Archive for the ‘Media industry’ Category

Altpapier: The obituary (?)

Monday, December 22nd, 2008

As I remember it, Thomas Schuler had the idea. The new media column of the Netzeitung would be called Altpapier (“old”, i.e. recycled paper). Eight years and six weeks ago, the first daily commented overview of the German media pages of the day appeared. Crucially, the column would be published early in the morning. Don’t tell it, show it: The Altpapier signalled that we, the web-only newspaper, could not only give you an overview of what was printed in the paper-papers before you had had time to read them yourself, we could even give you a digested, annotated, commented overview. With links.

Netzeitung has suffered for years, especially badly under the ownership of the crumbling Mecom empire, a media company which has chosen to have no internet strategy (one obvious suggestion that they ignored… It remains a mystery why Mecom bought the company at all). Today’s blow is especially painful: The very last Altpapier was published. As could be expected of them, the writers go down in style. The last column is an overview of the year, not the day, and of 2009, not 2008. The result: an abundance of sensational news stories and undercover media celebrity gossip. The visionary merger between Axel Springer Verlag and food discounter Lidl gets top points (and it’s not as crazy as you’d think).

So the resource-starved Netzeitung now must do without the almost legendary column — but with a chief editor that reportedly threatened to sack the remaining eight journalists, as well.

The question mark? One news account of the Altpapier closure gives some hope: Apparently one ponders the possibility of continuing outside the Netzeitung. As it’s stated at the end of today’s text: “Der Altpapierkorb füllt sich an dieser Stelle nicht mehr.” (emphasis added).

(PS: All things considered, I found it wise to archive the last Altpapier at WebCite. Just in case).

Moneymakers

Thursday, December 11th, 2008

1. Some YouTube video publishers are pulling in serious advertising money:

YouTube declined to comment on how much money partners earned on average, partly because advertiser demand varies for different kinds of videos. But a spokesman, Aaron Zamost, said “hundreds of YouTube partners are making thousands of dollars a month.” At least a few are making a full-time living: Mr. Buckley said he was earning over $100,000 from YouTube advertisements.

2. Iain Dale, “neither politician nor journalist”:

He gets £12-15,000 per year from advertising, but, Dale adds, a lot of his income is on the back of the blog, if not directly related. The work he does for Sky and the Telegraph, for example.

Bill pays

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

More philanthropic financing of journalism:

Last week, “The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer” received a Gates Foundation grant of $3.5 million to help its correspondents produce 40 to 50 reports over three years on malaria, AIDS, tuberculosis, measles, neglected diseases and other global health issues.

Everybody talks European

Friday, October 31st, 2008

Except the Norwegians. So it seems, anyway, as Aftenposten closes its news service in English. At the same time, there seems to be a momentum for local/national news and commentary in English from different European countries. Examples:

And more stories from different countries can be found in euro|topics.

The list can probably be made longer. Any tips?

UPDATE: Denmark is on the list, thanks to Søren.

The title is of course borrowed from signandsight.

Community influence the future of newspapers?

Sunday, October 19th, 2008

Philip Meyer thinks the endgame for newspapers is in sight and that the papers will vanish even faster than he has concluded before. Some newspapers might survive by publishing less frequently and concentrating on “evidence-based journalism”. The key is community influence:

I still believe that a newspaper’s most important product, the product least vulnerable to substitution, is community influence. It gains this influence by being the trusted source for locally produced news, analysis and investigative reporting about public affairs. This influence makes it more attractive to advertisers. By news, I don’t mean stenographic coverage of public meetings, channeling press releases or listing unanalyzed collections of facts. The old hunter-gatherer model of journalism is no longer sufficient. Now that information is so plentiful, we don’t need new information so much as help in processing what’s already available. Just as the development of modern agriculture led to a demand for varieties of processed food, the information age has created a demand for processed information. We need someone to put it into context, give it theoretical framing and suggest ways to act on it.

In some respects, what Meyer is describing is concepts like The Economist, and in Scandinavia Mandag Morgen in Denmark and Norway (disclosure: I used to work at the Norwegian edition and still write for them). Community influence among its small, but influential readership is certainly one of the cornerstones of the MM concept.

A quite original point from Meyer is that there’s no reason to worry about the consequences of democracy of a future where newspapers are more elitist than today. No problem, he says:

As far back as 1940, the sociologist Paul Lazarsfeld discovered that voters get their information from one another as much as from direct consumption of the media. He called this the “two-step flow” from opinion leaders to the general public. The Internet is enhancing that two-step flow, converting it to a many-step flow. The problem is not distributing the information. The problem is maintaining a strong and trusted agency to originate it. Newspapers have that position of trust in the minds of the public.

(tip: Bookforum.com).

Google is a media company

Monday, August 11th, 2008

The question mark is out of place in this story’s headline. Definitely Google is a media company. Knol is just a new example of that. All these forays into every possible area which might be “monetized” one way or the other is what makes Google somewhat unheimlich. David B. Yoffie has it right:

If I am a content provider and I depend upon Google as a mechanism to drive traffic to me, should I fear that they may compete with me in the future? The answer is absolutely, positively yes.

(tip: John Battelle).

Getty & Flickr

Monday, July 14th, 2008

Soon, we Flickr users can earn some money on our photos if Getty Images editors like them. So better hurry up and post some new pictures? Well, there are some issues here that are discussed quite interestingly in the comment section. One potential problem that struck me immediately, as well as commenter Stephen:

I wonder what effect this will have on whether Flickr photographers elect to post their images using the Creative Commons license.

Back to the future with Murdoch

Friday, June 13th, 2008

From an analysis in The Atlantic of Rupert Murdoch’s plans for the Wall Street Journal:

One of the first strong messages Journal reporters and editors received from their new owners was that Murdoch wants scoops. He wants his reporters out in front of every competitor on the planet. This means that, at a time when every big newspaper is tinkering with futuristic business models, Murdoch is doing so with both feet planted firmly in the past. His strategy for success in 2008 is to behave as though the year is 1908. So while his competitors retrench, Murdoch is going to war-by challenging The New York Times, in particular, to an old-fashioned newspaper battle. Except this time the stakes aren’t nickels in Times Square, but dominance in America, and the world.

Map Schmap!!

Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008

I’m an amateur photographer (with a big A), but photography is fun and I would like to learn more. So it was a nice encouragement that the online travel guide Schmap wanted to include this photo of a detail of the building on top of St. Hanshaugen in Oslo in a guide to Scandinavian parks:

Schmappers apparently do a lot of Flickr browsing…!

Can news websites achieve Google-size ad revenue?

Thursday, March 20th, 2008

UK newspapers could get much more ad revenue out of their websites, Ernst &Young claims in a new report. The consultants say that if newspapers got as much revenue out of their users as Google, they would have earned 120 to 250 million pounds each in 2007, instead of around one-fifth of that. Google had revenues of 1,26 billion pounds in the UK in 2007.

E&Y say that the newspapers should start offering advertisers cost per click (CPC) based ad models alongside the usual cost per thousand page impressions (CPM). But can ads in newspapers ever become as relevant to the user as Google’s search-based ads? Maybe on the newspapers’ own search pages? Some news websites have fought advertisers who wanted CPC before, because they feared too few would click (they know their own click-through rates, of course).

Other recommendations: acquire online classified ad services (a well-known strategy in Norway) and improve behavioural targeting of users. It would be interesting to know how much of this is done already, and what regulations exist — probably privacy rules are tougher in for example Germany and Norway than in the UK and US. (tip: journalism.co.uk).

UPDATE: A prediction for the US online ad market says growth will continue and the shares of the different types of advertising will be very stable in the five years ahead.