' entertainment choice. But I don't expect it to replace TV, but to enhance the value of the experience.

The NYT article talks about the rise in casual gaming and points to the new games coming out of Nick. All these games are dependent on the relationship to the TV show. In order to be like Dora or Pokemon, you must first have a relationship with the TV character. Casual gaming allows its audience to go beyond the one way relationship with the TV character to becoming more interactive. For its audience, I believe it leads to a stronger and more valuable connection. As mentioned by the article, it allows for more advertising tie-ins and promotion back to the TV. And done right, that is with a sense of who its audience is and how they relate to their brands, it is done with a sense of restraint. There is no need to kill the golden goose.

Disney has successfully used casual gaming as well. One does not just watch Hannah Montanah; my daughter has the Wii game to sing like her, the dvd and cds to watch and listen to, and the outfits (including blonde hair) to be like her. The gaming element doesn't replace watching the show, it merely enhances the enjoyment of the experience. And as the TV and the computer find there way into the same room, this younger demographic has learned to easily multitask among the different platforms; playing online, watching TV, and interacting with others.

As adults, we also have found interest in casual gaming. Just look at the success of Scrabulous on Facebook. And ask yourself, have you played brickbreaker on your Blackberry - what's your high score? To our kids, online gaming is a natural component to the TV brand.

Online Video Viewing Drops Slightly

"MediaPost reports that the total number of online videos viewed in January was down slightly from the more than 10.1 billion viewed during a record-breaking December 2007, according to the comScore Video Metrix service."

Interesting analysis but perhaps premature to talk about this online viewing drop as a trend just yet. It is reporting January vs December and may be due to a number of factors including how workers tend to be more busy starting a new year than enjoying the Holidays and non-work activities in December. At first blush, I wanted to blame this shift on the writers strike, but that wasn't resolved till the next month. And as Hulu is now out of beta, perhaps March will also show an uptick due to the pr around the launch.

I doubt that online viewing has reached a plateau, but should it be true, I contend that the VOD experience is what will move on-demand viewing back to the big screen. The pc is great for clips, but full episode viewing is best watched on the big screen. If that is the case, it will be evident in watching Hulu and Joost trends vs VOD viewership. And as for the mobility, DVDs will survive if they add options like downloading to portable players from the disc.

Media Merger Mania

This article suggests lots of M&A activity will be occurring. Not a very earth shattering proclamation. Already, we have the planned merger of Sirius and XM Satellite, the sale of The Weather Channel, Bebo's sale to AOL, among those known. So what of the rumors...is Charter for sale and will Time Warner and Comcast split the subs. Is Hallmark off the block or just waiting for a better offer. Is Comcast still interested in buying Disney or another programmer. Is CBS looking to add to its assets. And what of all the new media sites, financed by venture capital, and obviously looking for a payout. Merger mania, no, simply normal business transactions.

Media mergers is not new; big fish buy little fish. It is the natural order.

DirecTV to Start On-Demand

Talk about changing the media landscape, VOD was an important differentiator between cable and satellite. With this news, satellite services like Direct TV and Dish are working to close those differences. Still what keeps the two services separate are satellites inability to provide broadband service and its ability to provide phone. Direct also demonstrates the value of content by pushing their ability to provide more Hi Def linear channels than their competition.

Most interesting, what is required for a Direct customer to get VOD content is a broadband connection and per this report, half of all their customers also have a broadband connection. But from where? Are these customers also taking hi speed from the cable provider and perhaps basic service on one TV in the home as well. Could this mean that the cable operator has not truly lost this subscriber, they may have simply downgraded to fewer services.

Or are these connections with telcos like AT&T. As AT&T rolls out its own version of cable called U-verse to more and more homes, do they try to convert these subs away from Direct to AT&T? How do these two businesses remain friendly in communities where they also compete with one another.

Technology continues to make more and more things possible and I am sure the ideal situation for satellite is interactive communication, not the one-way transmission they currently use with a phone connection for the return. One day, that should be economically feasible. But perhaps the electrical outlet can provide another source to harness interactive possibilities. Competition is good for business and Direct TV continues to demonstrate that they know how to compete. Today broadband is the bandaid approach to VOD and interactivity, tomorrow, who knows.

Online Distribution Can Help All Audiences Grow

Robert Iger clearly embraces new media and recognizes that it doesn't replace TV but enhances its value.

“More mature platforms can still generate a lot of value, including the big-screen movie experience in the theater,” he added. “That value actually grows because of new media, because what you do is you introduce it to the world on a traditional platform and you use new media to reach more people and create more dimensions.”


The younger demo is embracing the entertainment value of the computer, but it can co-exist with the "old media" TV experience, especially with the advent of High Definition. Disney has been buying social networks like Club Penguin and successfully taking its content and merchandising it across multiple platforms. With 2 small kids watching Disney and playing online and listening to their songs, we have become a Disney family on all platforms. And don't think we won't be going to the movies when High School Musical 3 is distributed, too.

The distribution platforms may shift and change, but the content, if it is compelling, will continue to be consumed.

It's Hulu, not Hula

What's in a name. I can't tell you how many people have found my blog because they mistyped Hula instead of Hulu. Will this help or hurt this new venture, I don't know. But I will continue to link to the correct site so that you are able to see what all the news is about.

Enjoy the shows, access to old as well as to new series. Catch up during your lunch time, when you have the time to watch TV in your office. For those of us with kids, time in the evening to watch TV gets shorter and shorter, so online viewing gives another opportunity to watch those shows we miss. At the same time, it clearly impacts worker effectiveness at their desk. Some might argue that it simply replaces other distractions like online games, personal phone calls, and other non-productive activities.

Advertising is what pays for this accessibility. But will it also kill the golden goose. Will viewers put up with the mix presented or will they avoid these sites for others whose ads are less intrusive. And can these ads be shown in ways that don't destroy the experience or have some interest with the viewer. Blinkx believes it has the technology as do other companies like Overlay.tv. How tolerant will the user be?

How will big business react to Hulu as the increased bandwidth affects servers at the office. Will their be backlash. While it is too early to tell, it will be fascinating to watch this cause and effect.

Hulu to officially launch

Tomorrow should be the official opening day for Hulu. For those that have been following Hulu in beta mode, you have had access to its site for quite a while. It offers a terrific player with great audio and video quality. At the same time, it is filled with commericals, whether you are snacking on clips or full length episodes. And it tends to show only a couple full length episodes of a series at a time. Missed last Saturday's SNL, sorry, you only get 4 clips of the show. Can't get access to Hulu, don't worry, its also on NBC.com. The site also gives the fan additional backstage videos and a chance to comment.

So should Hulu do a better job of linking the content of each show back to the core site. And how can these sites help to push users back to watch the show on TV. We seem to be scratching the surface with the potential of the web; still its ability to interact with its audience and create ways to push and pull them to other sites is still missing. For example, place a contest on the web site to count the number of times a certain performer appears or says a certain phrase on the next show. Push them to watch. or add a link after the parody of the Bravo show to the actual show. It may help drive new viewership.

Serving Up Television Without the TV Set

Terrific article in today's New York Times looking at the growth of online video usage. One of the most interesting stats, that one in four internet users watched a full length show on the web over the last three months. percentages were slightly higher fir the 18-24 demo at 39% although I am surprised that these numbers are not higher, given that the group is internet users and the question is not, what percentage of TV viewers watch a full length episode on the web. And while it is interesting to note the percentage that have watched, i would also be interested in knowing when and where they are viewing full length episodes on the web. Is it primarily in the office or at home, during the day or at night.

Quincy Smith of CBS Interactive makes an interesting comment in the article, "The four and a half billion we make on broadcast is never going to equate to four and a half billion online.” In a separate article, he made this point: developing interactive programming for the Web is not about migrating shows to tv, he pointed out. It’s about designing smart programming for a new type of medium.

I love this comment. The web should not try to replace TV, it should enhance the experience. CBS has invested in sites like Wallstrip and Moblogic to provide more content to increase the value of the space. And while they can and should offer current and older tv programming, it should not alone define their web and tv 2.0 strategy. Cross platform synergy and interactive experience becomes their goal.

And while no one has come up with the right answer yet, it appears that CBS has successfully reached the user so far. As broadcasters have the deep pockets, it will be fascinating to watch the moves they make to make online profitable.

Do Online Video Clips Impact TV Viewership?

Do clips of TV shows lead to higher ratings? So many people assume that the promotional value of clips on you tube, hulu, and other video sharing sites provide users with the snacking to then become long form viewers of the show.

How many of us have seen the Jimmy Kimmel/Ben Affleck clip and the Sarah Silverman/Matt Damon clip. Both first aired on the Jimmy Kimmel show on ABC, but has it turned non fans into fans; that is, have these and other clips of the show increased the overall ratings for the show. Some have told me that no relationship exists. And from my own experiences, while I have watched these clips, I have not been converted into a viewer of the show.

I have been surprised to hear that this video snacking, regardless of the shows they come from, have not significantly impacted the ratings for the show on TV. So if the promotional factor doesn't impact ratings, is the buzz factor enough to matter. Or do these online clips need to exist distinct from their linear counterpart and require their own monetization model to maintain their existence.

I was initially surprised to learn that users aren't flocking to watch the Daily Show or SNL because they liked the highlights that spring up online. I would have thought that it would encourage viewership because of the buzz factor. And while the online hits grow, there appears to be no synergy to the linear platform. Still, it does create news and may have an indirect impact on viewership.

The bottom line is ratings and revenue; if online can at least expand the reach of the audience and incremental revenue can be built, than the long term value will remain; else these clips may start to appear behind walled gardens to maximize the return.

Mobile TV, Set Free

Europe seems to understand what consumers want from their mobile device. They want to combine their mobility with the opportunity to stay current with what is on TV. User generated video may be fun to watch on the pc, but I see that usage short lived. Its greatest opportunity is the chance to receive live video signal for on the go viewing.

According to the Wall Street Journal, "Cellphone makers and service providers are looking for new sources of revenue and see platforms like television as a lucrative and fertile territory. In the U.S., TV is available on so-called third-generation phones, but DVB-H is still in the trial phase." Sounds so much better than what Verizon currently offers.

Big fan of The Today Show, watch it live on the commute to work. Sitting in the stands watching the game and getting commentary and closeups on the phone. Working late with American Idol delivering results live to you. Breaking news available in video on your phone. If I were a broadcaster, I would be bullish on delivering my content through mobile for a number of reasons: more potential viewers to count, lessens the dvr issue, increases ad rates, and you can enable more interactive opportunities more easily through the mobile device. And cell phone makers will sell new generations of phones and charge small access fees to get the service. The only thing left to do is build a better battery to handle all this increased usage!

Is It Now The Actors Turn To Strike?

Hollywood has yet to learn its lesson. Freshly off a protracted writers strike that cost billions in exchange for pennies, comes the SAG union, eager to strike to prove their power. And while the deadline is months away, June 30, little is being done to start the process early.

The problem is that the folks that want to strike are the veterans with residuals coming in, regardless of the outcome. They can walk the picket line knowing that another check is sitting comfortably in their mailbox. Literally, getting paid to strike! For those without the resume and for the economy at large, that works around these strike makers, the cost is far bigger than the return.

If the writers strike proved anything, it is that the strike didn't lead to a better deal. The DGA got their deal without creating a nasty confrontation. Healthy negotiation is important, but it doesn't need the hostility of a strike to accomplish the end result. So SAG...stop threatening strike, start working on your new deal TODAY, and be considerate of the effect your actions have on others. Learn from the oh so recent history of the writers strike, and the more proactive, positive dealings from the DGA, and choose the smarter path! Yes you deserve to be treated fairly, but it means treating others fairly in return.

The New Workplace Rules: No Video Watching

Is online video hurting worker productivity? Would these same workers be doing something else to avoid work, i.e. play games, if video streaming was turned off in the workplace? Would the appeal of online video decline if workers could no longer watch at the office?

Obviously, the employed universe is not the only group watching online. But, it would be interesting to know what percentage of the user base they make up.

Online video tends to get more usage during business hours. Will prevention during the working hour cause viewing patterns to shift or will that individual stop using online video as feverishly. For me, after a long day in front of the pc at the office, I am reluctant to go back on the pc at night to watch videos. At that point in the evening, I want to sit back and watch the big screen. Online video has become the perfect escape for the employee who doesn't already have a tv in their office, the perfect way to catch up on missed shows or highlights of clips that are getting buzz. It is the appeal of Hulu, Joost, and You Tube.

Would viewing habits shift to after hours if the workplace prevented online viewership or would usage simply drop. Companies will begin to pay closer attention to this usage and I believe usage will drop.

What do you think?