She says Murdoch will fail with his new paywall and Google-blocking strategy, internet users only expect content for free, search dominates people’s news consumption and the only way for media companies to survive online is to be “promiscuous” which means getting your content on as many platforms as possible and then monetising through advertising.
A simple solution.
The startup’s proprietary alogirthims automatically pick the creative parts of a display ad (images, colors, text) in real-time determined by like geographic location, language, the content of the website, the time of day or the past performance of different ads.
Sounds impressive. And hot on the heels of Google acquiring AdMob. Something just dawned on me. If the news/media industry is so dependent on advertisements, why (aside from budget cuts and running tight ships) don't we have the foresight to make these acquisitions?
It's clear that we need to adopt the same strategy and a kind of cross-pollination between disciplines like technology and design for the news industry to evolve.
In similar ways, that's how technology-based companies have been leapfrogging ahead of once-incumbent and complacent industries. Google in the news industry. Apple in the music industry and then, interestingly enough, the (tech-based) mobile phone industry. Amazon with bookstores and publishers.
Maybe only a new player without the burden of legacy can change the game.
Can news outlets learn a thing or two from brands about engaging experientially with their audiences? The way brands do with their consumers? I've been impressed on many occasions with the ingenious ways in which brands are using the new digital channels available to them. They're always the first to move and latch on to trends. Because it's a cutthroat business.
On another note, here's a scary thought [from slide #29]:
“We’re not in the business of keeping the media companies alive. We’re in the business of connecting with consumers.” - Trevor Edwards, Nike
"I would recommend that journalists engage with social media sites and forums around their chosen subject."
Most don't.
A rather ingenious list of ideas. I like this one:
Transparency would be a core element of our journalism. One example of many: every print article would have an accompanying box called "Things We Don't Know," a list of questions our journalists couldn't answer in their reporting. TV and radio stories would mention the key unknowns. Whatever the medium, the organisation's website would include an invitation to the audience to help fill in the holes, which exist in every story.
"Help doesn’t mean a handout" : Google CEO Eric Schmidt On Newspapers & Journalism
What Murdoch doesn't get:
"That’s especially so in that Google has no plans to produce news content itself. Google’s success, he says, is tied to pointing its visitors to sources of quality content."
Via the Washington Post:
“Seeing all this, Japanese newspapers have no intention of giving away on the Web what their readers remain willing to pay for in print…”
So the papers in Japan guard their business by refusing to give away content online so readers will keep buying their dead-tree medium. Does anyone else find this ridiculously short-sighted? Hmm, I guess it might work for now but it definitely isn’t a sustainable business model. It would be almost effortless for a new player to disrupt the market by offering free quality content online.
