Skip to comments.The Print Media Are Doomed (Dinosaur Media DeathWatch™)
Posted on 01/01/2009 5:32:31 AM PST by abb
Surpassed in convenience and economy by online content, printed magazines and newspapers will dry up in the next decade. Pro or con?
Pro: Disappearing Ink
by Jeff Jarvis, Buzzmachine.com
Whether or not print dies, its business model will. Physical waresnewspapers, books, magazines, discswill no longer be the primary or most profitable means of delivering and interacting with media: news, fact, entertainment, or education.
Con: The Power of Print
by Chris Tolles, Topix
Given that I run an online-only news site here in Silicon Valley, youd think Id be arguing that print is already dead.
But the technology business teaches you that nothing ever goes away completely. Mainframes, Fortran, and paper all survive, despite PCs, Java, and the paperless office.
Whats really changing is the role of content itself.
Online, its participation that becomes the product, with the content merely an ingredient of the real product. And print becomes a great vehicle to promote that new, experiential online product.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
They aren’t doomed, The Messiah will bail them out.
Newspaper share value fell $64B in 08
KCKs Kansan to go online, end print newspaper
Reuters weighs in on supposed ‘bailout’ for Bristol Press
The First Newspaper Bailout of 2009?
Push To Save Herald, Press Sparks Debate In National Media
2009 Marks the Arrival of Feedback 3.0
“The Messiah will bail them out.”
Check that; you and I are going to end up bailing them out.
Trees are breathing a sigh of relief.
Distinction magazine: RIP December 2008
I agree with Tolles that we will have papers. Big papers have been dwindling in numbers for decades, since television came in. In Moscow twnty years ago, Russians had their noises buried in the papers, just as commuters did in the US fifty years ago. But tabloids will be around. Hard really to get into sports news without paper, or business, or celebrities.
Viacom vs. Time Warner Cable: Is Hulu to Blame?
In Dispute Over Free Online Content, Media Giant Threatens to Block Channels in Cabler’s Big Markets
By Michael Learmonth and Andrew Hampp
Published: December 31, 2008
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) — There’s nothing new about fee disputes between TV networks and cable and satellite operators, but now they’ve got an added wrinkle: Cable operators contending that TV networks should forfeit big fee increases when they put shows online free on their own sites and third-party distributors such as Hulu, Joost and Veoh.
That’s one of the central arguments being made by Time Warner Cable executives in their dispute with Viacom, which threatens to remove a group of 18 networks that includes MTV, Comedy Central, Noggin and Nickelodeon from Time Warner’s 13.5 million subscribers in big markets such as New York, Los Angeles and Dallas.
Connecting TV to computer
As part of the talks, Time Warner Cable execs put together a document outlining which shows Viacom is distributing online and where. If the stalemate continues, Time Warner Cable said it will start instructing subscribers how to connect their TVs to a computer and watch Viacom content online, a strategy it tried during a carriage dispute with LIN TV last fall.
Viacom Dispute Has Kids in Panic Over Losing Favorite Nick Shows
Scrolling Message Alarms ‘SpongeBob,’ ‘Dora’ Viewers
Viacom Threatens to Pull MTV Programming off Time Warner Cable
Fee Dispute With Carrier Faces Jan. 1 Midnight Deadline
“If everybody starts watching content online, why would they pay subscription fees for it?” Time Warner Cable spokesman Alex Dudley said.
In response, MTV Networks is threatening to block access to the shows online if the dispute is not resolved by Jan. 1. Spokesman Mark Jafar said not only will all Viacom networks be blocked to Time Warner subscribers on TV, they will also not be accessible online to any Time Warner broadband subscriber.
Using an enemy to get message out
The irony of this is that MTV Networks has taken a far more conservative approach to distributing online than, say, NBC Universal, News Corp. or even Turner Networks, largely to avoid conflict with cable and satellite partners in hopes of landing large annual fee increases.
Indeed, the company took the most aggressive stance against unauthorized distribution of any of the big media conglomerates when it sued YouTube and Google for $1 billion in 2007. (In fact, underscoring the enmity of the fight, Viacom is using arch-enemy YouTube to distribute its anti-Time Warner message.)
In addition, Viacom said it purchased media from sites including iVillage, Kaboose, TV Guide, Parenthood, New York Post, CBS News, Rolling Stone.com, NHL, and Hollywood.com to run its ads warning that Time Warner subscribers may lose its networks. The push was geo-targeted in 13 different markets, the company said, with a focus on adults age 25 to 54 — though it reached plenty of kids, too.
Viacom: Ratings not hurt
After its initial reticence, Viacom has started distributing more shows online over the past year. Comedy Central started airing full episodes of “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” online in 2007 and “The Colbert Report” and “South Park” earlier in 2008. In June, Viacom started offering episodes of “Stewart” and “Colbert” on the NBC Universal-News Corp. joint venture Hulu.com. MTV.com has episodes of “The Hills” and clips of a number of shows are available on Veoh and Joost.
Viacom makes the case that online distribution hasn’t hurt ratings. Comedy Central, for example, had its best month ever in November after the presidential election fueled ratings, even while though the shows are widely available online.
Nickelodeon finished 2008 as the highest-rated basic cable network and Noggin is up 29%. But beyond Nickelodeon and Comedy Central, ratings at other networks included in the negotiations like MTV, BET and VH-1 are down this year.
‘Guess what? We do mind’
As cable operators continue to push for online distribution, relations with cable operators will get more contentious. Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt said as much last summer when asked about networks streaming shows online. “Guess what? We do mind,” he said.
Viacom said it is asking Time Warner for rate increases of 23 cents per month, per subscriber, or $2.76 per annually, an increase of 12%. “Also, given that under our existing agreement they’re handing subscribers $3 monthly increases in Raleigh, Orange County, Los Angeles, and New York City as of tomorrow, there’s no need to pass this cost on to consumers,” the company added.
Online distributors such as Hulu see themselves as the cable operators of the future, and are working hard to engineer a seamless connection to the TV set and take over the living room. But it’s not just the networks distributing online. Comcast, the nation’s-largest cable operator, is distributing web video through Fancast, which has content deals with Hulu, CBS and ABC, not to mention Viacom networks MTV and Comedy Central.
Derek Baine, a senior cable analyst for SNL Kagan, argues that the audience for TV content online is still very fragmented demographically. “Teenagers are starting to move into their 20s who have never bought a multichannel subscription probably never plan to. They watch all their content online. We see that slice as a problem. But then you see people in their 40s, 50s and 60s who aren’t switching a lot of their viewing to online. Once you see the demographic bubble burst, it’ll hurt viewership.”
Nickelodeon, Mr. Baine added, could be considered “very under-priced, even when you compare it to Time Warner Inc.’s channels. There’s a very good argument to raise the rate on Nickelodeon. But they’re in a weak position on networks with declining ratings.”
On New Year’s Eve, Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman was at work at Viacom headquarters in Times’ Square, and said through a spokesman that Time Warner Cable was unwilling to meet.
Disputes have short lifespans
The center of Viacom’s argument is that it accounts for 20% of the viewing on Time Warner Cable, but only accounts for 8% of the subscriber fees it pays to TV networks. Time Warner Cable argues that in the past, Viacom has traded lower increases for analog channel positions for low-rated networks such as TVLand.
Because of the potential disastrous effects for all parties, cable disputes don’t typically last very long. This one in particular would hit both Time Warner and Viacom where it hurts. Time Warner Cable is under new competition from Verizon FiOS in addition to DirectTV and Dish Network, and Viacom because the last thing it needs is to lose ratings points in its two biggest TV markets. Time Warner Cable has 13.3 million subscribers.
Good riddance to these devils who sold advertising to businessess at exorbitant rates while really delivering nothing in return.
Good riddance to editors and owners who threw their weight around communities because they could ruin anyone they wanted. Many of these editors and owners are true criminals who were released by authorities under duress.
Good riddance to ‘journalists’ that are nothing more than uneducated, uninterested, ill-informed, agenda-driven monsters who simply look forward to the next party where they can brag about some feckless story they wrote that would be filled with red marks if it was submitted in 6th grade English class.
Buggies “survive” too, but not in any realistic sense. They are only curiosities and movie props, not transportation. So it will be with newspapers.
see post #15
I love that photo. I laugh every time I see it. :-)
Why pay for propaganda, lies, half-truths and mis-information when others are willing to provide it for free?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.