Na lezing van vorige post, de originele & contra intuïtieve gedachte gelezen dat kranten duurder moeten worden. Gewoon kwaliteit leveren en dan is er niks aan de hand. Yeah sure!
Hier: http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2007/04/hate-being-97-pound-weakling.html
01 mei, 2007
It is the people stupid!
Lees het stukje "Online sales, easing off " over het afnemen van de advertentie inkomsten in Q1 van 2007 doordat de upsell vanuit print naar online afneemt. Oorzaak: segment auto en makelaarsmarkt.
Maar de afgenomen omzet is niet het interessantste. De reactie geeft een andere mogelijke oorzaak waarom kranten in de problemen zitten.
"More importantly, newspapers do not have enough good and empowered programmers. They just don't know how to reward and nurture and even evaluate software engineers, so they all go to work at companies where they are rewarded with pay and attention and status and great working conditions, like at Google."
Maar de afgenomen omzet is niet het interessantste. De reactie geeft een andere mogelijke oorzaak waarom kranten in de problemen zitten.
"More importantly, newspapers do not have enough good and empowered programmers. They just don't know how to reward and nurture and even evaluate software engineers, so they all go to work at companies where they are rewarded with pay and attention and status and great working conditions, like at Google."
09 april, 2007
Advertenties als goed doel
Hier een leuk essay ("Reinventing The News Business Requires A Little Imagination") van Scott Karp van Publising 2.0 over advertenties als goed doel. Het goede doel is de journalistiek die over ons waakt.
"So here’s the idea (finally) — instead of asking people to donate cash or pay for news to help keep journalism alive, neither of which will fly, why not ask people to donate classified advertising."
Het is een grappig artikel, waarin de auteur stelt dat mensen niet altijd zo rationeel (homo economicus) zijn. Hij geeft het voorbeeld van een dure (milieuvriendelijke) auto terwijl je ook een goedkopere (lees vervuilende) kunt kopen. Met de koop doneer je aan een goed doel, nl. het milieu. Het tweede voorbeeld is iTunes. Iedereen betaalt tegenwoordig 0.99 cent voor muziek die je ook gratis kunt krijgen op Internet. Vroeger deed iedereen dat laatste, nl. niet betalen.
Dus waarom geen advertenties in kranten plaatsen als goed doel? Dit om de journalistiek draaiende te houden. Het doel is goed, maar of dit het middel is, betwijfel ik.
"So here’s the idea (finally) — instead of asking people to donate cash or pay for news to help keep journalism alive, neither of which will fly, why not ask people to donate classified advertising."
Het is een grappig artikel, waarin de auteur stelt dat mensen niet altijd zo rationeel (homo economicus) zijn. Hij geeft het voorbeeld van een dure (milieuvriendelijke) auto terwijl je ook een goedkopere (lees vervuilende) kunt kopen. Met de koop doneer je aan een goed doel, nl. het milieu. Het tweede voorbeeld is iTunes. Iedereen betaalt tegenwoordig 0.99 cent voor muziek die je ook gratis kunt krijgen op Internet. Vroeger deed iedereen dat laatste, nl. niet betalen.
Dus waarom geen advertenties in kranten plaatsen als goed doel? Dit om de journalistiek draaiende te houden. Het doel is goed, maar of dit het middel is, betwijfel ik.
Liever lui dan moe -- Web 2.0
Leuk dat social networking verhaal en al die Web 2.0 verhalen over user generated content, maar wie verdient er nou wat aan? Ik vroeg me dat al eerder af, vandaar de eerdere post deze week (hier). Vanmiddag deze online column gelezen met zo'n beetje hetzelfde verhaal.
"Even if we grant that traffic numbers are unreliable and that page views are not the only way to measure traffic, the trend seems clear: A few big sites increasingly dominate the web
....
What's being concentrated, in other words, is not content but the economic value of content
....
In this view, the attention economy does not operate separately from the cash economy; it's simply a means of creating cheap inputs for the cash economy.
It strikes me that this dynamic, which I don't think we've ever seen before, at least not on this scale, is the most interesting, and unsettling, economic phenomenon the Internet has produced."
Bron: http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/12/sharecropping_t.php
En die kranten maar zelf moeite doen........
"Even if we grant that traffic numbers are unreliable and that page views are not the only way to measure traffic, the trend seems clear: A few big sites increasingly dominate the web
....
What's being concentrated, in other words, is not content but the economic value of content
....
In this view, the attention economy does not operate separately from the cash economy; it's simply a means of creating cheap inputs for the cash economy.
It strikes me that this dynamic, which I don't think we've ever seen before, at least not on this scale, is the most interesting, and unsettling, economic phenomenon the Internet has produced."
Bron: http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/12/sharecropping_t.php
En die kranten maar zelf moeite doen........
08 april, 2007
Erotiek vermoordt de kranten!
Eigenlijk is het geen verrassing! Maar eh, de partij die de classified omzet van kranten in de US om zeep helpt, Craig's List, doet dat oa via een sterke positie in de viespeukerij.
Zoals zovele revoluties in medialand is sex weer de oorzaak. Je zou kunnen zeggen dat de kranten hier een kans laten liggen in Nederland of dat bijv. De Telegraaf moet oppassen voor de omzet die ze in print gaan mislopen als er een vergelijkbare site op de markt komt.
Goed, lees verder zelf maar en bekijk de andere grafiekjes gemaakt door Compete:
http://blog.compete.com/2007/04/05/craigslist-popular-categories/
Zoals zovele revoluties in medialand is sex weer de oorzaak. Je zou kunnen zeggen dat de kranten hier een kans laten liggen in Nederland of dat bijv. De Telegraaf moet oppassen voor de omzet die ze in print gaan mislopen als er een vergelijkbare site op de markt komt.
Goed, lees verder zelf maar en bekijk de andere grafiekjes gemaakt door Compete:
http://blog.compete.com/2007/04/05/craigslist-popular-categories/
07 april, 2007
Nieman report - Goodbye Gutenberg
De prestigieuze Harvard universiteit doet ook iets met journalistiek dmv het Nieman instituut. Ze brengen rapportjes uit over dit onderwerp. Anyways, vandaag de laatste uitgave van december 2006 doorgeworsteld. Goodbye Gutenberg heet ie, de suggestie wekkend dat het game over is voor de print business.
Deze twee bijdrages zijn zeer het lezen waard:
Risk-Adverse Newspapers Won't Cross the Digital Divide
Newspapers and Their Quest for the Holy Grail
Conclusie: transformeer naar een Internet-strategie, innoveer en wees vooral niet bang!
Deze twee bijdrages zijn zeer het lezen waard:
Risk-Adverse Newspapers Won't Cross the Digital Divide
Newspapers and Their Quest for the Holy Grail
Conclusie: transformeer naar een Internet-strategie, innoveer en wees vooral niet bang!
Warren Buffet over kranten
Warren Buffet is de tweede rijkste man ter wereld. Dit is hij geworden met zijn investeringsvehikel Berkshire Hathaway. Ik kreeg van mijn broer het linkje naar zijn jaarlijkse "letter to shareholders" doorgestuurd. Buffet schrijft zó'n 1 1/2 pagina over zijn investering in de Buffalo News (check pagina 11 en 12).
Hij begint zo:
"Not all of our businesses are destined to increase profits. When an industry’s underlying economics are crumbling, talented management may slow the rate of decline. Eventually, though, eroding fundamentals will overwhelm managerial brilliance."
Voor kranten die hun hoop op omzet via Internet hebben gevestigd, heeft Buffett ook een pessimistische voorspelling:
"the economic potential of a newspaper Internet site -- given the many alternative sources of information and entertainment that are free and only a click away -- is at best a small fraction of that existing in the past for a print newspaper facing no competition."
Don Dodge (directeur business development bij MSFT) heeft de "golden nuggets" uit het stukje van Buffet samengevat:
* If you want a reputation as a good businessman, be sure to get into a good business.
* Advertisers prefer the paper with the most readers, readers prefer the paper with the most pages and ads. (This is why Google gets most of the ad revenue)
* Rich people used to love to own newspapers and sports teams. Now sports teams are the better choice.
* If cable TV and the Internet came first, there probably never would have been newspapers.
* Only a combination of print and online ads will ward off doomsday for papers.
* The days of lush profits for newspapers are over.
Misschien toch een idee om in de gaten te houden wat die investering van Buffett op de krantenmarkt uitspookt, gezien het feit dat Buffett slimme investeringen doet en nogal gebrand is op goed management. De site(s): http://www.buffalonews.com/ en http://home.buffalo.com/
Buffet is overigens ook de grootse aandeelhouder in de Washington Post (18,6%).
Hij begint zo:
"Not all of our businesses are destined to increase profits. When an industry’s underlying economics are crumbling, talented management may slow the rate of decline. Eventually, though, eroding fundamentals will overwhelm managerial brilliance."
Voor kranten die hun hoop op omzet via Internet hebben gevestigd, heeft Buffett ook een pessimistische voorspelling:
"the economic potential of a newspaper Internet site -- given the many alternative sources of information and entertainment that are free and only a click away -- is at best a small fraction of that existing in the past for a print newspaper facing no competition."
Don Dodge (directeur business development bij MSFT) heeft de "golden nuggets" uit het stukje van Buffet samengevat:
* If you want a reputation as a good businessman, be sure to get into a good business.
* Advertisers prefer the paper with the most readers, readers prefer the paper with the most pages and ads. (This is why Google gets most of the ad revenue)
* Rich people used to love to own newspapers and sports teams. Now sports teams are the better choice.
* If cable TV and the Internet came first, there probably never would have been newspapers.
* Only a combination of print and online ads will ward off doomsday for papers.
* The days of lush profits for newspapers are over.
Misschien toch een idee om in de gaten te houden wat die investering van Buffett op de krantenmarkt uitspookt, gezien het feit dat Buffett slimme investeringen doet en nogal gebrand is op goed management. De site(s): http://www.buffalonews.com/ en http://home.buffalo.com/
Buffet is overigens ook de grootse aandeelhouder in de Washington Post (18,6%).
04 april, 2007
Start een media site? NIET doen!
Als ik deze post van een Amerikaanse venture capitalist lees, dan kan je net als de mensen die reageren BIJNA alleen maar concluderen dat veel geld verdienen met een mediasite een onmogelijkheid is. Of je moet van supergoede huize komen.....
Oorzaak: die verdomd lage RPM!
Volg de link en laat je de 3 modellen door de Lightspeed meneer voorrekenen.
http://lsvp.wordpress.com/2007/02/26/three-ways-to-build-an-online-media-business-to-50m-in-revenue/
Zijn vervolgstukje is ook best boeiend.
"At the Online Publishers Association’s Forum on the Future earlier this month, Marketspace (a consulting firm associated with Monitor) announced the results of their research which showed that 92% of 2006 gross online ad spend in the US went to only four companies; Google, Yahoo, MSN and AOL. Although some portion of that ad spend was subsequently distributed to independent sites through ad networks (e.g. AOL’s Advertising.com, Google’s Adsense, Yahoo’s Publisher Network etc), that is a big proportion of the total. Furthermore, that is an INCREASE from the 88% that went to those four companies in 2005."
Maar:
"Now According to the IAB and PwC, internet advertising revenues for 2006 were estimated to be $16.8 billion, a 34 percent increase over $12.5 billion in 2005. So doing the math, that suggests that the online advertising that didn’t go to the big four actually DECREASED from $1.5bn in 2005 to $1.34bn in 2006."
Oorzaak: die verdomd lage RPM!
Volg de link en laat je de 3 modellen door de Lightspeed meneer voorrekenen.
http://lsvp.wordpress.com/2007/02/26/three-ways-to-build-an-online-media-business-to-50m-in-revenue/
Zijn vervolgstukje is ook best boeiend.
"At the Online Publishers Association’s Forum on the Future earlier this month, Marketspace (a consulting firm associated with Monitor) announced the results of their research which showed that 92% of 2006 gross online ad spend in the US went to only four companies; Google, Yahoo, MSN and AOL. Although some portion of that ad spend was subsequently distributed to independent sites through ad networks (e.g. AOL’s Advertising.com, Google’s Adsense, Yahoo’s Publisher Network etc), that is a big proportion of the total. Furthermore, that is an INCREASE from the 88% that went to those four companies in 2005."
Maar:
"Now According to the IAB and PwC, internet advertising revenues for 2006 were estimated to be $16.8 billion, a 34 percent increase over $12.5 billion in 2005. So doing the math, that suggests that the online advertising that didn’t go to the big four actually DECREASED from $1.5bn in 2005 to $1.34bn in 2006."
Als we deze man moeten geloven, snappen kranten er nix van.
Wil de laatste krant het licht maar uit doen dan?
"It’s no news that print news is in deep yogurt and sinking faster than ever. Average weekly paid circulation declined 2.6 percent for the six months ending September, 2006, following a 1.9 percent drop during the previous six months, according to the Newspaper Association of America. Sunday circulation, the advertising honey pot, shrank about 50 percent more than weekday readership. To cut costs, articles are getting shorter and fonts smaller. The years-long death by a thousand column-inch cuts is accelerating, to no one’s surprise.
Newspapers’ online editions aren’t faring much better. Today’s trend is called “crowdsourcing”, the latest euphemism for selling reader-generated content back to the readers themselves. Drew Curtis at Fark was a master of that ingenious paradigm long before it occurred to Gannett, and USA Today’s make over still doesn’t quite get this whole comment-and-recommendation thing.
The trouble with the online newspaper sites is simple. They can’t build Web sites properly. They can’t keep them running. They just don’t get IT and don’t get the Web.
Examine any aspect of any newspaper’s online edition and you will find it botched. Fixed table widths that assume everyone has a 26-inch monitor set to 1024 x 768 resolution; check. Page design that loads images, Flash animations, and other slowpokes before the text that people came to read; check. Background links to external servers, such as weather services, that prevent viewable content from loading if the remote servers are unresponsive; check. Reader forums and blogs that stall for 96 seconds every time a comment is submitted; check. Search engines that don’t understand “exact phrase in quotes”; check. Default font size set to 6 points; check.
The HTML sins just go on and on. It is sad when you realize that the average MySpace page is better designed than your average newspaper site.
And let’s not even get into the issues I have with trying to get through the gates to their sites, or why they need to collect demographic information anyway. (News flash: the hallowed New York Times is removing its gate on “Times Select” for those customers lucky enough to have an .edu address.)
Most of us know that people don’t put in accurate information anyway. When was the last time you did? When I did buy newspapers, no vendor or vending machine dared to ask me for my address, phone number, or tax bracket. The enormous popularity of BugMeNot.com should be sufficient clue for newspaper Web editors. But a growing number of these highly-qualified professionals are sabotaging BugMeNot registrations instead of dropping the doomed idea. Better to lose ad views than to give free content to strangers.
Newspaper operators would be better off shutting down their presses and their Web servers. The only unique value proposition that they have – and often do right - is local news reporting. Take the money wasted on content delivery and invest it in content creation (the opposite of what newspapers are doing now). Then sell that content to the handful of delivery services, such as Google News, that know what they’re doing. If the news is not online, no search engine can leech it. That’s the only way local newspapers are going to survive."
http://strom.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/newspapers-will-never-get-it-right/
"It’s no news that print news is in deep yogurt and sinking faster than ever. Average weekly paid circulation declined 2.6 percent for the six months ending September, 2006, following a 1.9 percent drop during the previous six months, according to the Newspaper Association of America. Sunday circulation, the advertising honey pot, shrank about 50 percent more than weekday readership. To cut costs, articles are getting shorter and fonts smaller. The years-long death by a thousand column-inch cuts is accelerating, to no one’s surprise.
Newspapers’ online editions aren’t faring much better. Today’s trend is called “crowdsourcing”, the latest euphemism for selling reader-generated content back to the readers themselves. Drew Curtis at Fark was a master of that ingenious paradigm long before it occurred to Gannett, and USA Today’s make over still doesn’t quite get this whole comment-and-recommendation thing.
The trouble with the online newspaper sites is simple. They can’t build Web sites properly. They can’t keep them running. They just don’t get IT and don’t get the Web.
Examine any aspect of any newspaper’s online edition and you will find it botched. Fixed table widths that assume everyone has a 26-inch monitor set to 1024 x 768 resolution; check. Page design that loads images, Flash animations, and other slowpokes before the text that people came to read; check. Background links to external servers, such as weather services, that prevent viewable content from loading if the remote servers are unresponsive; check. Reader forums and blogs that stall for 96 seconds every time a comment is submitted; check. Search engines that don’t understand “exact phrase in quotes”; check. Default font size set to 6 points; check.
The HTML sins just go on and on. It is sad when you realize that the average MySpace page is better designed than your average newspaper site.
And let’s not even get into the issues I have with trying to get through the gates to their sites, or why they need to collect demographic information anyway. (News flash: the hallowed New York Times is removing its gate on “Times Select” for those customers lucky enough to have an .edu address.)
Most of us know that people don’t put in accurate information anyway. When was the last time you did? When I did buy newspapers, no vendor or vending machine dared to ask me for my address, phone number, or tax bracket. The enormous popularity of BugMeNot.com should be sufficient clue for newspaper Web editors. But a growing number of these highly-qualified professionals are sabotaging BugMeNot registrations instead of dropping the doomed idea. Better to lose ad views than to give free content to strangers.
Newspaper operators would be better off shutting down their presses and their Web servers. The only unique value proposition that they have – and often do right - is local news reporting. Take the money wasted on content delivery and invest it in content creation (the opposite of what newspapers are doing now). Then sell that content to the handful of delivery services, such as Google News, that know what they’re doing. If the news is not online, no search engine can leech it. That’s the only way local newspapers are going to survive."
http://strom.wordpress.com/2007/03/20/newspapers-will-never-get-it-right/
03 april, 2007
(Re)design van kranten.
Surfend over het web kwam ik deze site tegen vol met voorbeelden over redesigns van kranten.
http://www.brasstacksdesign.com/
"Circulation is merely one measure of a newspaper's health. The most important metric is revenue. Redesigns that boost revenue are achieving the most important goal. And it appears as if redesigns can boost revenue despite circulation slips. So savvy editors and publishers should pursue them as a short-term tactic to support margins while they struggle with the strategic issues of online migration and market fragmentation."
Eens, eens, eens... Hier de link naar de pagina.
Ook nog twee leuke lijstjes pagina's met tips & tricks:
How to sell more newspapers?
New rules for newspapers! Vooral de volgende passage in tip 3 op deze pagina is boeiend.
Ignore your loyal readers!
;))
"Most redesigns begin with a survey of subscribers. What a waste of time and money! If you want to sell more newspapers, it's pointless to chase after loyal readers because you can't sell any more papers to them. Equally pointless is the pursuit of non-readers – because they're non-readers. Any attempt to change their behavior is tough going."
Klik verder maar een beetje rond op de site, want dat ga ik nu ook doen...
http://www.brasstacksdesign.com/
"Circulation is merely one measure of a newspaper's health. The most important metric is revenue. Redesigns that boost revenue are achieving the most important goal. And it appears as if redesigns can boost revenue despite circulation slips. So savvy editors and publishers should pursue them as a short-term tactic to support margins while they struggle with the strategic issues of online migration and market fragmentation."
Eens, eens, eens... Hier de link naar de pagina.
Ook nog twee leuke lijstjes pagina's met tips & tricks:
How to sell more newspapers?
New rules for newspapers! Vooral de volgende passage in tip 3 op deze pagina is boeiend.
Ignore your loyal readers!
;))
"Most redesigns begin with a survey of subscribers. What a waste of time and money! If you want to sell more newspapers, it's pointless to chase after loyal readers because you can't sell any more papers to them. Equally pointless is the pursuit of non-readers – because they're non-readers. Any attempt to change their behavior is tough going."
Klik verder maar een beetje rond op de site, want dat ga ik nu ook doen...
Misschien toch niet zo'n goed idee dat Web 2.0 gedoe?
Iedereen kan publiceren is het moderne devies. Democratisering van media is het buzzword. Ik denk dat de meeste bedrijven er niet zo happy mee zijn als ik het onderzoekje van Clearswift bekijk.
Leve Web 2.0! Of niet.......
Leve Web 2.0! Of niet.......
- 43% of office workers access social media sites from their work computers several times a day
- 51% spend an hour or more a week on the sites
- 13% spend five hours or more
- 46% have discussed work-related issues on social media sites
- 46% regularly access Wikipedia during work hours
- 50% believe they have a right to use work computers for personal internet access
De samenvatting hier.
01 april, 2007
Satire video over veranderingsbereidheid kranten.
Deze video van ene meneer Shapiro zet je wel aan het denken als je zelf bij een krant werkt. Anyways de man is nerdy & grappig. Have fun!
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)