This week I
am attending CES (Consumer Electronics Show; http://www.cesweb.org)
in Las Vegas as a guest of IRTS (International Radio and Television Society
Foundation; http://irtsfoundation.org).
For day one, IRTS organized a great event where academics who study and teach
social media could meet with leaders of the profession. The topic of the
conversation was “The art of reaching consumers in the digital age” but since
many of the professors as well as speakers were from the journalism field, the
conversation kept returning to the future of news organizations. And I have to
admit that after today I do not see a happy future for today’s news
organizations in any shape or form – not in print, not on TV, not even online –
despite some professionals and academics cheerful comments. So, here is my
quick one-sentence summary of each speaker’s presentations and then, at the
end, my conclusion.
First, Jack
Myers (https://twitter.com/JackMyerscom),
Chairman of Media Advisory Group, talked about the convergence of brain, heart,
and gut and the new generation that embraces this convergence – they do not
want just to know they want to feel as well.
Then, David
Poltrack, head of research at CBS, tried to persuade us how great networks are
adapting to the changes in media consumption – DVRs, video on demand, streaming
TV shows – he had plenty of data available, but it sounded more like explaining
why the numbers in TV viewership are going down rather than explaining why the
numbers of total viewership are going up.
Rob Barnett (https://twitter.com/DamnRob) of My Damn
Channel focused on branded entertainment versus commercial-paid model of interruption
marketing and proposed that advertisers do not need to rely on networks.
Michael
Terpin (https://twitter.com/michaelterpin),
founder and CEO of SocialRadius, talked about different types of social media and
how brands can use them instead of doing any outreach to the traditional media.
Michael
Zimbalist (https://twitter.com/zimbalist)
who is in charge of research for the New York Times Company tried to defend the
“old” media proposing that it can become interactive and occupy various
surfaces: instead of paper New York Times can be on a mirror in your bathroom
answering your questions about the day ahead.
Dave Morgan
(https://twitter.com/davemorgannyc),
founder and CEO of Simulmedia, concluded the day by saying that news
organizations thrived in a scarce distribution environment – with 2-3
newspapers and 2-3 TV stations, there was hardly any competition and
advertisers had to pay them no matter what. Today, however, distribution is not
scarce but plentiful; instead, attention is scarce. He did not believe
newspapers could adapt and survive, but broadcast networks would thrive in this
entertainment. I was not sure why he made that claim.
So, what did
I think at the end? Newspapers, TV stations, and journalism in general are all in trouble! None of the speakers could
explain what the added value of a journalist is. New York Times stock dropped
from almost $50 to under $10 in the last 10 years and I think it is still overvalued.
When Michael Zimbalist talked about the successes New York Times had playing with
convergence and online distribution – he talked about the things, such as Infographics,
slide shows, and so on, that college students do for fun and for free and post them
to Facebook. And New York Times had teams of 10-20 people (all getting salaries
and maybe even benefits!) working on those.
Journalists
are also in close and symbiotic relationships with their sources – they depend
on each other. So, there is not much of “controlling the government” function
left any more. Again, regular people can do a way better job than professional
journalists.
Another answer
suggested by David Poltrack was that content is king. People will have to watch
CBS in some way to see the good shows. So, TV networks will survive. But how long before content creators go
directly to YouTube? How long before they make a website where they would
release a new episode of their show once a week instead of selling it to CBS? How
long before they decide they want 100% control over the show and revenues? Why
do you need networks if more and more people are watching the shows on their
computers, tablets, and cell phones? Same can apply to journalism. If you have a great story about the corruption in the White House why sell it to CBS or New York Times, if you can put it on your web site and have control over everything?
Finally,
news. Dave Morgan said that networks and local news stations are essential for
that. In fact, the success of networks is attributed to the fact that they
delivered news faster than newspapers. But are they still the fastest? Jack
Myers in his speech said he had been able to call the election results before
any of the networks did by just following Twitter. When something happens I see
the information on Twitter and Tumblr and YouTube before I see it on networks.
In fact, I often see networks showing the same footage I already saw on YouTube
or Twitter earlier. I’d rather believe that in 10 years people will be able to
zoom in on Benghazi from space to see what is happening there live(!) using Google
maps and then switching to live feeds from cell phones of people located there than
they would turn on CBS news to learn about the events in Benghazi at 6pm. And for
local news Dave Morgan himself said that a passionate parent can do a better
job posting about the little league baseball game than a local newspaper. How
about local restaurants? Or road constructions? Or any other topics? In 10
years, when current University and high school students who do everything with
a smartphone in their hands turn into adults, they are not going to drop their
devices – they will continue taking pictures and videos of the world around
them, posting them, tagging them, commenting on them and especially things they
are passionate about.
And I think the
coverage they would produce, would satisfy brain, gut, and heart as the first
speaker, Jack Myers, demanded for the next generation.
So, then, what is the added value of
journalism? What does it produce for the society that
people should pay for?
A few notes:
Huge thanks to all the speakers – your experience and knowledge of the industry
was eye-opening. It is of course possible that I misunderstood and/or misinterpreted
what the speakers were saying – if this was case, I am sorry about that. Huge thanks
to IRTS for this unique opportunity. I know I can serve my students better now
when my mind was expanded. Looking forward to Day Two tomorrow (or actually
already today)...
No comments:
Post a Comment