Terry Heaton's PoMo Blog    Feedburner

"Postmodernism is a change-or-be-changed world. The word is out: Reinvent
yourself for the 21st century or die! Some would rather die than change."
Leonard Sweet, cultural historian.

Pomo Blog Archives: July 2006

Monday, July 31, 2006

Advertising's big engine slows
A global study by WPP Group's GroupM unit and reported in today's
MediaDailyNews confirms something I've suspected for several months -- that the boom in comparatively cheap internet advertising is slowing the growth of advertising overall.

...the rapid expansion of supply of online advertising opportunities is helping to satiate demand from marketers, keeping media price inflation in check for the overall advertising economy, especially in major markets such as the U.S. "At this late stage of the economic cycle one would normally expect media growth to have run well ahead of GDP as healthy profits finance excess demand for diminishing media reach," the GroupM report says, noting, "One thing stopping this is the growth of the Internet in developed economies. Its audience is growing even faster than its incoming tide of advertiser money, so it is actually getting cheaper. At the same time it is attracting cash from the big but fragmenting and hence inherently inflationary media, whose valuable reach is in shortening supply."
This, of course, leads one to ask what happens to media companies whose lifeblood is the GROWTH of advertising?

Posted by Terry @ 11:44 AM CST [Link] [No Comments]

The time to act is NOW
If 2006 is/has been the
unbundled awakening, 2007 is looking more and more like a desperation year for local broadcasters, a year when new media ventures begun this year need to begin producing fruit. We won't have the Olympics, although they didn't perform up to snuff this year, and we won't have elections, so political ad money will vanish. Wherever I go and with whomever I speak, there is this growing sense that new media MUST be more aggressively pursued...or else.

While this shouldn't come as a bulletin to anybody who has been following my writing, the urgency I now sense is intense and palpable. Two items of interest today add to my concern.

One, the folks at WeatherBug have launched their own video sharing community, where anybody can upload their own forecasts, reports or storm video. The key word here is "community," and while the site sucks so far, that's not the point. It's another play for the local weather niche by an outside internet company. Weather is THE local franchise for broadcasters, and they ought to be viewing this -- and the effort by the Weather Channel to provide local weather applications -- as very serious competition.

Two, take a look at BuffaloAtHome.com, a local information portal built by VertaSource, LLC. This company has a deal with CBS/Viacom and has already launched "at home" sites in Chicago, Philly, Baltimore, Detroit, Rochester, and Erie and has plans to launch 30 more -- including Denver tomorrow -- by year's end. These are not stamped with the CBS brand, although it's pretty easy to see the partnership.

Bob Gerow, General Manager of VertaSource told me that it's been quite a challenge to get the local CBS affiliates to sign off on providing content, because they assume they already have a portal. In the end, though, revenue drives the deals, and while he won't give me his "secret sauce," Gerow is quick to point out that their model isn't banners and page views. Keyword exclusivity and business search optimization are two areas where they make money, and isn't that just like pure internet players? So while the broadcasters are still out there trying to make a buck off of reach/frequency methodologies, this company is growing revenue the internet way. How terribly smart!

Related to local media, "CBS asked themselves this question," he said. "Do we want to be one of 25 sites in a market or one of two or three portals?" Who will these other portals be? Googles, Yahoos, YouTubes, or other internet pure plays?

So once again, we have very smart people coming into town and creating applications that could and should be done by the local stations (media companies) themselves. This is serious business, folks, and not to move TODAY to develop new businesses on the web is playing with the lives of your employees. 2007 is just a few months away.

Posted by Terry @ 11:24 AM CST [Link] [No Comments]

I must be beautiful
A report from the London School of Economics -- and reported in today's
London Telegraph -- finds that beautiful people are 36% more likely to produce daughters than sons. It also notes that the world's females are becoming better-looking than men as a result (Oh THAT's why, eh?).

So while the children of aggressive, scientific parents tend to be boys, who can outwit their competitors when it comes to finding a mate, the children of beautiful, empathic parents tend to be girls, who can take their pick from the gene pool and then hang on to their man.
And since I have three daughters and no sons, then I must be one of the beautiful ones, right? Here's Dr Satoshi Kanazawa, the evolutionary psychologist who led the research:
"We have shown that beautiful parents have more daughters than ugly parents because physical attractiveness is heritable and because daughters benefit from this more than sons."
This will no doubt infuriate the anti-stereotypers, but, hey, it's science, man, and science never gets anything wrong.

Right.

Posted by Terry @ 09:11 AM CST [Link] [No Comments]

Friday, July 28, 2006

Boxes and more boxes
Surrounded by boxes in my new apartmentMy furniture -- or should I say boxes arrived first thing this morning. Not bad, since I was expecting Allied to deliver the stuff next week. I counted this morning, and I've moved my whole household 18 times since 1970. That's what happens with the news business, but I was a little extreme.

This one was/is the most difficult, because I'm doing it alone. Everything I unpack has a little story attached to it, and I find myself drifting emotionally. On the up side, it's been a chance to clean out a bunch of old "stuff" and organize what's left. I need that to make this truly a fresh start.

I'm writing tons of stuff, although it's not for publication. I promise I'll get back to serious writing here as soon as I get settled.

Posted by Terry @ 04:39 PM CST [Link] [No Comments]

Thursday, July 27, 2006

The benefits of apartment living
To the neighbor whose WiFi I'm currently stealing, I'd gladly pay you, if I knew who you were. My DSL line won't be in until next week, and, well, you're probably at work anyway.

Posted by Terry @ 09:13 AM CST [Link] [3 comments]

The Godlike anchorman
I watched the PBS worship of Walter Cronkite last night with nostalgia, fondness and a whole lot of gratitude that there will never be another like him. Alessandra Stanley of The New York Times agrees in
a column that basically trashes the whole breed.

But the thing about Walter that was different was that he wasn't pumped as the most trusted guy in America; he simply was. There was no relentless stream of promos touting him as the greatest (although some did appear later in his career). He earned that position, largely, I think, because TV News was still in its relative infancy. Audience manipulation "rules" hadn't been written yet, and network anchors were news people first and "talent" further down the line.

In today's world, the "anchor-as-God" is over and done with -- commoditized along with everything else in the TV world. Those who didn't have the good fortune to be alive during the Cronkite years missed a truly remarkable person in the history of communications. We needed Walter. We needed gatekeepers, because access to information was limited to the few. That's all changed now, and I believe that's a good thing.

Nevertheless, Walter Cronkite was a big part of my early life, and I'm happy to have been there for the sense of security in "and that's the way it is."

Posted by Terry @ 09:11 AM CST [Link] [1 Comment]

Spreading the new media word
There's an
excellent primer in today's Dallas Morning News on the changes underway in video viewing in the home. It's nothing substantial or deep, but it's the kind of article that's necessary for the continued education of everyday people (and some media people, too).

Many agree that we're headed for a time when almost every piece of video ever recorded — your favorite sitcom, your favorite movie, your favorite candidate's speech, your kid's soccer game — will be available and quickly accessible for viewing.

There are enormous technical issues and costs to overcome, but technology companies are focused on making it happen.

For TV viewers, the world of ubiquitous video could be an amazing technological advance or a confusing mess.

No one's sure exactly what the future holds, but it's safe to assume that consumers are going to grapple with more choices and more complex technology.

For most consumers, the changes won't happen overnight, said Dick Anderson, general manager of International Business Machines Corp.'s media and entertainment practice.

Gadget lovers and young trendsetters will embrace new TV technology while the majority, the "massive passive," continues to veg out the old-fashioned way.

Eventually, though, even the traditional audience will follow.

The writer, Crayton Harrison, has no doubt read IBM's "The End of Television As We Know It," because of its references to the "massive passives" as the majority of consumers and "gadget lovers" and "young trendsetters" as everybody else. The general premise of this article and the IBM report are the same, and if you haven't read the IBM report, I encourage you to do so.

The most important thing about articles like this morning's is how they're spreading the technology word to people outside the typical tech publications and challenging people to boost their knowledge of technology. This will accelerate change by breaking down knowledge barriers. I believe this is a fundamental role of media companies who wish to play in these new worlds downstream, and it's nice to see a report like this in the paper of my new hometown.

Posted by Terry @ 08:52 AM CST [Link] [No Comments]

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Moving Adventures
I've arrived in Dallas and am camping out at my new apartment. It's a super place, and I'm nestled in the trees. It'll be a great place from which to write and work. The doggie downers did the trick for my dog, and the trip was essentially uneventful -- until I arrived in Dallas. It seems there's a rather serious problem with my new old car -- $1,200 for steering and suspension repairs. Nice.

Gone are the days when they just pick you up and move you. Allied told me they'd be by at 8am Monday. They got there at 1pm, which put me on the road near nightfall. My "window" for furniture delivery is today through August 4th. So I'll be camping for awhile. The phone is in. Cable TV on Saturday. Internet sometime next week. I'm writing now from the apartment complex's business center, which will be a frequent visiting spot for me.

I'm working on a new essay about third-party metrics for the web that should be finished by Monday. Stay tuned.

Posted by Terry @ 01:10 PM CST [Link] [No Comments]

Monday, July 24, 2006

ABC's experiment becomes permanent
From
Jeff Jarvis comes this gem via a pending Ad Age article on the ABC experiment with ad-supported online programming. The network says it'll become a "real" offering beginning in October, because the experiment earlier this year was such a success.

The network said the experiment was a success for advertisers given that research showed users had 87% recall of the advertisers involved. (Average recall of advertising on TV is about 24%.) Each program that was streamed was supported by a single advertiser.
This is an important piece of data as it relates to the diminishing value of the 30-second spot paradigm. Will advertisers pay a premium for 87% recall? You betcha. Will the 30-second spot ever go away? Not a chance.

It's also another significant blow to network affiliates, because it reduces the rerun value of primetime programming. I've been predicted for years that the programming value of net affils will be steadily diminishing, because the web eliminates the need for middlemen.

This'll be my last post from Nashville. I'll be westbound later today and hopefully blogging again later in the week.

Posted by Terry @ 07:40 AM CST [Link] [2 comments]

Saturday, July 22, 2006

Email hell
In moving to Dallas, one of the things I must give up is my Comcast Cable and Broadband. I've been a faithful customer for eight years, and I will surely miss it. The apartment complex into which I'm moving has an exclusivity deal with AT&T, so I don't have any choice but to let go.

The problem? I've enjoyed the email address "xnuzboss@comcast.net" for eight years, and it's my connection to a hundred websites and businesses, all of whom will "lose" that connection in after 30 days. I'll be sending notices to many online billing companies, but I'll never remember them all.

This, I suppose, is why God made Gmail, Hotmail, etc.

I submitted a formal suggestion that comcast create a business that will allow people to keep their addresses (heck, I'd pay for it), but even if they do, it'll be too late for me.

The things we learn, eh?

Posted by Terry @ 01:06 PM CST [Link] [3 comments]

Quote of the day
(T)he new feudal economics of "Web 2.0": the serfs must be grateful for the hospitality of the proprietor.

Andrew Orlowski
The Register

Posted by Terry @ 12:59 PM CST [Link] [No Comments]

Friday, July 21, 2006

Closure from the Medical Examiner's Office
It is with great sadness -- yet in the hope that her tragic end might save another -- that I report the cause of my beloved Allie's death. She may have taken too much over-the-counter cold medication (generic Nyquil) that night before she got ready for bed. The cough suppressant dextramethorphan interacted with prescription pain medication that she took for endometriosis and, as the pathologist at the Davidson County Medical Examiner's Office told me, it shut down the mechanism in her brain that controls the "will to breathe."

So she essentially just drifted off to sleep, then coma, then death. She felt no pain.

I say she "may have taken too much," because Dr. Adele Lewis, the pathologist, told me that 10-20% of people are what's called "slow metabolizers" of dextramethorphan, and that could account for the extremely high level of the drug that they found in her blood. In other words, a pretty fair chunk of society doesn't process the drug like it's supposed to be processed, so multiple doses even as directed can accumulate and stay active in the body. I want to point out that this is a very common over-the-counter medication for cough suppression, and it's been around for 50 years. There are documented cases of accidental overdose death with this drug, so it's not something to play around with, especially when mixed with prescription medication.

Some idiotic people actually abuse the drug, but that certainly wasn't my Allie. She just didn't feel good, so she took something she had taken many times before. We'll just never know for certain how much she took or when.

As I researched the possible causes of the sudden death of a young, healthy woman, something like this was high on the list. It is profoundly sad, because her death was an accident, and accidents -- at least one like this -- can be prevented. I don't dwell on that, however, because it will keep me forever bound to the past, and the best way I can honor her and her life is to live on and be well.

It took a long time for the Medical Examiner to piece this all together, and I am extremely grateful for their assistance. It has been agonizing for me and Alicia's entire family, but now we know. And this will help us with our grieving. There aren't words in any language to adequately express the loss of someone like her, so I won't try.

I'm moving to Dallas next week to begin another chapter in my life, one that she had a major role in developing (and is likely orchestrating from the world beyond). I need this move, this change, this turning-of-the-page. The headstone on her grave will be up soon, and it contains the last words I ever said to her: "He gives to His beloved, sleep."

She is gone, but her memory will always be with me.

Posted by Terry @ 01:55 PM CST [Link] [13 comments]

Thursday, July 20, 2006

Blogging as community
Don't miss the
Center for Citizen Media's inaugural podcast featuring Nashville is Talking editor, Brittney Gilbert. The interview, by hyperlocal h20town.info's Lisa Williams is especially insightful as it relates to the community that is local blogging.

(DISCLOSURE: WKRN-TV is an AR&D client.)

Posted by Terry @ 08:34 AM CST [Link]

Sunday, July 16, 2006

News Corp and MySpace -- pay attention, everybody
The latest issue of Wired has an
outstanding cover story on Rupert Murdoch and MySpace. I think this should be must-reading for every broadcaster, because it rightly raises the matter of a business model and rightly answers that there isn't one -- yet. Spencer Reiss wrote the piece, which references the standard options of advertising and subscription services.

As lucrative as those ideas may be, they're based on an old media conception of audiences as consumers. But MySpace members are something different: They're participants.(Emphasis mine) The site’s greatest value isn't connecting people to products, people to information, or eyeballs to advertisers. It’s connecting people to people...MySpace multiplies the value of each member by connecting one to another. It’s a virtual nation of people instant-messaging their friends a link to Gnarls Barkley’s new track and decorating their pages with Family Guy clips. And that’s where MySpace could strike gold: It lets News Corp. host the cultural conversation.
This is an insightful piece of knowledge that those who are stuck in the rut of trying to make this quarter's sales projections are unable to use. That's too bad, because money always follows eyeballs, regardless of how or where they're gathered. Something WILL become of this, although I'm not alone in suggesting it won't be a traditional media model.
MySpace fits into an old media portfolio like a skateboard in a Manhattan boardroom. Even though News Corp. has a reputation for edgy content — The Simpsons, 24, American Idol, even Fox News — its business model is as old-fashioned as they come. The company earns its daily bread by luring people with carefully crafted content and selling their eyeballs to advertisers. MySpace, on the other hand, is out of control. Indeed, its core value is that users rule. They write what they like, stream their choice of music, link to their favorite sites, turn their profiles into HTML Niagaras of cascading style sheets. Hence the question: How do you manage MySpace without ruining the site’s irresistible free-for-all?
Maybe you don't, at least not in any conventional, top-down sense. That IS the question, though, and so far Murdoch has been smart to approach it cautiously. It is the anti-establishment nature of teens that brought them to MySpace in the first place, and it can just as easily move them to abandon the place.

Posted by Terry @ 04:27 PM CST [Link]

Saturday, July 15, 2006

Eclectic thoughts for a Saturday evening post :)
I noticed at the airport the other day that a 16 ounce bottle of water cost $2.89, while a 16 ounce bottle of Coke, etc., cost $2.79. This intrigues me, because, well, don't you think the carbonation, flavorization and colorization processes have costs? I mean, Coke is just a bottle of water that's been carbonated, flavored and colored. WTF? Is this a ploy by the water companies to justify charging more when THEY start flavoring, coloring and carbonizing their products? Hmm.

Want to know the cause of all the strife in the Middle East? I'm about to drive to Texas, so the price of gas had to go up, right?

I had a flashback to the Ma Bell days this morning. AT&T has cable and broadband "rights" in the apartment complex to which I'm moving, so I called to make the arrangements. Their voice mail told me to call back during normal business hours, Monday through Friday. Ah, I can just hear Springsteen singing "Monopoly Days."

My zefrank T-shirts arrived today, just in time for my trip to San Diego tomorrow. I wonder if anybody will recognize them. I especially like the "Thinking, so you don't have to" shirt. I'll be out-of-pocket again for a couple of days. Back to Nashville on Wednesday.

Finally, on my way home from Dallas on Thursday, I had a fun experience on the plane. My cellphone has the old "Our Man Flint" hotline "red phone" ringtone, and I usually have it set pretty loud. We were heading out towards the runway, when the flight attendant made the usual announcement about shutting down everything that has an on/off switch. I lifted my phone out to turn it off just as Harry called. The "Our Man Flint" theme echoed throughout the plane, and everybody broke out laughing. It was a moment.

Posted by Terry @ 06:02 PM CST [Link]

Friday, July 14, 2006

Rocketboom is back (yes, the real thing)
I waited until the first week of the "new" Rocketboom was finished before making a comment, and here it is: The new Rocketboom looks and feels a lot like the old Rocketboom. Shocking, I know, and evidence that personality-driven television isn't always as personality-driven as the personality doing the driving would like us to think it is.

Today's episode, I think, is pretty much an instant classic. Give a lookie-loo at Casual Friday.

Seriously, Rocketboom is a show -- a concept -- not a person. I adored Amanda and hope we all see her again soon, but Joanne Colan brings new life, energy and opportunities for conflict that only help the program. Good job, Andrew.

Posted by Terry @ 01:53 PM CST [Link]

Rather wants "to do news that matters."
I watched Larry King's
interview with Dan Rather while I was in Dallas, and this part of the exchange stayed with me:

There came a time when I realized...That we were working for not CBS and not CBS news. We were working for Viacom News, which was a whole different thing...

...with different interests, different traditions. And more lately, and they have a right to do this, they indicated they want to go in a different direction. The very top management has said they want, I think this is a paraphrase of a quote, they want to break with the past. They want to be done with the past and build something new. And I'll be interested to see what that something new is.

But...I want to do news that matters. And so much of news these days, and this is not directed at CBS and I include myself as one who from time to time, maybe more than time to time, but it's so driven by ratings, so driven by demographics, so driven by, we used to be told "stockholder value." It's driven by things other than the public interest. I want to do news that's fair and accurate, do it with integrity and I want to do it in the public interest, and I now have an opportunity to do that at HD Net.

This is Dan Rather's public spin, the fundamental positioning of himself for the future. The above had nothing to do with his departure from CBS News, and the network's wishes to "go in a different direction" isn't a suggestion that it won't include "news that matters." If Dan wants to do that kind of news -- and Mark Cuban's HD Net is making that possible -- then the statement "I want to do news that matters" clearly implies that at CBS News he wasn't, and that's just a self-serving positioning statement.

This is spin and nothing more; it's Dan's way of twisting his departure from CBS into an unrighteous act, a jihad against the high priest of 20th century journalism. He's a victim of "Viacom News" and nothing else. This is simply false.

For all his experience and credentials, Dan Rather was a polarizing evening news anchor and was the perfect foil for the right, because historical facts didn't support his claims of objectivity or lack of bias. Rathergate was simply the last straw, and I'd rather (I know) see him now do news with a perspective than to claim that his news is fair, accurate and done with integrity.

This interview -- and others he's doing to promote his new gig -- suggest that Dan Rather has learned nothing from his experiences during the last two years, and that's a real shame.

Posted by Terry @ 08:15 AM CST [Link]

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Thoughts from the mainstream
I've spent two days having my assumptions challenged, and it was a rich and rewarding experience. The vision becomes stronger when other voices (and minds) are considered. Wisdom, I think they call it.

Some take-aways for me:

I've been alone for so long in my world and its accompanying vision that I need to go back upstream for a season and strengthen the various thought tributaries that guide my future view. I've no intention of altering them in any way; it's just that when you've been down this river for as long as I have, there are certain things -- certain pieces of knowledge -- that I cannot assume others will understand without further explanation. And without those explanations, it's impossible for people in positions of power to be persuaded by the business concepts and opportunities I present to the extent that they will actually implement change.

And I'm in it for the change.

Someone once gave me the picture of myself and those I'm trying to reach as traveling along the current on separate rafts. I call to them to come closer to me, but realize when I look down that we're actually traveling along parallel streams, and moving others to my stream requires a return to the original split in the streams -- the old fork in the river. This is tough for me to do, because even my language assumes years of life on my stream. But this I will do, because my work with television stations demands it. For example, I can't talk about RSS unless those in the room fully understand my knowledge of RSS. I want to talk about downstream applications, but the immediate need is for upstream entry points.

Next, I think I've got to tone down the shouting. This stems from frustration (a three-syllable word for anger), and I've caught myself lecturing here many times. Who wants to sit through that? I need to try harder, because an iconoclast is born of anger, and while my communication from that perch may resonate with readers, it throws an unnecessary roadblock in my attempts to take "the message" to the industry I have loved all my life. Passion can be interpreted many ways, and it's my responsibility to make sure it's not interpreted as unbridled criticism.

AR&D is a dynamic, smart, vibrant and flexible company that sees the challenges facing television stations with informed eyes, and we're going to do our best to be a big part of the solution to those challenges. Turning my esoteric concepts into doable products and services is the best part of my new job, because it will result in opportunities for broadcasters in the months and years ahead. Allie, I'm sure, is smiling at the thought.

This is a brave new world we face, and I'm a very happy camper tonight, because I'm now linked with the broad shoulders of people who are just as motivated as I am to face the new world with confidence, conviction and workable ideas.

BTW, I'm "Senior Vice President of New Media." Holy crap.

Posted by Terry @ 09:45 PM CST [Link]

Monday, July 10, 2006

Off to Dallas
...and important meetings with my new teammates at Audience Research & Development. I'm not sure how much blogging I'll be doing, but I'm sure life will go on without my daily 2-cents. I'll write if I can. Back Thursday night.

Posted by Terry @ 09:44 AM CST [Link]

Bullshit Oops, I can't say that.
This is one of those times I wish Doc Searls had comments. He posts this morning about
Ulises Ali Mejias' rant on how technology is actually bad for the concept of community and that online "interaction" isn't really interaction at all. Always the gentleman, Doc tries to be nice, and I encourage you to go on over and read it.

Mejias' writing is essentially a modernist intellectual rant about the cultural evils of a liberal web. While I do think it's important to consider the potential downsides of cyber "life" compared to real "life," categorizing life this way is a slippery slope.

...the kinds of sociality that these "virtual communities" prescribe are actually more aligned with the dynamics of a mass than with a community.

Masses are not sites of rich social interaction. Masses foster an alienated form of individualism, making it difficult for people to come together meaningfully. Because of their large numbers, masses may give the appearance of robust communities, but a closer look reveals that people feel irreparably alone in a mass.

The problem here is that the logical modernist mind enters the equation, and sense isn't made of anything postmodern, including the concept of tribes. I completely reject the theory that the web destroys community and invite Mr. Mejias to examine the local blogosphere in Nashville as an example.

The web, with its associative links, is a deconstructionist machine, and this is (and should be) frightening to the institutional status quo. In that sense, it DOES destroy community, but let's not stop there. Let's look at what it is about "community" that it's destroying, because maybe, just maybe, that needs destruction.

It's not liberal versus conservative. It's about the failure of modernist institutionalism.

Posted by Terry @ 09:36 AM CST [Link]

Let's hope not
A new report (yes, one of those) from Magna Global USA -- the media services (advertising) firm specializing in television (especially product placement) -- and reported in today's Online Media Daily links the so-called "digital divide" to the failure of the web to achieve status sufficient for mass marketing.

"Despite falling prices for PCs, the potential for the Internet to become a true 'mass' medium remains limited by the lack of ubiquitous access," stated the report. "As a result, endemic advertisers, marketers with e-commerce activities, companies offering deep information to consumers, and those seeking niche audiences will continue to be the primary users of Internet advertising, rather than advertisers focused on mass marketing."
The report goes on to tout television (shocking, huh?) as still the best tool for mass marketers.
"Marketers will actually find traditional media to become increasingly important because of the relative scarcity of ways to reach masses of consumers."
It's hard to disagree with the positions presented here, but they assume a significant fact not in evidence -- that media is an open playing field for "marketers" to push products and services at "consumers" (who are increasingly hollering "STOP"). This is a dangerous assumption, because it blocks creativity at a time when creativity is what's needed most. It is foolish to take the position that there is only niche marketing and mass marketing, when technology is on the side of people in their efforts to avoid all forms of push marketing.

Secondly, this report conveniently offers up hope to traditional marketers by presenting the have-not's lack of web access as a potential opportunity to achieving mass status on the web. Here we have an appeal to the government to interject itself into business, and that's a loaded gun. Besides, while equal access for all may be a big help socially, it won't change people. Do these marketing types honestly believe that low-income web users will be any less resistant to pop-ups, blinking and whirling, or uninvited video than the current crop of users online? I think not.

Mass marketing will always be around, and television will always provide the best bang for the mass marketing buck. But increasingly, there is really only a perception of mass, because people are scattered and rarely get together in one place and one time (like the Superbowl). We've entered a new era of advertising that demands something other than tired efforts at manipulation of masses, and reports like these that offer the obvious as something new do nothing to inspire new thinking.

Posted by Terry @ 08:32 AM CST [Link]

Blogger skepticism understandable but in this case wrong
There's an interesting
discussion in the comments to a Jeff Jarvis post about WKRN-TVs announcement last week that it will begin paying video bloggers for material they submit that's used on-the-air or on the station's website.

Seth Finklestein Finkelstein (see comments) raised the issue of whether the station isn't just doing this as a budgeting ploy to get cheap content. I've encountered this before, so I asked him what a mainstream company has to do to prove that it wishes to work WITH the local blogosphere rather than exploit it. His response was to defend his cynicism.

Seth is one of the smartest guys out there, so it's important to pay attention to what he says. This kind of jaded thinking is sadly the norm, and I've always pointed out to clients that trying to play with local bloggers can be a minefield. The benefits of doing it right, however, can pay off big time and in many ways. It is upon this, after all, that my theories and axioms are based.

We shall see.

BONUS: Here's a link to the 3rd segment of yesterday's Reliable Sources on CNN. The discussion is about online video and its disruptive potential. (Thanks, Harry)

Posted by Terry @ 07:24 AM CST [Link]

Friday, July 7, 2006

More moronic observations from the "experts"
This one takes the cake, especially in light of my previous post and the one about ABC wanting to block fast-forwarding during commercials on DVRs. Two professors have done a study -- as
reported in today's Online Media Daily -- with the remarkable conclusion that:

Consumers might have more power over when and where they experience media than ever before, but they appear to enjoy content more--and pay closer attention to it--when they relinquish some of that control...

..."More attention is elicited by things that are not expected," said (Kevin) Wise, who was a doctoral student at Stanford when he conducted the research.

One implication for online media is that users might be more interested in content when it appears without warning, such as in the form of sudden bursts of motion and sound, or the much-disliked pop-ups, Wise said.

Where do they find people like this? "More attention is elicited by things that are not expected?" You mean like a man with a gun jumping in your face?

To paraphrase Rishad Tobaccowala of Starcom's Denuo group, "We're in an "empowered era" in which "humans are God," because technology allows them to be godlike. How will you approach god?"

It won't be with "sudden bursts of motion and sound."

Geez.

Posted by Terry @ 10:08 AM CST [Link]

In-stream video ads, yes. In-page video ads, no.
I'm usually a big fan of
MediaPost and its various publications, but a guest commentary in today's Online Media Daily has me a little perturbed. The column, written by EyeWonder CEO and co-founder John Vincent, makes the case that "in-page" video ads offer nothing but opportunities for advertisers. I have two problems with this piece: one, Vincent's EyeWonder is a leading provider of in-page video ads, and, two, I think in-page video ads that play automatically are the greatest insult to users since pop-ups.

In-stream video ads are another animal altogether, and I appreciate what he writes about advertisers and ad agencies not being fully up to speed on their effectiveness. He quotes a DoubleClick study that indicates online video ads "roughly triple the increase for all key brand metrics [brand awareness, ad awareness, message association, brand favorability, and purchase intent] compared to GIF/JPG display ads."

MediaPost needs to take a hard look at its policies relating to guest commentaries. Self-serving pitches ought not to be allowed, and if you are going to allow them, at least give your readers the courtesy of a disclaimer. John Vincent is merely identified as a co-founder of EyeWonder. There's no mention of EyeWonder's specialty.

Of course, I could be wrong...

Posted by Terry @ 09:51 AM CST [Link]

Mommy bloggers are the bomb!
Here I am with Busy MomOne of the things I learned at Bloggercon this year was the growing strength of a niche group of bloggers known as "mommy bloggers." I don't know the source of that title, but there are apparently quite a few of them writing about their adventures with their children.

This is a significant niche for several of reasons. One, Madison Avenue has always paid attention to moms. They are among the most attractive "targets" for advertising, because certain products have a strong appeal to moms and not necessarily everybody else. Moreover, moms tend to influence the family to a greater extent than dads, and that clout has value to advertisers (money). Two, people who read the stuff written by moms are -- by proxy -- also a "target" for certain advertisers, like, for example, Proctor & Gamble. Three, there is a kinship among mothers that is reserved strictly for them -- a club, if you will -- that has deep social significance.

The annual BlogHer conference of women bloggers gets underway at the end of this month in San Jose, and the mommy bloggers will be there in force. Last year, they rose to take the floor when someone suggested women bloggers could change the world if they'd only stop blogging about themselves. This offended the mommy bloggers, and one, Alice Bradley (aka finslippy) later wrote:

We readers and authors of parenting blogs are looking for a representation of authentic experience that we're not getting elsewhere. We sure as hell aren't getting it from the parenting magazines. If you want to find out how to make nutritious muffins that look like kitty cats, you can read those. But a parenting magazine will never help you feel less alone, less stupid, less ridiculous. This is the service I think parenting blogs provide-we share our lopsided, slightly hysterical, often exaggerated but more or less authentic experiences. If one blogger writes about, say, her bad behavior at the doctor's office, then maybe at some point, some freaked-out new mother is going to read that and feel a little better-less stupid, less ridiculous-about her own breakdown at the pediatrician's.
Powerful stuff, I think, and that backlash against the mainstream is the essence of most blogging, but with this group, trust me, Madison Avenue will pay attention. Mommy bloggers will have their own session at this year's BlogHer event. Read this summary (MommyBlogging is a radical act) from the BlogHer website to get an idea of what's going on.

In the news today is the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's purchase of a local parenting site, MilwaukeeMoms.com. This could be pretty significant, it seems to me, but according to PaidContent's Rafat Ali, the paper plans to begin carrying content from its parenting magazine, Metroparent. That smacks of another tired attempt to build up the old instead of boosting the new. What about the mommy bloggers in Milwaukee? Why not support them by building a smart aggregator of the energy that's already there? Let me repeat that smart aggregators are where local media companies should be looking for tomorrow, and this one makes so much sense that I'm surprised they aren't already a local internet staple.

Are you listening, big media?

Posted by Terry @ 09:08 AM CST [Link]

Thursday, July 6, 2006

Nashville TV station to put video bloggers on the air
WKRN's Mike Sechrist addresses a Nashville blogger meet-upIn an unprecedented industry move, Nashville ABC affiliate WKRN-TV announced tonight that it would begin paying local bloggers for approved video stories they submit and running those stories on its Website and in its newscasts. WKRN president and general manager Mike Sechrist told a "meet-up" of local bloggers that he could envision the day when a daily program would be made up entirely of material submitted by the community.

While there are many issues to work out, the reaction in the room was extremely positive. Nashville already boasts several quality video bloggers (vloggers) who are expected to begin offering their material immediately. Sechrist said the station would provide technical and journalism support where necessary or requested and that all stories would be vetted through the station's existing editorial process and systems.

Sechrist told the group of bloggers that they had already had a significant influence on the news programs the station produces, simply by doing what they do. The station has pursued stories first raised in the blogging community and has used local bloggers as a sounding board at various times.

This bold move reminds me of South Korea's OhmyNews! and its "every citizen is a reporter" slogan. By paying bloggers to conceive and produce stories that they feel are interesting, the station is following the "networked journalism" model noted by Jeff Jarvis earlier this week and the citizen journalism thinking of people such as Dan Gillmor.

I'm sure that we'll hear plenty of bitching about this from the trenches of the TV news business, but the truth is this was inevitable. Stations have always employed "stringers" or "freelancers," but most of their work was raw video that station reporters used to tell stories. This takes the concept a step further and taps into the knowledge, passion, brainpower and, yes, skill of people in the community. This a fruit of the personal media revolution, and it will be interesting to watch.

The social gathering tonight was well-attended, and I was taken by the number of new faces present. The blogosphere in Nashville is unique in its real world social networking, and it's always good to see in the same room people driven by the ability to self-publish. These are bright people, and most of them are funnier than all get out, too.

DISCLOSURE: WKRN-TV is a client of mine.

Posted by Terry @ 08:48 PM CST [Link]

Pay attention to what's happening down under
If you've not heard by now, the Australian version of the show "Big Brother" has caused a
hornet's nest of controversy over sexual conduct between two of the male characters and a woman contestant. Both of the male contestants were removed from the show for violation of rules. The incident didn't occur on-the-air; it was seen via the live internet version (at 4:30am Saturday).

What's important here is that this didn't occur over regulated airwaves, but Australian lawmakers now want to extend broadcast supervision to the internet in the name of protecting families "from exposure to offensive material." One can speculate about the chances of this happening, but that's not the point. The more legislative bodies attempt to apply top-down (modernist) mechanics to regulating online content, they more they run into a structure that was designed to avoid command-and-control functionality. Where do you draw the line without stepping all over personal -- and guaranteed -- freedoms? How do you actually implement such controls on those outside your area of jurisdiction?

This is a new world into which we've entered, and old laws and methods of enforcement -- like everything else -- must conform to that which is new. People will simply not stand for governmental interference here, and the more they attempt to interfere, the more visible becomes the political motivation for so doing. As I've said before, the internet is taking us to a place where the more we holler at the moon, the louder comes a voice saying, "What do you want?" I view this as a good thing, because it forces the realities of our connectedness and the need to face our problems in a way that's completely new. If we truly want a government of the people, then we must be prepared to accept the consequences of our actions. As long as we can shift the burden of those consequences to others (the government), then there's little need for us to carry the load ourselves, and yet that's exactly what is required of an informed citizenry.

Jeff Jarvis notes this morning that:

The FCC has asked a federal court to delay action by three network affiliates appealing a recent indecency order so it can hear the affiliates’ arguments and reconsider the case. The ABC, NBC, and CBS affiliates concurred; Fox’s stations did not...The FCC has studiously avoided court tests of its indecency rulings and I wonder whether this is another effort to sidestep the Constitutional challenge that is inevitable.
The last thing the FCC wants is to get into the court system, because it will lose the constitutional challenge to which Jeff refers. That will have a cascading effect on all previous commission decisions and ultimately lead, I believe, to its destruction. We don't need media interpretation for us to see what's really taking place -- that the FCC serves the political agenda of the party in control of the chairs. We know this, because their actions cannot be hidden anymore. Too many eyes are watching and relaying what they're finding. This is what I mean by the new clarity with which political bullshit can now be seen.

The FCC was created to regulate spectrum, for crying out loud, not to make viewing choices for us.

Does something need to be done to "protect" us from the excesses of human nature? Nothing new there, but what is new is the increasing and healthy shift of that burden to ourselves. Technology is our friend here, not another straw man to exploit for political gain.

Posted by Terry @ 10:11 AM CST [Link]

ABC's Shaw needs to get real
In one of the most preposterous and asinine statements I've read since covering the whole new media space, ABC President of Advertising Sales Mike Shaw told
MediaDailyNews that skipping commercials ISN'T a driving factor in the purchase of a DVR. In the words of the immortal Frank Barone, "Holy crap!"

The Shaw statement came as a justification for the network discussing with cable operators the notion of adding technology to set-top DVRs that would disable fast forwarding during commercials, so they could "run as intended."

"I'm not so sure that the whole issue really is one of commercial avoidance," Shaw said. "It really is a matter of convenience--so you don't miss your favorite show. And quite frankly, we're just training a new generation of viewers to skip commercials because they can. I'm not sure that the driving reason to get a DVR in the first place is just to skip commercials. I don't fundamentally believe that. People can understand in order to have convenience and on-demand (options), that you can't skip commercials."
What absolute poppycock! Mr. Shaw apparently doesn't read research on the subject or simply ignores it, because it doesn't fit his paradigm. Here's a graphic from the folks at eMarketer on why people use DVRs.

Why people use DVRs

What Mr. Shaw doesn't want to accept is that time is the new currency and that his industry has done this to themselves. One-third of prime-time viewing is now devoted to marketing, and this revolt against that is driven by a very real need for people to manage a decreasing amount of leisure time.

The 30-second ad model is broken, folks, and we need creative thinking to find ways to overcome it -- not crap like this from network executives. The horse has left the barn, and it ain't comin' back. Why can't we bring ourselves to accept that?

There's a lot of experimentation with program sponsorships, and I like that model. Whether it will provide the kind of revenues broadcasters need is questionable, but at least the concept begins with accepting certain realities about life. New options yet to be created certainly won't be created, if this kind of reasoning is the best the networks can offer. Bring on the right-brainers!

Puh-leeze!

Posted by Terry @ 08:47 AM CST [Link]

Wednesday, July 5, 2006

Is Amanda leaving...
...or are we being gamed? One never knows with the
Rocketboom crew, but the story is out that Amanda Congden and Andrew Michael Baron are splitting and that she's no longer a part of the 'boom. Hard to believe, but if true, Amanda is going to make some online (or offline) property very happy.

Amanda's video.

Lost Remote

Steve Rubel

UPDATE: Mathew Ingram talks with Baron. She wanted to be in L.A. He didn't want to move that fast. Sounds like typical anchor/management stuff to me.

Posted by Terry @ 12:29 PM CST [Link]

Networked journalism
Jeff Jarvis notes a
significant shift in his thinking about "citizens journalism." He now favors "networked journalism:"

"Networked journalism" takes into account the collaborative nature of journalism now: professionals and amateurs working together to get the real story, linking to each other across brands and old boundaries to share facts, questions, answers, ideas, perspectives. It recognizes the complex relationships that will make news. And it focuses on the process more than the product...

...this isn't about citizens or amateurs vs. professionals. We're all in this together. Journalism is a collaborative venture. Journalism is a network.

This is very good thinking, because it provides a way for all media to work together, which is the advice I've been giving clients for a long time. This term gives the concept an important framework for discussion.

I teased Jeff about starting a meme, to which he responded "I wasn't trying to claim provenance." Nevertheless, it'll be interesting to follow the Google link to see how quickly it grows.

Posted by Terry @ 09:09 AM CST [Link]

Networking blogs
When Gawker media mogul Nick Denton
announced he was selling two of his domains, speculation about the profitability of blogging hit the streets immediately. Friends jumped to his defense by saying he was doing necessary pruning of unprofitable wings of his multi-blog empire (Gawker, Wonkette, Fleshbot, etc.). Lost Remote asked "Is the blog bubble about to burst?" to which commenters responded in the affirmative.

Let me make something perfectly clear: Blog groups -- such as those of Nick Denton or Jason Calacanis -- were originated to carve out pieces of the mass media pie, and while they use the technology of blogging, the business play is textbook reach/frequency. Are they then blogs? Well, I believe that if you call yourself a blog, you are one, but I think the argument is irrelevant. The point is these networks are media companies, and they are competing with every mainstream outlet online. Nothing wrong with that.

But blogging -- as in the personal media revolution -- is much, much more than this, and it's here where I part company with some of my colleagues and friends. Heather Green of Business Week gets it right when she writes that blogging isn't about making money.

Sorry if I am repeating myself, but I remain convinced that the destabilizing nature of blogs (and personal media writ large) won't be the creation of a group of huge new media companies (a la Gawker) that displace the traditional ones. The real power is how personal media fragments the mass market audience by turning readers, watchers, listeners, into writers and video and audio creators. Most of these folks won't make money and it won't matter.
Fellow Nashville (and beyond) blogger, Rex Hammock (himself a magazine publishing fellow), writes that Denton is just practicing good business, but that many observers are missing the point about blogging.
Bubbles, booms, busts, bears: these are financial terms that are confusing to me when misapplied to blogging and the adaptation of personal media. Blogging (except to a small universe of individuals who see everything in financial terms) is more a social or cultural phenomenon than a business and financial one. I certainly think personal media will have a tremendous financial impact and transform certain aspects of the way business is conducted, but even finding a "pure play" in the blog-arena is going to be a challenge for the lay investor (not the professional one), so how can there be a bubble in the classic sense?
Of course, the real problem for me, since I deal with real world media companies, is that they view the Gawker model as the "real" model for blogging and the other, generally, as a messy nuisance. It's really not, because there are ways that local media companies can work WITH local bloggers to make money.

Networking local blogs is a win-win for everybody, because it creates clout that advertisers recognize and provides the money for bloggers to pay for their hosting, etc. But this type of network rises from the bottom instead of being organized from the top, and this is the source of its strength.

Posted by Terry @ 08:56 AM CST [Link]

[Archive Index] [The Pomo Blog]

"The future is not something we enter. The future is something we create."
Leonard Sweet