A Reality Check on Content: whose quality is it anyway?

Frankly, I don't like some of the things being said in this article.

But it is highly relevant. The fact is that content -- good content -- is no longer an objective thing.

Nor is it confined to one Website.

Not is it necessarily "objective."
I do believe that "curation" and "editing" are critical in the journalistic sense (my favourite example being mineral water being a guaranteed version of the free liquid)
However, as this guy argues, point of view, virality and relevance in a narrow, defined sense are critical. Accept it.

Is traditional journalism "useless"?

 Here is a piece that actually systematically lists the virtues of old journalism, and describing it as "useless".
I find it interesting, because it is written by an entrepreneur, not a journalist. His clear elaboration is welcome, but after going through it, I suddenly realised that something that is "useless" need not be "irrelevant".
Don't tell me people don't want credible, fair and lucid content.
My simple take is that journalism has moved one step back in order to be more relevant than ever before. In other words, the relevance has shifted to proving the same virtues all over again, but in an "open universe" that the Web and convergence enable.
You can't control the press or the editor, but over a period of time, by word of mouth and for sheer clarity, people will-- and in fact - do seek journalistic skills.
I experience that myself on both Facebook and Twitter, where I am like anyone, but get appreciated for journalistic skills. Some things don't change, though the circle might widen.

Awesome--you have to read this!

I don't usually gush, but this piece from Harvard Business Review's blog is a must-read for anyone interested in the Internet from the point of view of business, marketing, social media or strategy. Also offers brilliant insights for media people. I am not going to elaborate. Great food for thought.

Content is King and Access is Emperor?

Content is King, but Access is Emperor. A thought provoking piece by Forrester analyst raises interesting questions on pricing of digital content.

Dr. Natalie Petouhoff ROI Of Social Media Social Media Club Presentation/ Forrester Research

View more presentations from drnatalie.

They will pay for content online -- if it is good enough!

70 per cent of Indians are willing to pay for online content, although 90 per cent of Indians believe content should remain free on the Net in the future.
Quality is the key issue.
So says a survey by The Nielsen Company.
But what I find fascinating is that as much as 63 per cent of those surveyed said they will pay if the payment system is easy to use.
Eggzactkly, as a Bollywood line goes!
I feel it is absurd that people are willing to pay Rs. 30 a month for a caller tune, while a  month-long supply of a leading newspaper costs only around Rs. 50 to 70. Obviously, plenty of work can be done if content-wallahs (and wallis) get out of the Advertisment Fix
What I say is that it is a very 20th Century way of looking at things if we keep ads to be the main source of revenue. Payment methods are changing and electronic transmission alters the distribution dramatically for the better.
Plenty of implications there for business model changes.

The Journo Trap: Who reads your stories?

Imagine a world where there are no television rating points (TRPs) for news channels.

Imagine a world where there is no broad circulation or readership metric for newspapers or magazine.


Imagine a world where journalists cannot quite claim their stories drive the business -- or one in which they can do EXACTLY that!

We seem to be getting there. But on the Web

AOL has started a new experiment in which stories on the Web are measured for popularity and the traffic shared. It is the closest journo stories got to post-paid billing a la telecoms.

Is that good for journalists?
Yes, if you are really good, and cribbing that your organisation does not take note of you. Or for you to fine-tune your work.
No, if your stories are meaningful in a larger social sense or giving you some personal fulfillment, but held accountable to some scoreboard.
Transparency is a two-way sword, I tell you.

ABC of Indian Media-Advertising, Bollywood, Corporate Power

P. Sainath is a firebrand activist, and incidentally a journalist.
But he is understandably a spokesman for journalism and journalist issues these days, for good reasons
1) He is at The Hindu, which likes to discuss media-related issues on its pages, especially those that relate to ethics

2) As a methodical prodder passionate about rural and social issues, Sainath comes from the "development/activist" school of journalism, and is thoroughly disturbed by the trivialisation of many serious issues

3) He writes well, with a strong tendency to marshall facts and use telling phrases which can match any lawyer or public orator.

Here he is, arguing about how the Indian media is almost systematically being held to ransom by the superficial troika of advertising, movie glamour and corporate agenda. Good, essential reading for media watchers.

Content goes the service way

Content is King, yes.

Murdoch says it is the emperor. Yes.

But there is an interesting insight. Just as a still is not a moving picture, content is not about static stuff on the Net. Increasingly, it is a service.
Here is a fine piece on that.

An Idiot, An African --And the story of story ideas treated like "Kaminey"

Have you heard of Cajetan Boy?

Today was only the second time I came across the name, and that too, after an Internet search.
Strangely, symbolically and significantly, he shares the same initials as Chetan Bhagat.
And thereby hangs a tale on intellectual property.

Now, Cajetan Boy is the man whose idea gave rise to the story of "Kaminey" for which no less than four other writers took credit. But it goes to the credit of director Vishal Bhardwaj that the movie's starting credits clearly identify Mr. Boy.
Boys must be separated from Men. Vidhu Vinod Chopra, who asked reporters to "Shut Up" on New Year day when asked about writer Bhagat's wail that his story was not given proper credit in the making of "3 Idiots" could do well to learn a lesson from Vishal B, whose earlier two films Maqbool and Omkara were based on Shakespeare's Macbeth and Othello. Given Vishal's treatment, he could have easily called the stories his own, but he did not.
That is the business of respecting intellectual property, even if it involves only an idea.
Check out the Internet Movie Data Base where Cajetan Boy gets due credit for his idea that gave rise to Kaminey
Or then, read here about the fascinating story of how an African stands at the heart of a story that talked about Guddu and Charlie lost in Mumbai's bylanes.
I agree with my friend Shubho. Smirking at Chetan Bhagat is one thing, but giving IP the recognition that is due is quite another.
3 Idiots may be a big hit, and Chopra the Man with the Midas Touch, but perhaps he should not assume that giving ideas away is a matter of Gandhigiri.
We shall await director Rajkumar Hirani's take on this.
P.S. --There is a conspiracy theory that Bhagat and Chopra are in league because the novel (Five Point Someone) and the movie (3 Idiots) can be cross-promoted by the controversy over intellectual property. In which case, we would be the idiots to play into their hands.

The Future Is Social, Multi-App, Teen And Chinese Heavy

Within five years there will be broadband well above 100MB in performance - and distribution distinctions between TV, radio and the web will go away.
--Eric Schmidt, CEO, Google.

More here on the profound changes ahead in the way media is shaping

Newspapers are alive and kicking -- in Delhi

So you thought newspapers are sinking? Not in Delhi--look what I clicked at the news-stand this morning...and none of them is Delhi's main paper. Amazing language range as well!

Is social media a threat to journalism?

Here is a piece from Chris Cramer, a BBC and CNN veteran and current Reuters Global Editor, Multimedia, on what social media and "citizen journalism" means to the media. The bottomline: credibility and integrity matter, and profits follow.
I agree with a lot of what he says, having worked at Reuters-- with its commitment for some basic principles. But there is a chaotic universe out there and we need more innovations -in products, services and business models.

Content is King: And Confusion Is Clarity

I have been writing for years now about how online video, Internet streaming and mobile devices will cloud the media, but here is final proof on how confused and confusing the advertising industry and its feeder, market research, have become.
I don't even need to understand the details.
The simple fact is that confusion spells clarity.
Here is how.
For close to a century, we have been led by the thumb rules of the mass media

1. Channel leadership based on high capital costs
2. Television rating points (TRPs) based on prime-time
3. Hype based on a little bit of data and a lot of "relationships"
4. Brands based on broad recall

That era is over, with the Internet and online videos and iPods and all the elements of the Long Tail (including low-investment satellite broadcasts)

Is it any wonder that market researchers are groping in the dark? Stereotyping of the consumer is the illegitimate child of 20th Century mass marketing.
That is ending. Rejoice. Now I can have an old man in Mozambique listening to Britney Spears. And I can have a 20-year-old Peruvian teenager liking South Indian plantain leaf meals.

When a conventional media house buys a 'citizen journo" site...

I have talked in the past about another kind of convergence, where conventional media companies acquire or partner a social media outfit.
New York Times made Freakonomics.com which is a blog derivative of the eponymous book a part of its Web initiatives.
 Now comes news that Examiner.com has acquired NowPublic, which lets local news and "citizen based" feeds aggregate on its site..a bit of a more newsy form of "user-generated content"
The convergence is happening and is sort of healthy. But I can't easily gauge the shape it will take.

TOI, ET losing circulation in Mumbai: Is the Old Lady of Bori Bunder aging further?

I find this quite interesting.
Could it be true? The venerable Old Lady of Bori Bunder losing hold in her Victorian bastion? Are Hindustan Times and DNA eating into her vitals?
Or is it that thing called TV or Internet which is making readers less interested to pay for it?
I don't know, but it is clear to me that the newspaper business is headed for a real churning. The winners will be those who truly understand readers-- and that's easier said than done.
Here is the story with some details. Data is still pouring in.

Why Murdoch is right on charging for online news

The Web is abuzz after media baron Rupert Murdoch of New Corp said that his group's newspapers planned to charge for online news/content.
I have no problem with that. Though obituaries and criticism of such a move are afloat on the selfsame Net.
As an experienced journalist, I make a few simple observations.
It costs money to make people do reportage
Credibility comes from known sources that employ processes
Bloggers and others who simply extract published news from the Web and repeate it have no viable business model and breaking news cannot be ad-hoc.
If it is offered free, it has to be accounted in financial terms somewhere--at least by cross-subsidisation.
For more than a decade now, newspaper publishers have been shooting themselves in the foot in order to understand the new medium better.
They have tried to behave like news agencies, reporting 24/7
They have offered content free, only to find their own revenues and circulation falling.
They have invested in technology and branding, but online ads have not got the traction to take it beyond a point.
Above all, they have to suffer sites like Google News that looks like a newspaper and rides on free content from the papers and other online news sites.
Something's gotta give.
If Murdoch charges, will other newspapers see it as an opportunity or a threat? I don't know, but  I do know that sooner or later, viable models for both credibility and profitability in online news has to come in.

The Printed Blog R.I.P.

It was touted as a great idea.
Print blogs. Sell them.
They didn't.
Here is the story.

But publishing is not over yet, either in print or online. I believe bloggers often confuse venting and airing of views with meaningful content. Publishing is about getting the focus right.
Truman Capote once ended a book review, saying, "That's not writing, that's typing.
I want to paraphrase that. "Don't confuse printing with publishing."

Online ad revenues zoom on....

Despite the recession, digital advertising is growing robustly--and in fact more so as advertisers find it sensible in getting the right bang for buck, says Zenith Optimedia. Here is a report.

Is your newsroom ready for the future?

Here is a video from a panel discussion involving the Reuters editor-in-chief and other leading lights. I haven't watched it, but can ask a cheeky question. In the 21st Century, will people have the time and inclination to watch leisurely panel discussions?

Citizen journalists can go to YouTube school

Here is how