Today Show Needs To Change Even More

Today Show finally officially announced this morning that Ann Curry will be stepping away from the anchor desk and pursuing more journalistic endeavors inside NBC News.  As an avid Today Show viewer, Ann never made a strong impression as a co-host, neither jelling with Matt Lauer new carrying well the softer, humanistic pieces. It was simply not a good fit and created some cringe-worthy interviews.  Frankly, not all Ann's fault, wrong person for the wrong segment.

But Ann isn't the only problem with the Today Show.  Look no further than their weather person Al Roker and there lies additional blame.  His personality overwhelms the broadcast, his segments too much about him and less about the weather.  Among his signature bits, "Sunday, Sunday, Sunday" and " These are my people" are annoying at best, but over the top mainly.  He is in fact, best enjoyed when he plays less bombastic and loud. Willard Scott may have been the role model for Al, but Willard never seemed to overwhelm the show like Al always tries to do.

Lastly, changes in the hosting should also go along with changes in the format back to a more newsy approach in the first hour, less so in the second hour.  Sure an interview with a guy that screams on a roller coaster is cute but not worthy for a first hour newscast.  There must be something better to put on.  Pick your segments more wisely and put the human interest and celebrity spotting into hour number 2.

Change for the Today may not be easy but it sure is necessary.  The moment people become disenchanted they break away from their routine and try another show.  Winning back viewers will not be easy, especially if they have found turned away.  Make us like you again, make us respect what you are telling us, and treat us to stories that define best what you want to become.  The Today Show has a long and storied history, let's get back to what makes it click.

Cable Networks Believe Movies Stop Cord Cutting

An article in today's Paid Content states that today's basic cable networks believe that movies on their network help to keep viewers from dropping their cable subscription.    And while I love a good laugh, I don't see any logical correlation between the two.  Here's the quote "As basic cable original series prove to be important product differentiators for over-the-top services like Netflix, some of the networks that produce these shows are actually relying more on high-priced theatrical movie acquisitions to maintain or increase their subscriber counts and drive ad revenue."  

Movies are indeed a comfort staple on TV.  Put a compelling one on and sure enough viewers will stop  and view; it may bring ratings, it may bring ad revenue, but it is not the stickiness that keeps consumers subscribed to cable.  With many of these same titles available uncut and commercial free elsewhere, viewers are not subscribing just so they can see an ad every 5 minutes or a constant bug in the corner of the movie promoting your channel, or worse, a pop up announcing that a new show is coming up next.  Those in fact make me consider dropping cable to find the same movie without interruptions or distractions.

What does keep consumers from cutting the cord, live programming, especially sports, that are not available easily on the web.  Exclusivity of a show not yet available online.  Differentiation is key and movies are not differentiated especially when they are available on so many other platforms.

News Corp To Split, Like Viacom and Time Warner

It seems that News Corp will be taking a page from the divestiture handbook and split itself in half.  Like Viacom and Time Warner, the notion that bigger is better is not paying off and value can be best derived from splitting itself in half.  So where to make the cut?

"News Corp. is mulling splitting its 20th Century Fox film studio, Fox broadcast network and Fox News channel from its newspapers, book publishing assets and education businesses. News Corp.'s publishing assets include The Wall Street Journal, the Times of London, the Sun and The Australian newspaper, as well as HarperCollins book publishing."  So on one side are the future growth businesses with high potential profit margins and on the other, the older print media, with declining revenues and unsure growth.  And by splitting out the two businesses, the hope is also that it unleashes higher stock market valuation.

And yet both sides are content creator businesses, one more in the video side while the other is in print.  But doesn't print hold future promise in digital once consumers fully adjust to the transition of receiving its printed content exclusively through tablets, readers, and other online platforms.  Won't News Corp be missing out on the synergy that each side of the business brings to the other or is it true that big businesses just can't get out of their own way in making this kind of synergy effective.

Perhaps the challenge of companies getting to big in size is that they lack the flexibility and the focus to adapt quickly to changing landscapes and adjust more quickly.  By trimming down, management can better focus on their business and respond more quickly to new opportunities.  Is splitting in half enough or should they split again into even smaller pieces?

The other thought is that News Corp owner, the Murdoch family, may simply be seeking to use a split as an opportunity to divorce the phone hacking drama of its newspaper empire from its broadcast and movie empire.  And once the two businesses are separated and values are unlocked, the newspaper side of the business could be sold for an attractive price.  For now, we focus on the split, but its what they do next that really matters.

Apple Motorola Patent Dispute

Despite the Federal Court's dismissal of the patent lawsuit between Apple and Motorola Mobility, " the International Trade Commission plans to review its own related ruling that the Mac, iPhone and iPad maker is infringing on a Motorola-owned Wi-Fi patent. ... With the ITC revisiting its own ruling, Motorola may find that it has lost yet another potential tool in its fight against Apple."  Does Apple owe any license fees for use of patents; are Motorola's claims untrue?   As technology continues to grow, we are seeing more and more of these types of claims.  And by the time they get settled, there is more chance that the technology has been replaced by something newer and different.

Forcing A la Carte Cable Programming Would Hurt The Cable Industry

Without the packaging of multiple cable networks at one monthly subscription price, most cable networks would fail to reach a large enough audience to succeed.  Not enough license fees, not enough advertising revenue, and not enough accessibility to build an audience and get a Nielsen rating.  "If the U.S. government mandated that TV channels be sold individually, only five to 10 traditional TV networks would survive -- destroying up to $300 billion of value, endangering some 1 million jobs and curtailing consumers' video choices, according to an analysis by Needham & Co."  So why can upstarts in the digital web space survive, less capital and fixed expenses, and small means more flexibility.  Their returns are smaller but such is the case of an upstart trying to change the system.

Consumers may desire paying less for cable, but it is the current system that pays for the content that ultimately finds its way from TV to the web.  Changes in programming are happening thanks to a free economy that  encourages competition and new forms of competition.  But this change must happen over time and not be forced by government intervention.  Letting natural market forces change the nature of how and  where people consume content will ultimately shift and move the content model to other technologies and pricing models.

Does Your Cable Operator Provide TV Everywhere?

According to the research, only one in five cable customers know that their provider offers a TV Everywhere experience.  What that means is that few current cable customers know that they can access TV shows through their cable provider's apps on mobile and computer devices.  Not a good sign for those providers that hoped that by finally offering a TV Everywhere experience, their customers would be less likely to cut the cord and go to the web.

For me, I do know that my cable provider offers shows through their app but I, like I assume most others, have gotten conditioned to look elsewhere for my TV Everywhere content.  With iTunes, Hulu, YouTube, Netflix, and others, my cable app is the last place I would think to go too find content.  Add to that my MLB  access and my TV Everywhere experience seems almost complete.  It seems the real challenge for cable operators is that they are so late to the game.  Dish delivers the slingbox experience which makes their access to linear and DVR programming appealing; other cable operators have been reluctant to offer a similar experience.

The other issue and one that really hurts the cable operator today is the rising costs of a cable subscription.  "It’s all about dollars and the perception of value. Cable subscriptions declined 2.7 percent in the first quarter, according to Bernstein data, as cash-strapped consumers look for less expensive TV viewing alternatives."  By not building a differentiated product, consumers can get a similar viewing experience at a much lower cost.  For them, cable programming is a commodity that can be served anywhere.

And so cable operators are facing some real challenges, a service that has lost its value proposition, a product that  is being served cheaper elsewhere, and a next generation consumer that is becoming more oriented to over the top programming.  For cable operators, they may soon find themselves considering a change in the business model, to a dumb pipeline with wired and wireless access for a monthly fee.  With declining profit margins the cable subscription business may finally be losing some steam.

ls The Microsoft Surface Priced To Fail?

The rumors continue to flow about the Microsoft Surface.  Where will it be sold, how can it connect, and how much will it cost.  So the news that a WIFI only version will be the first released and priced at a whopping $599.  Certainly not a price point that will excite too many possible consumers.  "Throw in the fact that one new estimate shows the battery life on the two tablets will fall short of the competition, and Microsoft's new tablets start to seem like a much tougher sell."  It starts to make the  tablets from Amazon and B&N far more attractive.

And what should Apple due to beat Surface to the punch; how about add apps that bring Microsoft Office to the iPad.  Already, Business Insider has an article on a free app called CloudOn that brings all those features of Office to the iPad and Android tablets.  For Apple to highlight and market that app on iPads prior to the release of Surface could just be its nail in the coffin and make the Surface DOA.

Forget The 7 Second Delay, Cursing Is OK

What is indecency?  A curse word, a little nudity; to some, it is acceptable, but to others it is not.  And while we as a society seem to become more at ease with public profanity and nudity on HBO, we still have the FCC trying to police the broadcast airwaves against their version of what is indecent.  Well, at least for the  moment, it seems that they have been overruled.  "The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to address whether the government still has the authority to regulate indecency on broadcast television, but it ruled in favor of two broadcasters who had faced potential fines for programs featuring cursing and nudity on narrow grounds."

Based on these indecency cases, some of which look to be a decade old, the fleeting use of cursing, some of which occurred  during live broadcasts are not subject to any FCC fines.  I guess that now means that there is no need to institute a 7 second delay on live sports or award shows.  So now that football star or celebrity can drop an F-bomb at will.  And Janet Jackson should have no trouble exposing her other breast at halftime; here that Madonna.

With technological innovation enabling video across multiple platforms, not just broadcast, but cable and the internet, the rise of language and nudity is everywhere.  So why should these cases even be heard.  The gate has been wide open for years.  “'In my view, ” Justice Ginsburg wrote, the Pacifica decision 'was wrong when it issued. Time, technological advances, and the commission’s untenable rulings in the cases now before the court show why Pacifica bears reconsideration.'”  In light of changing technologies and society morals, the FCC has lost its focus.  We may wish for moral decency, but free speech ultimately endures.  Perhaps the focus should instead be in campaigning for the return of civility.  Not in wasting taxpayer money on regulating cursing.  You missed that boat a long time ago.

Today Show Upheaval

While it does not yet seem to be confirmed by NBC, the rumor mill is abuzz that Ann Curry's days as co-host of TODAY are numbered.  Not since the days of Deborah Norville have we had such trouble with the morning show.  Consumers, heck most human beings are uncomfortable with change.  Only when it is shown to be better, faster, easier, that we finally let down our guards and make the change a permanent choice.  TODAY show is facing that challenge now; will whoever replaces Ann be a better fit and a more preferable host to keep its audience happy.  Or will it encourage sampling of other network morning shows.

For NBC, host challenges seem to be following them.  It's only been a few years since Conan - Leno was the  front page issue.  And while WNBC is a NYC station, its news program just wen through its own shake-up last week with the departure of Sue Simmons from the evening news, only to be  replaced with a younger, cheaper version of herself.  As change is uncomfortable for people and viewers like the familiarity of its hosts, the acceptance of a new host to replace the old always comes with possibility that  viewers won't stay through the switch.

For WNBC, the choice was perhaps a financial one; for the TODAY show, it may be more about the loss in viewership and the need to recapture them through a host switch.  It eventually worked for TODAY Show when Katie Couric came on board and the audience loved her.  For Ann Curry' successor, we can only wait and see if the same thing can happen.