Clark Gilbert, Utah papers, and the circulation game

We were just talking about how circulation numbers are a mess yesterday. Here is a real story FYI:

http://www.cityweekly.net/utah/reading-between-the-lines/Content?oid=2519741

Two market experiences

Readings about the information surplus and the competition for audience’s attention on the Web bring me some memories from media companies:

1.

 When I was working for Univision as an online editor –basically ensuring synergy between the online platforms and local television networks—one of the most difficult tasks was to convince TV news reporters and news directors to use their website to promote their own content.

 “By promoting on-air any other product different to television news we could take away our TV viewers’ attention,” they said,  "so even our own website would become an open competition/distraction that might lead to a reduction of our audience.”

I was amazed by that logic and always wondered whether it was possible to understand the web not as a substitute but as a complement of traditional media.

If traditional TV news decided not to be on the Web, could that lack of presence facilitate competitors to take over potential markets and cannibalize the same audience they ignore from the bottom?

Some trending users’ activities such as second screening could open the way towards that direction. The relationship between social networks and television would provide new ways to engage audiences during braking news, political debates and live coverage.

2.

Terra Networks, an online branch of the Spanish company Telefonica, launched its online video product Terra TV on February 2006. I was selected as the director of the project for Colombia and Venezuela. The headquarters of the operation were located in Sao Paulo, Brazil.

The idea was to implement little teams of producers in each Latin American country and provide generic content to feed the local websites from Brazil. Terra bought Grey's Anatomy, Lost, iCarly’s old seasons, among other TV shows. All episodes were in HD.

The massive audience of these TV programs and people who didn’t have access to cable in Latin America were expected to visit Terra TV to consume those old episodes of famous series. They never did.

As a reaction to that costly failure, we started to produce short local videos (1’:30”) with our small team in Colombia (culture, news and sports). Soon we reached more audience than those foreign shows. As Hoskins, McFadyen and Finn have stated, the demand is greater for TV domestic products than for foreign programs. Therefore, the dream of Terra Tv to maintain a low profile local operation in Latin America and substitute local content with foreign high quality episodes published from Brazil did not come true.

Experience the information!

Today, Apple just held a showcase to promote I-Phone 6 and wearable devices. This is meaningful for the ‘information surplus’ because the development of technology let the supply curve move into the right in a drastic manner. What I feel significant about Apple products is that they not only lead consumers to pay attention to information, but also lead them to ‘experience’ the information vividly in their lives. Cutting-edge technologies can widen the information surplus because their roles as transmitting information is becoming faster and easier for consumers. At first, consumers might feel fascinating about the convenience provided by technologies, which allow them to pay attention to more stuff in comparison with the past. Later, consumers will be absorbed into the massive information that is directly related to their own lives. For example, individuals can check their health status easily, by using I-Phone 6 (Of course, they might pay attention to such health service before ‘the assimilation.’)

Some services on smartphone applications are free, which were not free in the past. Now, consumers might take it for granted that information should be free. I totally agree with the idea that individual’s attention is limited. But, due to the development of technology, the chance to be exposed to information for individuals is growing exponentially. Apple or Samsung products are successfully for consumers to pay more attention to the information. We are facing the world where mere attention to the information would not be enough; we are experiencing the information and bring such experiences into real lives. As a platform, communication technologies are accelerating the information surplus gap.

            Information itself can allow consumers to not only pay attention to, but also experience that. ‘Snowfall,’ created by New York Times at 2012 is a perfect example to ‘experience the information.’ Snowfall is an interactive news service and quite different from traditional news content. Audiences can understand and even experience what happened at Tunnel Creek. After consuming interactive news contents like Snowfall, audiences might feel banal toward existing news services. Sometimes, they might feel dismissed after paying attention to the news content, which would not lead them to experience that service.
           In the information surplus area, consumers might not so much different from the past. But the supply determinants are drastically evolving. Information surplus will continue and even increase and technology is playing prominent role in moving the supply curve into far right.

Isn't it about time? (Week 3)

Time is a very finite resource and inside that limited amount of time we have to decide how to balance the two different sides of attention. (1. The attention of others place on our work and the things we provide, and 2. the things we choose to place out attention in) That is the thing we have control over as individuals. Regardless of what we do, time will continue to pass by and will be used for an infinite number of things. There is nothing we can do to stop it. However, the amount of attention that we use isn't constant. We can use all of the time we have to pay attention to one thing or another, or we can choose to limit our attention to allow ourselves time to relax and recover (I personally like to sleep).

Like Davenport & Beck said, "attention is the real currency of businesses and individuals."  Every decision that is made starts with the attention of a person or group of people, so the point that they are trying to make is extremely valid. Business are trying to capture attention so they can convince you to purchase their services and/or goods. But they also have to decide which things available to them they are going to use their attention to focus on. This limited resource of attention is an extremely interesting topic and is why we have study things like selective exposure, news overload, participation etc. It all stems from someones attention. If we don't have attention, nothing matters and the work that we do is for not, regardless of the results. 

Understanding the principles of markets in association with attention is an interesting concept. The supply of information and other things that people can spend their attention on is infinite, especially in comparison to years past. Each person has a different demand curve related to the amount of information they want and the attention that they're willing to pay for it. So what is the equilibrium? What information are people demanding and how much of their attention are they willing to pay to consume it? Are they spending their attention on the right things, or are they filling their bellies with froth that does nothing to nourish the body? What are the priorities that we have for the attention we spend?

The competition between new media and traditional media

It is a topic that never grows old. Many research focuses on the influence of new media on traditional media, such as “Will television replace radio”, “Will DVD kill movies.” Nowadays, we are concerned about information surplus. Will the Internet replace traditional media? It is interesting to think about this topic in an economic perspective.  

Audience’s attention and time are limited. New media and traditional media compete for limited attention.  My question is that does new media compete for limited attention or does it increase audience’s demand?

If new media and traditional media are substitute goods, then when a reader reads print newspaper, he or she would not read online newspaper. What if new media and traditional media are complement goods, new media will increase the old media consumption or vise versa. 

The other assumption is new media increase media consumption. New media serve a different function with traditional media. For example, before TV, people only   read newspapers.  When we have TV, people watch TV but still read newspapers because people watch TV news and read newspapers under different circumstances. Now we have online news, mobile news, people can check news whenever they want. It means people spend more time on news consumption.

When television was introduced, there was a concerned that radio may be replaced. Radio is not a main media in a household, TV replace it. However, the fact is radio became an important media when people driving.

In my opinion, traditional media would never die. It will find its own way to get along with new media, as it usually does. New media will increase the demand of media use.

Information Supply, Demand and Overload

I think the insights offered in both readings hit one of the fundamental problems facing any kind of information-based enterprise. On the supply side, it requires a lot of effort to ensure one’s message reaches the widest possible audience. Since search engines essentially act as portals to the Internet, rules are imposed on content to guarantee its visibility. (Ironically, one of the rules of visibility is to churn out content on a regular basis, contributing to information overload). As a result, Search Engine Optimization firms thrive in this new attention economy and serve as marketing departments for web-based enterprises.

On the demand side, finding pertinent information has become challenging. In the era of big data, or simply information in this context, it is difficult for consumers to separate the signal and the noise. Information aggregators, indexers and organizers have proliferated to help us sort, prioritize and find content. It seems unsurprising that the Internet is so well-suited for lists.

Maybe the issue needs to be re-framed like this: there is more content which can now be accessed by more people. The trick is connecting the right content with the right consumer. This is the philosophy that guides Netflix’s recommendation system, Google’s personalized search engine results, and other efforts aimed at increasingly individualized information consumption. What loses here is content that does not find a niche or a large enough audience to sustain itself. 

Week 2 Reflections

Last month Variety published a report stating that YouTube celebrities were more popular than traditional celebrities in a study of 13-18 year olds. This clip from Shane Dawson ranked #8 of 20 on the list has garnered over 12 million views.

Reflecting on our supplemental readings, I think it is fascinating to think media companies may have to increasingly compete with a substitute such as YouTube star Shane Dawson (though I don't know close a substitute) that offers a cheaper (free w/ internet connection) alternative,  is more agile/adaptive, and doesn't have to follow many of the same rules of media companies. Additionally Dawson can continue collecting ad revenue for the foreseeable future on several videos simultaneously with virtually no distribution cost.

I'm also curious about how remix culture impacts the supply and demand relationship of media. From personal Twitter accounts to established, large-traffic blogs there are media entities that thrive off the remix, repurposing and reposting of another source's media. These consumer-producers are aggregators, memes, YouTube channels dedicated to producing show recaps. I'd like to spend a few minutes in class discussing this if there is some time available.

Finally, reflecting on the attention issue presented in the readings, I'm curious to know if there is evidence media consumers feel obligated/pressured to having knowledge and a voice about larger/macro issues rather than local issues? Are there certain types of knowledge that are considered more important than others?