As I mentioned at length in my post about the homeless and the future of newspapers, the old media companies are struggling. While discussing my theory with friend and tv news reporter Nick McGurk, he pointed me to this video, which focuses on ways entrepreneurs are trying to save and shape the future of news-gathering aggregates and newspapers.
In particular, I was struck with the story of the guy who took blog posts, printed them out, and then handed them out at the train stations. It was an idea that was very similar to that of having the homeless hand out newspapers like the Chicago Tribune and New York Times for free, though the content was not the same. Still, the entrepreneur brought up an idea in regards to advertising that I had not considered.
In my opinion, the idea of hyper-local advertising, that is, extremely specific, targeted ads, down to specific train stations, is genius, even if it’s an idea rough around the edges. The ability for companies to target people who are predisposed to spending money with them is something that newspapers and other media organizations at this time struggle to do. Think about how valuable it would be for the shoe store 3 blocks from your train station to put a coupon into a paper that is given to people near their store, but not across town, thus saving them money and creating a more effective advertising campaign.
It’s another idea for newspapers to kick around. As you can tell, I’m not ready to give up on them for good. I think there is still a future for the paper, and in the print form too, but they need to figure out how. Thinking outside of the box, like in the video above, is the way to do it.
For those who spend any amount of time in major cities, you’re familiar with this scene:
You’ve waited 10 minutes too long for the train to arrive, and now you’re running late. You finally get to your stop, quicken your pace to a half-walk, though it’s more like a jog or power-walk, and keep checking your cell phone for the time. You walk up the stairs out of the subway station and you hear a familiar sales pitch. “Good morning! Get your (Name of the city) free daily newspaper!” You block it out, as you do most days, even as a newspaper is literally being shoved into your empty hands. Some days, you manage a “No thanks.” Other days, you simply ignore.
It’s similar to how you would react to a homeless man begging for change on the street. Sometimes you tell him you don’t have any change. Often you ignore his pleas, because you’d rather not lie that you don’t have anything to give him. But once in a while, you fork over a dollar.
And some mornings, you get out the door early, the train arrives as you make it to the platform, and you have a couple minutes to spare before needing to get to the office. So you take a free newspaper and open it up while walking to the office. And while the writing is not what you might read in the New York Times, and while the articles may not be investigative pieces acting as government watchdogs, you realize that you kind of like the newspaper.
And then the next day, you’re running late again, and you’re back to the ignore/no thanks routine.
What some don’t realize is that the people begging for you to take papers next to Subway stops and on street corners in the morning are often on the street corners begging for money later that day.
The above scenario describes my morning routine during my time this summer in New York City. But I imagine it’s a situation to which many of you can relate.
There are many homeless empowerment newspapers in the United States and throughout the world. They are not all the same, both in content and in business model. Check out this video if you aren’t familiar with the concept. It’s a short clip about the Street Sense newspaper in Washington, D.C. Try to watch it all the way through, as it really does highlight what these papers do for the homeless.
The papers that are passed out in NYC are free, and their content focuses on much of what is covered in regular newspapers, albeit in a smaller, shallower form. They sell advertisements, so I assume that is how they pay their vendors, rather than through circulation sales like you saw in the Street Sense video. Few would argue the merits of helping the homeless get back on their feet by empowering them with jobs. The question I have is whether there is a lesson to be learned or potential business model to be shaped from the way these free newspapers operate.
The free papers generally are non-profits who operate via grants, donations or government subsidies. This is clearly not the case with commercial newspapers. But think about what the problem is with newspapers, who are folding at an alarming rate and operating with huge losses. When newspapers were at their peak, they had huge print circulation numbers with ridiculously high profit margins. But when the Internet came along, many no longer needed the print version of the day’s news, which may already have been outdated, in their hands. Plus, many don’t have time for the newspaper before they run out the door on their way to work or school.
And because the news online is free, and advertising is far cheaper on the Internet as opposed to in print, newspapers are struggling. But what if cities with downtown areas took a page out of the book of the free daily newspapers?
Take, for instance, the Chicago Sun-Times. If the paper ceased to deliver door-to-door during the week and cut all weekday circulation subscriptions, it would seem crazy. But what if they devoted those resources to hiring the homeless as vendors for their papers, handing out copies of the Sun-Times for free all across the downtown Chicago area. Every day on their way to work, as men and women head to the train or the office, they suddenly have a copy of a reputable Chicago paper. Not only that, but anyone else in the city, from teenagers to tourists, could also grab a free copy of the paper. Pretty soon, downtown Chicago is flooded with copies of the Chicago Sun-Times. And, if the paper wants to really help its image, it can place conveniently-located recycling bins (with advertising space, of course) all across the city for people to dump their papers after they finish with them.
But how is the Sun-Times making money from this if they are cutting their circulation during the week? Suddenly, when a couple million people in the downtown area are reading the hard copy of the newspaper again, advertising rates will spike, providing newspapers with revenue that they haven’t had in years. Not only that, but the Sun-Times will most likely greatly increase circulation among the younger demographic that gave up on newspapers long ago. If people are used to paying for something, and all of a sudden it’s now free, it becomes very hard to turn down.
Of course, there are probably holes in the above argument, and I’m not sure how exactly the numbers would work out as far as profits gained from a presumed increase in advertising sales minus the loss of the weekly circulation revenue. But I would think that the hiring of the homeless as vendors across the metropolitan area would lower operating costs, since there would no longer be a need to pay drivers to deliver newspapers every morning.
Whether the numbers work out or not, I believe that it’s this kind of thinking that could save newspapers. The answer is not forcing people to pay to read online content. That won’t work, and will only further drive people to blogs to get their news.
So the next time you have the chance to take a free newspaper after getting off the train, just give it a look and see if you like it. You might be helping get a man off the streets, or you might be helping save the newspaper industry.
It’s been well over a week since the death of entertainment superstar Michael Jackson. In terms of the 24-hour new cycle, a week is about 3 years. News turns over so quickly because it has to, since viewers now get their news outside of the morning newspaper and the evening newscast. Websites need to be constantly updated, cable news needs fresh subjects to beat to death and reporters need new things to tweet. Thus, it’s not surprising that the media bombarded our senses with coverage of Jackson’s death when the news first broke.
It didn’t even surprise me that the next day or two were devoted to coverage of the events surrounding the pop star’s death and to putting his life in perspective. For a star of his magnitude, I would expect this kind of coverage. After all, news of Jackson’s death affected most people in the Western world in some way. I could not, however, have predicted that Jackson would still be making front-page headlines.
Some people are starting to grow annoyed with the coverage. Here are some examples:
From Mark Knoller, CBS White House Correspondent, Twitter: “Who had a more consequential impact on the world: Michael Jackson or Robert McNamara. Who will we hear more about today & tomorrow.?” “What do you think the networks will lead with this evening? Obama in Russia, or preps for Michael Jackson memorial tomrrow?”
From Jake Tapper, Reporter, ABC News, Twitter: “remember how right after 9/11 all those media muckety-mucks said they wouldnt over-cover fluff and celebrity stuff anymore?”
Those are two pretty prestigious reporters throwing not-so-subtle hints to their employers to lay off the Michael Jackson coverage (this may also be so that they can move their own coverage up in the program, since both are covering President Obama’s visit to Russia). Since both are reputable reporters, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt in suggesting that they actually are fed up with the amount of Jackson coverage still being thrown our way by the media.
Then there is this video, which seems to sum up how some are beginning to feel about all of the coverage. It gets credence because it is from a Congressman:
I’m not sure the Congressman offered the most politically correct message in the video, but I think his point is clear: there are a lot of terrible things going on in the world that warrant media coverage, so why is one man, albeit an important one in the entertainment world, garnering so much attention?
HOWARD KURTZ: Don’t you feel deep down that this is overdoing it?
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: No, I don’t feel it’s overdoing it. And I don’t — and when I hear people say that, I have to be very honest with you, Howie, I think it’s elitist. I don’t remember — I’m sure there was some criticism when there was the coverage of Princess Diana’s death, but I don’t think that there was this sort of criticism that we’re having with Michael Jackson.
Michael Jackson is an accidental civil rights leader, an accidental pioneer. He broke ground and barriers in so many different realms in artistry, in pictures, in movies, in music, you name it. So, no, I don’t think it’s overkill.
KURTZ: Okay. He did all of those things. He also was accused of child molestation, and was a seriously weird person. But he has been dead for more than a week and we are still going almost wall-to-wall.
LEMON: Well, he has been dead for more than a week, yes, but Michael Jackson twice — well, once, I should say, he was acquitted of child molestation. The other time it was settled out of court.
KURTZ: Right.
LEMON: And if you talk to people who were involved in those cases, they don’t believe that he did it. So let’s put that aside.
The Huffington Post entry points to a Pew Research Center Study that found nearly two-in-three Americans felt that the media covered the story too much. But at the same time, 58% of those surveyed said they followed the Michael Jackson coverage either very closely or fairly closely. Furthermore, half of those surveyed said they thought the media struck the right balance between covering Jackson’s career and his scandal-filled life.
But there’s another reason that the media is covering Jackson so much, beyond the reasons Lemon stated above. Those reasons all come down to ratings and money. All one has to do is take a look at Twitter’s “Trending Topics,” which follows the subjects that are most tweeted. Two of the top subjects most-tweeted about are “Michael Jackson” and “MJ.” Nowhere on the list is President Obama, Russia, healthcare, etc. Clearly, Michael Jackson is still on the minds of the masses. People are tweeting about him at a rapid pace, with dozens of tweets coming down per minute.
Is this the most scientific way of finding out whether people are annoyed with the coverage? It definitely isn’t, but in my opinion, it’s a great indicator that news of the King of Pop is still intriguing to a lot of people, which is what, at the end of the day, the news organizations will want to deliver. Ratings=advertising dollars, so why would news organizations barrage its consumers with coverage of Obama in Russia when it’s a subject that won’t gain much traction? Over a million people registered for Jackson’s funeral, which is probably double the amount of people who even know Obama is in Russia.
Thus, it makes perfect sense to me that the media keeps churning out stories about Jackson. It’s an intriguing story that has a huge following. One of my journalism professors once told me that “sex, murder and food sell.”
I’m not sure which of those categories MJ fits into; perhaps all three. Or, maybe he belongs in a category all to himself, a category where the word “celebrity” is a vast understatement.
The details of the unexpected death of former Tennessee Titans and Baltimore Ravens QB Steve McNair are still forthcoming. Recently retired, McNair was far from the public spotlight and, on a Fourth of July weekend where so much was going on in sports and in world news, the former NFL co-MVP couldn’t have been more distant from the minds of people everywhere.
But in an age where news spreads like wildfire because of texting and smartphones, sports fans Saturday across the country were turning to each other poolside, beer in hand, asking, “Did you hear that Steve McNair died?”
In light of all the recent celebrity deaths, including the one that STILL continues to make front page headlines and lead newscasts, the death of a quarterback who is only a borderline hall-of-fame player probably doesn’t resonate with a whole lot of people. The reaction of the people I was with ranged from “Wow, that’s pretty crazy” to “Who’s Steve McNair?” to “Is there any more of that summer brew drink you made left?” The world did not stop for the death of Steve McNair.
But that doesn’t mean that his passing is not significant in the football world, particularly for Titans fans and, to a lesser extent, Ravens fans (myself included).
McNair entered the league in 1995, at a time when the black quarterback was still not an established facet of the NFL. Faced at times with intense media pressure and racial epithets hurled his way in Houston and then in Nashville when the team moved, McNair faced challenges that would tested the resolve of the league’s mentally toughest. McNair would prove over the next decade that he was not only mentally tough, but physically tough in ways that very few NFL players have ever proven to be.
Every week, Air McNair was a walking medical clinic. I remember a graphic shown during a game of all of McNair’s injuries, and seemingly every part of his body had been in some way banged up (the link above in this paragraph has one of those very charts). The fact that he played for as long as he did, and as well as he did, is probably some sort of medical miracle. McNair was also involved in one of the greatest Super Bowls ever played, with one of the most exciting finishes in all of sports:
So how will McNair be remembered, now that he’s gone? For now, it seems that he is leaving behind a positive legacy, one of a tough, humble player who was a great teammate. McNair did not burn bridges with the teams he played for. For proof, just read articles in The Tennessean and The Baltimore Sun.
Of course, details may emerge, once investigations are done into the deaths of McNair and his “friend” Sahel Kazemi that may not reflect too well on McNair. Nobody quite knows what happened early Saturday morning on the 4th of July, but regardless of the details that emerge, this is a tragedy. McNair leaves behind children who will now grow up with only memories of their father, the NFL star.
Whatever may come to light about McNair’s personal life in light of these investigations, it should not take away from his on-field accomplishments. He was beloved in Tennessee, where he became the face of a newly-located franchise. He was respected in Baltimore, where he gave hope that the Ravens could win with offense. And his mobility, toughness and passing prowess gave hope and even more legitimacy to the evolution of the black quarterback, further paving the way for fans and teams to embrace the Donovan McNabb’s, Daunte Culpepper’s and Michael Vick’s of the football world.
We’ll all follow the investigation into McNair’s death. I, for one, and hoping that he is exonerated of any wrong-doing in the events that may have led up to the shootings.
McNair will always hold a place in NFL history for his performance in Super Bowl XXXIV. Here’s to the hope that his legacy is further cemented as one of the league’s toughest players, and a man who further opened the door for a generation of black quarterbacks to follow.
This summer, I am interning at two companies: The first is Buddy Media, a start-up company focused on helping companies successfully market themselves in the realm of social media. The second is NY1 television, a more traditional news station. Working for these two companies brought me to think about the future of media, and where the two companies may someday intersect.
I’m not breaking any news when I write that the state of media is, to say the least, in a state of flux. Newspapers are struggling across the board, television ratings, particularly network newscasts, are a fraction of what they once were, and the Internet is a giant vat of news in which the user is responsible for picking out what is credible and what is junk.
This isn’t new. The writing has been on the wall for traditional media outlets for years now, as they struggled to adapt to the changing climate of consumer-produced and consumer-controlled content. The problem is not necessarily that the climate has changed. That was inevitable as technology evolved. The problem with the established media was the hesitation, reluctance and downright stubbornness of the old guard to roll with the punches. It was always assumed that profit margins would continue to be ridiculously high, because, after all, where else would people find out about the war overseas, the state of the economy or that creepy woman down the street who actually donates all of her money to homeless shelters?
But then Al Gore invented the Internet, and soon enough, every news outlet had a website, blogs were breaking news and reporters were tweeting out info on their stories long before it was published in any traditional news outlet. But profit margins are still down across the board for the old guard.
Which brings us to today. Traditional journalism jobs are dwindling, journalists are being asked to do more with less, and companies are struggling just to stay afloat. The Internet isn’t just hurting media companies, though. Many companies are struggling to figure out how to tap into the 24/7 connectivity that iPhones, laptops and blackberries provide.
Enter: Buddy Media. Rather than shamelessly plug the company that is helping to subsidize the cost of my living in the most ridiculously high-priced city in the country, let me just say this: Buddy Media gets it when it comes to brand promotion online. They have created Facebook fan pages and applications for companies interested in stepping outside the box of traditional advertising.
Is it effective? Consider tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people that have signed up for a company’s fan page like Bud Light. Then consider the ways that a company can use this Facebook page to communicate directly with Facebook users. It’s a priceless tool that, in the age of Tivo, can be invaluable for companies trying to get the word out about a new product, new marketing campaign, or new location.
So the question then becomes, how can a company like Buddy Media help save journalism? While it might not be Buddy Media that helps make online journalism profitable, it will be a company with a similar mindset and skill set that does so. The problem with online content is that advertising space is much cheaper than in newspapers or on television. Thus, posting a newscast online won’t garner as much in the way of profit as that same newscast during the 6 o’clock time slot. It would be very, very hard for these companies to survive solely online, though some companies are going that route anyways.
And the traditional news outlets have already proven that they can’t figure it out themsleves. They seemingly have tried everything at this point: their reporters tweet, their stories appear in print and in video form on their websites, and they try to incorporate user-created content as best they can. But it’s still not working, because news outlets keep cutting jobs and consolidating newsgathering sources. The audience keeps fragmenting into smaller and smallers segments, with more and more specialized interests. Hyper-local reporting is in. People are just as interested in the job fair going on down the street as they are with North Korea’s latest craziness.
Companies like Buddy Media can help bring together these traditional journalism outlets with advertisers who know how to promote themselves online. There needs to be a complete integration of news content with Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, etc. As it stands now, news outlets find the online part nice, but they still devote most of their resources to the traditional product. This attitude needs to change. News outlets need to get people to want to watch this:
As much as, if not more than, this:
Maybe the hampster is an unfair competitor for the news outlets (that little fellow is cute), but you get the idea. Somehow, news needs to become exciting again. When it reaches that point, advertisers will come flocking back. And to make that happen, a company like Buddy Media will facilitate it, through iPhone applications and facebook pages.
Imagine getting breaking news videos while on the bus to work. But, in order for you to watch them, you need to download an application from Six Flags onto your iPhone that allows you to build your own roller coaster and then send it to a friend on Facebook. It’s advertising that is interactive and fun, and also allows you access to great traditional news content. That’s the future of journalism, in my opinion.
Is journalism worth saving? That’s a discussion for another blog post. But does it have a future? I hope so.
I’m not sure how else to describe a comeback by the Baltimore Orioles that saw them down 10-1 in the late innings against the Boston Red Sox. Not only are the Sox in first place, and not only do their fans invade Camden Yards whenever the two teams meet, but these are the BOSTON RED SOX. The Orioles NEVER beat the Red Sox. And this is a team with one of the best, if not the best, bullpen in the league. So how in the world did the Orioles find themselves up 11-10 in the top of the 9th with closer George Sherrill on the mound?
To be honest, I don’t know how it happened. I can watch the highlights and read the box scores and check out the blogs, but that doesn’t suffice. Something happened during that game that I doubt the players even realized at the time. For Orioles fans, the hope is that this is the beginning of a team a season or two away from competing in the star-studded AL East.
In sports, it’s easy to make snap judgments (I just did in the above paragraph). But that’s also what makes sports great. As an Orioles fan, I’ve spent the last decade+ in despair, watching management drown in its own incompetence. So I’ve seen things like this happen (though not to this extreme) before. And I try not to get myself excited, because moments like these are normally followed by the lowest of the low (remember the 2004 season? The Orioles were in first place near the all-star break. And finished below .500. Again. Also, look at that steroids-riddled lineup) . But it seems this squad is getting ready to approach the corner so that they can flick their turn signals on, signaling they are ready to turn it, then they’ll look both ways and then finally turn the corner.
Up until now, the corner might as well have been on Mars.
Don’t get me wrong…I’m not expecting the Orioles to win their next 15 games and move into the Wild Card discussion. In fact, I wouldn’t be shocked if they lost their next 15. But it’s a young team, with a lot of valuable pieces that are finally starting to fall into place. If some young pitchers develop…well, I might have a baseball team to root for in August and September.
Until then, I’m going to enjoy this win and rub it in to my Red Sox groupie friends. Because it doesn’t happen often.
It’s been a rough first half of the year for the aviation industry.
And the hits keep coming, too.
Today, we learned of two more incidents. A Yemenia Airlines flight trying to land on the island nation of Comoros went down in the Indian Ocean during rough weather. It is believed that all of the passengers were killed, except for a 5-year-old boy who appears to have been miraculously rescued. The incident is somewhat reminiscent of the Air France flight that went down in bad weather over the Atlantic, killing all of the passengers aboard the plane.
The Yemenia Airlines flight probably won’t get as much press as the Air France flight because of the location of the plane, and the fact that there weren’t any American or British nationals aboard. But it doesn’t mean it isn’t an important news item to look at in the larger context of aviation safety. Not to mention, it was another AIRBUS plane that went down in water, the same company who built the Air France plane.
Then, news broke of a plane bound for New York’s LaGuardia Airport from Miami, that, while landing, suffered a bird strike on the plane’s landing gear. Fortunately, the plane landed without incident. Of course, this immediately brings to mind the U.S. Air flight that landed safely in the Hudson River after suffering bird strikes to both engines. New York City has attempted to round up geese in the area and gas them in an attempt to control the population and prevent these strikes from occurring.
While there have been a number of plane crashes around the world this year, aviation experts say flying is as safe as it has ever been. Statistically, the chances of being in a plane crash are miniscule, and we all know that driving a car is much more dangerous (after totaling my car a month ago, I can attest to this).
But, aside from the bird strike incidents in which nobody was hurt, the only deadly crash in the U.S. was the Colgan Air flight that crashed near Buffalo. This set off a storm of Congressional hearings and questions about the safety of regional airlines, but nothing has come from it yet. Most likely, ths will remain the case until a major domestic carrier has a catostrophic accident. It took 9/11 for airport security to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Will it take something similar for pilots to be compensated fairly and given the benefits they deserve for such a stressful job?
Most likely, the recent string of crashes won’t prevent Americans from getting on planes. But what would it take for you to stop flying? Leave your answers in the comments section. If they are any good, I’ll post and respond to them.
Just saw this tweeted out by sports super agent, Drew Rosenhaus:
“I have been hired by the fans of the NHL’s Florida Panthers to negotiate lower season ticket prices. I will keep you posted on the outcome.”
If true, this is verrrrrry interesting, and could signal a new era in the way fans interact with sports franchises. There have been instances of litigation in the past where fans try to extract compenstation or better treatment from their sports franchises, but I doubt they have ever hired a sports agent to work on their behalf.
I’m sure more details will emerge, but until they do, I have some questions:
-Who is paying Rosenhaus to work for the fans of the Panthers? Is it the official fan club? Some wealthy fan or investor? I’m sure he’s not working for free.
-What’s the bargaining chip that Rosenhaus has to use in negotiations with team ownership? It’s one thing for Rosenhaus to enter negotiations with, say, the Bengals, trying to get Chad Johnson a new contract. There’s the possibility of holding out or leaving for another team. Rosenhaus also has statistics to guide negotiations. I guess fans could hold out as well, but how will this be organized? Is the entire Florida Panthers fan base going to work together on this? Will they actually all hold out and boycott(doubtful)?
My guess is the Panthers’ organization laughs at Rosenhaus. Fans will still come to the games if they were going to already. But if Rosenhaus can somehow organize the entire fan base to threaten boycotts unless ticket prices are lowered, look out.Then the Panthers are suddenly in a tough situation, staring across the table at a man known for sticking to his guns and representing his clients well.
This could get interesting, and might be a pivotal turning point in the way fans are treated by sports franchises.
