Comments on: Digital first isn’t an option for media — it’s the only way forward

By: Buffalo

Buffalo — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 12:50:20 +0000

How much can digital first help to tell the unbiased truth, how digital was it for President Obama watch live on drones viewing the asking for help and the destruction that followed on the Embassy in which American’s died only for him to go around and make speeches that it was a video that sparked this before the truth came out, this might not have room in this conversation buy it is very digital or a bi product of digital to come, yet who will report the truth to this invasion of digital awareness that was not reported and used to manipulate others before the truth came out, would this be digital in the past tense. Do we think real time digital should be controlled or is free speech the right to digitally improvise how to edit what is happening or what could happen or better yet just let anyone of the first responders who can knowingly view in real time and than just keep it secret because they have the power to later say there was a lot more at stake by not telling the truth in the first place. Who has the right to control this and instead of saying that those will be found and punished when in the first place it should have not happened at all. First digital is the way to the future but it should be used in a way where all views are created equal and not just to report so this future could have saved lives and not just be used for the short comings of one at the top of the food chain to have the right to say I am sorry for something and making it worse through digital communication just to say I am sorry is not enough unless it really was a mistake. We say Politics has it’s place but not to digitally use it for reasons of manipulation of a for sale sign after you have raised the price of life. The balance of journalistic value from print to digital is more or has more than just after the fact value now that digital is involved in changing life in real time which will change the journalist who will write the book or digitally make that decision. The process of old ways of print to the new ways of digital is a lot more than just an option unless the only use for digital is for journalism which is no longer the case no matter what professor in any liberal or conservative college teaches digital has the speed to control more than journalism it has the power to persuade a persons views in real time what is the option to that or will that come out digitally later? What I have said is not to point any fingers though it could appear that way because hopefully there are a lot more good things that the speed of digital has worked and helped improve but have yet to be reported , to me that has more value and to make that a contagious option will be hard to do because the price or reporting seems to be worth more when one reports and distorts the truth to magnify that key word that catches your attention that sells and that structure of pay for dirt and add a little water on it makes mud , the harder it is to wash off the more it is worth to the ones that profit by negativity but they would say we are only reporting this so it does not happen to anyone else, that old saying do not ask a question unless you already know the answer because it gets very expensive for those FIVE little words that can be so big in value, so what does digital have to say to them besides WHAT WHO WHEN WHERE and WHY or is it just the option value that they all start off with the letter W ? I am sure that I have left something out like what does that have to do with me and my family and friends and I am sure it has to do with the word EVERTHING!!!!!

By: Geoffrey Colon

Geoffrey Colon — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 20:31:22 +0000

Thank you Matthew for this nice piece. It’s only 10 years since the music industry began to implode from disruption as a result of P2P and digital mp3 technology and yet the case studies have yet to be followed by publishing, radio or TV in ways that they are properly preparing for their crash/transformation pending how you view it. One thing is certain, it is past the point of debating whether these industries will transform. The physical print model is slowly dying similar to the physical CD format that was the longstanding delivery mechanism in music. You are accurately pointing out the obvious that many in those industries fail to realize. Take a look now at music and even mp3 for sale ownership has transformed into rental or streaming models not even realized a decade ago. Where the news business will end up is hard to tell but by trying to battle rather than embrace change, publishers are basically setting themselves up for failure rather than success through an innovation via evolution mindset.

By: Steven C Threndyle

Steven C Threndyle — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 18:49:16 +0000

Lots of great points, here. However, you also have to put yourself in the role of the marketer trying to reach an audience. What kind of platform will engage with your brand to fill the sales funnel? Here’s an example: in Vancouver (where I live) – condo marketers love print because the splashy ads are hard to ignore, especially if you’re flipping the pages of the weekend newspaper. The most successful publication remains “New Home Guide” – which is basically gussied up advertorial that again, is printed on decent paper and makes the homes look good. Now ask yourself – does banner advertising, pop-ups, mobile, or inbound SEO offer that number of potential eyeballs? (They advertise on radio a fair bit, too – calling out price point/high value ads which are narrowly targeted to certain neighbourhoods.) Yes, there are developers on Facebook, GoogleAds etc – but it appears to me – in fact I happen to know – that digital is often ‘thrown in’ as part of the tradi hard copy print buy that the agency or client is making. So, I still don’t think it’s an either/or thing.

By: Chris McCoy

Chris McCoy — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 07:46:42 +0000

I think the thesis wrong.

In a newspaper and magazine world, info was distributed around dates.

In a social world, info is now distributed around people. Dates are secondary.

The content management systems of traditional can’t support social natively. They outsource it to Twitter, Facebook, etc.

Twitter, Facebook, etc. don’t let them monetize natively–nor do they give them access to social data.

So as content discovery has completely changed, the content creators are getting left out of the equation.

Either traditional needs to build their own social CMS’s or Twitter, Facebook, etc. needs to give them access to social data and social identities so they can sell against. Current APIs aren’t enough for traditional to survive.

By: Mark Laudi

Mark Laudi — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 00:23:25 +0000

Angela Phillips nails it by saying journalists shouldn’t be flogging products.
But seriously, isn’t this exactly what journalists do every time they attend a press conference, report on (rewrite?) a media release or respond to an interview invitation?
No wonder “news is a commodity”! No wonder media consumers don’t want to pay for that.
Whether digital or traditional, we cannot discuss the medium without taking a long hard look at the content.
As with any commoditized product, we must create points of differentiation.
In this day and age of PR-driven news agendas, doing what journalists should be doing – breaking real news – might be one such approach. And refer the product-pushing PR firms to the advertising sales department.

By: Angela Phillips

Angela Phillips — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 17:09:09 +0000

How right you are Jassa. I teach journalism. We have been digital first for years.I also research journalism and I have found that older journalists have been very fast in embracing the web – the ‘divide’ doesn’t exist. It is the business model that lags behind. Managements have failed journalists and its no good berating pensioners for the fact that they continue to live and breathe and their cost is dragging down the legacy media. Creative thinking is certainly required but getting journalists to flog products is not the way forward – that way lies the end of real journalism. We have to protect public interest journalism whatever method we use to disseminate. That is the bottom line.

By: Janet DeGeorge

Janet DeGeorge — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:02:52 +0000

Why does there have to be an “either or”. Isn’t it best to offer readers and advertisers good quality in both print and online? Most daily papers have more people reading their paper each day then they have uniques on their website (remember, monthly uniques are cumulative, divide that number by 30 days and then compare with daily circulation). Obviously their are plenty of readers who still want print while there are other readers who prefer digital. Newspapers are in the prime position to offer a media mix for advertisers to reach both print and online readers. It is not either/orr, it is how to do both with quality in order to reach the most readers out there.

By: Richard Myles

Richard Myles — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 18:13:23 +0000

The future isn’t obvious, but as marketing managers become ever-more savvy and look to promote themselves through integrated marketing campaigns, so must media companies (newspapers included) offer joined up media solution for their clients – print, digital (multiple formats), F2F etc

By: yarra64

yarra64 — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 21:08:56 +0000

We’re obsessing about platform. It’s at best a sign post along this dark hall way. If platform thinking helps news media find its way, great!

However, I’d argue that the problem is actually a loss of consumer focus. Let’s first consider the expectations our audience, then the stories, style and approach we must take to engage and then the platform or platforms best suited to consumer behaviours and how these are enabled by digital and traditional means.

There’s a conga line of boring news producers who churn out a relentless stream of content driven by a top down agenda presented in a ‘tried and true’ format generally considered within news media as ‘quality journalism’.

The real news is that people don’t want it! It is dull and disempowering. Stories have to connect the issues to the personal interests and motivations of the consumers we seek to engage.

Why not lead with the consumer, choose the right stories and then lead with an approach to communication, which addresses their needs?

By: DigiAdGirl

DigiAdGirl — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 19:02:40 +0000

A good start Patrick since bundling has been used for years depending on your market and this might only partially fill a marketers purchase funnel depending on the solutions offered. This works for a while but is actually tough on post sale ROMI, attribution and optimization unless you have campaign management software that will include all ad campaigns – offline, online., yours and other advertisers – in a single reporting location beyond click path.

Newspapers need much more than bundling to compete in 2013 to advance and optimize in the same way digitally as pure-plays do and can – still need data driven metrics beyond click path. Call tracking is good but may partially cover multi-touchpoint campaigns and GA for local and large advertisers rarely is used to capacity so there’s always need for education or expertise. Plus GA support is rarely a service offered by media companies in general and again will rely on click path, last click and only partially helpful with attribution.

But it is a good start.