As technology segments the news market, we can only wait and watch
A few interesting articles,
all of them echoing the same sentiment, caught my eye the past few weeks,
thanks mainly to Joe Scaria who chose to retire from a well-paying job in
Journalism at 50 to pursue his interests, but still keeps in touch with
developments in the field and has me in the loop.
One of the articles by John
Gapper in the Financial Times points
to how “advertisers have lost the attention of a generation”. We have shifted
from parents trying to stop teenagers slumping in front of the TV to young
people losing all interest in the box. US teens are so occupied with
social networks and mobile video that they watch only about 21 minutes of live
TV a week, Gapper writes. According to him, the ad industry is suffering from
attention deficit disorder – the audience that once sat obediently in front of
TV spots lovingly devised by its creatives is hard to pin down. Millennials are
out there, on their phones and tablets, but they are as likely to be tweeting
angrily about a brand as noticing its ads in the content stream. He adds:
Publishers complain that the rates they can charge advertisers are falling
steadily, especially in mobile, but this is a problem equally for advertisers
and agencies. If digital and mobile ads are not worth buying, despite the
migration of the audience from traditional media, something is wrong. Indeed,
technology has not helped advertisers but rather, it has given viewers a tool
to fight back.
Writing
for BloombergView, Megan McArdle
says online journalism is suffering print’s fate. She sums it up pithily:
dollars in print, dimes on the Web, pennies on mobile. The problem is, advertising dollars are shrinking, she
writes, “We just can't charge as much for Web advertising as we used to for
print advertising. A decade ago, when I entered professional journalism and
began earnestly discussing its financial future, there was a reasonable case
that, eventually, digital advertising would be worth more than print
advertising. That theory has, alas, been pretty well destroyed by the last 10
years. Advertisers still won't pay print rates for digital. Worse, the money
that does get spent on digital advertising increasingly isn't going to news
outlets; it's going to Google and Facebook and Yahoo… Digital ads simply have a
lot of drawbacks that print didn't. For starters, people either hate or ignore
them; the more you try to get their attention, the angrier they get.”
The Guardian reports
that newspapers are searching for ways to survive the digital revolution. The
newspaper refers to how much of the traditional
media is considered to be several years behind in the digital revolution, still
experimenting with paywalls, digital technologies and alternative means of
storytelling. And Roy Greenslade, in his blog for the Guardian, referring to the third annual digital news report published by the
Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, states how traditional news outlets are facing a new wave of
disruption as the digital revolution sweeps on. The report, in pointing to new
threats to traditional news sources, identifies the smartphone and social media
as the most powerful agents of change. Greenslade says while some news
organisations are being outpaced by the speed of change, others show signs of
rising to the challenge. And rising to the challenge, it seems, is the UK ’s Telegraph
Media Group, which has announced the creation of 40 new editorial jobs, some of
them focused on innovation in digital journalism and expansion of the
digital design team.
Comments