For deep, narrow coverage, blogs are better than mainstream media

A few Philistines are still maintaining that blogging isn't a worthy medium for intelligent discussion, that it's somehow less valuable than the "professional media."

Yes, there are crappy blogs out there, just like there are crappy newspapers and magazines. The low barrier to entry of blogging means there is more crap--but, long-tail style, there is also content of tremendous value, erudition, power and influence.

I learned of one more example today. Tanta, who wrote for the Calculated Risk blog, died over the weekend.

She warranted an obituary in the New York Times and a mention from James Surowiecki (from that most professional media outlet, the New Yorker). Here's another tribute from Felix Salmon at Conde Nast Portfolio.

And it wasn't because she wrote about Britney Spears or LOLcats. According to the Times,

Thanks in large part to Tanta’s contributions, Calculated Risk became a crucial source of prescient analysis as the housing market at first faltered, then collapsed and finally spawned a full-blown credit crisis.

Blogs allow writers with deep, narrow expertise, like Tanta, to pass on their learning, share their opinions, and illuminate that which for most of us is unknown. For me, in particular, I still read general-interest media, like the Times, New Yorker, WSJ, HBR, etc. But for subjects I want to explore more deeply, blog content is far better and more valuable.

There's no way Tanta would have had a voice twenty or even ten years ago. That's a benefit to readers everywhere. Including, as her case makes clear, those from the "professional media."

Tags:
blogging, blogs, finance, obituaries, media

Good news: The WSJ is back to being a great business paper (for now)

I wasn't alone in complaining about the Wall Street Journal's decline in the quality and quantity of its business news articles. Thankfully, as Slate's Jack Shafer points out, the Journal has improved markedly in this area recently.

I'd point to this article on Dell's embrace of web2.0, this one on new business gurus (but no women) and this on municipal broadband as recent standouts. Each of which has reconfirmed why I like the paper. I've also noticed that the wonderfully silly page-1 articles (I still remember the 30-year-old one on Meat Loaf) have returned.

Related post:
Wall Street Journal is discarding its identity as a business newspaper

Tags:
management, strategy, newspapers, media, Wall Street Journal

The new media onslaught is making entrepreneurs out of creators

An article from the New York Times earlier this week ("Bridging The Gap, The Sequel") starkly illustrated that venture capitalists from Silicon Valley and creative types from Southern California are having difficulty cooperating to create financial and partnership models for new media.

One of the biggest obstacles, according to the articles, is the Southern Californians' focus on upfront cash rather than long-term equity.

How this situation came to be is easy to understand: when the means of production of creative property were expensive, there was a distinct separation between the "suits," who raised needed capital, and the "talent," who wrote, acted, sang, directed, etc. The suits financed productions and paid the talent, who worked job to job. It was in the talent's interest to get as much of their payment upfront as possible because (1) they didn't know when their next job would come through and (2) the suits could, and wanted to, maintain full ownership of the property.

Now production costs can be much smaller, for music, video, text, etc. Prices for distribution are coming down too as new outlets emerge for digital distribution. And media companies are looking to hedge their risk as the old moneymakers (CDs, DVDs) erode.

As a result, an entire new entrepreneurial class has emerged, between the suits and the talent, combining the ability to raise money, cut deals, etc., with songwriting, producing, or acting. Around this "middle class" is a new set of technology and business enablers that are providing key pieces of the production and distribution infrastructure for these creators. (This edition of the radio program "Fresh Air" discusses some of the new models and companies emerging in the music business. Companies like Indieflix provide distribution services for video/film producers.)

Here's an example of the new world order for music: the LinkedIn profile for Fran Ten of the LA band West Indian Girl:

oversee and run all the departments of the west indian girl business - management, marketing, new media, touring, merchandising, promotions, licensing, legal, accounting, art, etc etc.

music is a business and musicians that dont understand this are at a disadvantage.

this job is just as much a blue collar job as the one i had in high school working at a brake factory in grand rapids, mi. sometimes i think it's even dirtier.

Technology advances have made internet video and mobile entertainment accessible to consumers on a wide scale. The business models are lagging behind. The old way--suits and talent--isn't going to be able to work them out. The "middle class" will have to do it.

(Photo: a still from "Fields of Mudan," the all-time best-selling DVD on Indieflix.)

mobile, media, alliances, technology, music, video, business models, New York Times

News item: a media company grows by studying its customers

In March's Harvard Business Review, Richard Harrington, CEO of Thomson Corporation, discusses how the large financial-media company reinvented its strategy ("Transforming Strategy One Customer At A Time" - free link). With his coauthor, Anthony Tjan of the Parthenon Group, Harrington shows how Thomson, by changing its focus from the standard segmentation used by its industry to that of specific end-users, was able to better understand its market position and identify attractive new product features.

This epiphany--innovation and differentiation through understanding how end-customers utilize a product and how they do their jobs--would not be surprising to Procter & Gamble, or to Clayton Christensen, who wrote about this back in 2005 ("Marketing Malpractice: The Cause and the Cure" link - $$).

One question is why this was so novel to Thomson. My guess is that it relates to how media companies view themselves. They have grown up as mass distributors, sending standardized product out to customers via newsstands, television, radio. Focusing on specific end-customer segments was time-consuming and unnecessary when there was always a new growth medium out there. Now, with growth stagnating for most media companies, they find they are no different from the packaged-goods manufacturers who sponsor their television programs.

To wit: they need customers, and customers need a job done.

Related:
How to market a product that isn't a product
Shop Talk Podcast #4 - Tony Ulwick on Determining What Customers Really Want...

segmentation, media, innovation, marketing, Harvard Business Review

What's wrong with what Marie Digby did?

No, she wasn't caught partying with Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan. She wasn't arrested or sent to rehab.

As described in a front-page article in today's Wall Street Journal (link - $$), musician Marie Digby made simple videos of herself singing cover songs, posted them on YouTube, got millions of views, and parlayed that into gigs on the Carson Daly show, local LA radio, and general buzz as a true YouTube discovery.

Oh, and she made an album with Hollywood Records (part of Disney) last year that is about to be released. The YouTube idea and the TV and radio appearances were done with the approval and assistance of marketing at Hollywood Records.

Oops.

Like any such situation, the coverup is far worse than the initial offense. So she was signed to a major label. So what? She made the videos herself, posted them herself. People found the videos themselves, played them, recommended them, etc. The YouTube buzz was legitimate.

So what didn't she do right? She didn't list her affiliation with a major label on her MySpace page. Not so bad, given that she hadn't yet released an album.

Worse was the way she tried to erase the Hollywood Records connection. Here's are examples from the Journal article:

When Los Angeles adult-contemporary station KYSR-FM, which calls itself "Star 98.7," interviewed Ms. Digby in July, she and the disc jockey discussed her surprising success. "We kind of found her on YouTube," the DJ, known as Valentine, said. Playing the lucky nobody, Ms. Digby said: "I'm usually the listener calling in, you know, just hoping that I'm going to be the one to get that last ticket to the Star Lounge with [pop star] John Mayer!"

and

Ms. Digby gave a backstage interview that was posted online by NBC. "I just did this YouTube video two months ago and never, ever imagined that it would actually get me on TV or radio or anything like that," she said. "I just did it in my living room and it blew up first on YouTube and then I guess it got to Star 98.7 and then Carson Daly found me so that's why I'm here."

Now it's not just Marie Digby. I'm certain the marketing folks at Hollywood, and her manager, were deeply involved in preparing her for the appearances, including rehearsing what she would say.

And the radio hosts and Carson Daly could easily have pointed out that Hollywood Records saw the same things in Marie that the viewers saw, and that she's recorded an album to be released soon. But instead they played along with the "YouTube discovery" story and in so doing share part of the blame.

As best I can figure, Hollywood Records either fell in love with the story, even if it wasn't completely true, or they were concerned that people finding out about their connection would be a buzz kill. In either case, they got in their own way.

So, a plea: media companies (really, all marketers), learn from your mistakes. Stop trying to manipulate audiences! It doesn't work anymore! Use YouTube and all these new outlets to allow people to discover new artists, but for God's sake have enough confidence and integrity to stand up and reveal that you've also made that discovery.

Then show them where to buy the songs.

(And now to demonstrate that there's no such thing as bad publicity, here's Marie Digby's most popular video. It's pretty good.)



marketing viral marketing public relations media mistakes Wall Street Journal