eric tatro dot com » New Media

If (traditional) media companies saw the writing on the wall…

Eric — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 02:59:32 +0000

Imagine if, 25 years ago, a time traveler from the present day appeared to newspaper, television and radio executives to outline the media landscape in 2008. He’d tell them about how the Internet has dramatically increased the number of media outlets and how it’s enabled everyone to opine or present news via text, audio or video for virtually no cost at all. That it’s decimated the newspaper classified ad market with free, wide-reaching alternatives. That people no longer have to wait for the evening news or the next morning’s paper, but can follow along with up-to-the-minute updates of breaking events that are pushed directly to them, wherever they are in the world.

Executives would grumble. After all, good reporting costs money. The infrastructure that supports the production and distribution of news, be it print, radio or television, is extremely expensive – It’ll be impossible to compete when everyone is a reporter and can instantly broadcast or publish around the world. Plus, there’s only so much ad money to go around – if advertisers flock to the little guy, that’s fewer ad dollars for the big companies! Not to mention the loss of revenue that comes in from the “for sale” and “want” ads!

The time traveler, if he were savvy, would agree, but with a few caveats. While it’s true that things will change a great deal in the next quarter-decade, he’d say, you’re missing the big picture. Wouldn’t you want your content distributed instantly and inexpensively, all over the world? (I can travel to Europe and still read live updates of baseball games at the Web page of my hometown newspaper.) Despite the new influx of opinion leaders and “new” media personalities, don’t people still need and crave local news? (All news is local news, after all.) Won’t new means of content distribution provide new ways to deliver advertising? (There’s a reason Google wants in on the mobile phone market, and it’s not to sell handsets.)

Finally, don’t you realize that quality reporting will always cost time and money, something usually out of the reach of everyone but news organizations that can afford it? (People can only have an opinion about the news if there’s news to opine on.)

After leaving executives with those thoughts, when the time traveler returned to the present day, would anything have changed? Could the big media companies have figured out how to leverage all of these opportunities, or would we continue to hear stories about major media outlets, from those with national reach to those in major local markets laying off personalities because of the rise of the Internet and social media?

I wonder sometimes.

There’s a chance to slip up around every corner

Eric — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 03:11:07 +0000

A world where reputations are destroyed with a slip of the tongue is a very perilous world, indeed. Twenty years ago one could make a remark in bad taste on television, or the radio or even in print and chances are, unless it was remarkably offensive, it would go largely unnoticed. Even then, the opportunity to put one’s foot in one’s mouth and have it broadcast across a wide area was largely confined to television personalities or politicians.

Today we’ve got video from TV recorded to DVRs, ripped to hard drives and uploaded to YouTube for everyone to view, share, and embed. Local newspaper stories are available to a global audience in an instant. Millions upon millions of people are sharing thoughts, photos, video and other information via blogs and social networks. What was once the domain of professional broadcasters and public figures has now trickled down to anyone with an internet connection and a Blogger account.

Yes, now we all have the opportunity to put our foot in our mouth and have it broadcast, so to speak, around the world.

Everyone’s heard horror stories about someone sending an embarrassing e-mail to an unintended recipient. Or, for that matter, everyone in the office. New job applicants fresh out of college are inadvertently sharing their compromising spring break photos with their future potential employers via their MySpace pages. Add in message boards, social networks, blog comments… And so on. Plus we have to remain transparent, so when we screw up we’re not supposed to (ahem) quietly sweep our comments under the rug. It’s tough.

The sheer number of opportunities we have to communicate on a widespread scale means we’ve got to be extremely careful in what we write or say. Seeing as how we’re the first generation to face this responsibility, there are bound to be some growing pains. The best we can do is try and not write anything online that can come back and bite us, double-check before hitting “save,” and have mercy on those who slip up.

How can newspapers pull themselves from the grave?

Eric — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 12:34:41 +0000

Robert Scoble says, “Newspapers are Dead” and that his son will never “subscribe to, nor read, a newspaper.” He’s probably right. Most people my age and younger get their news online or from news/entertainment shows like The Daily Show. I’ll admit to reading papers daily, but that’s because it’s a part of my job- Otherwise I’d get all of my info online, as well (and I consider myself to be a total news junkie).

Doc Searls has eleven insights for saving newspapers, and includes comments from Web luminaries Dave Winer and Tim O’Reilly. Much of his advice seems to borrow concepts from blogs and social media, such as linking out, ceasing charging for news online, opening up archives, and partnering with bloggers.

Some “old media” giants are slowly opening up to new ways of reporting the news- USA Today recently adopted several “community” features, such as allowing readers to vote on stories (ala Digg). CNN launched I-Report, a call for citizen journalists to send them stories. While it’s been good for topics like reporting severe weather, the full potential hasn’t come close to being realized.

I know it’s cliche, but it’s a changing media landscape, and newspapers are beginning to feel the heat. I look forward to seeing how newspapers can adopt new strategies and innovations to “adapt and thrive,” as Doc Searls writes, in such a world.