The hop topic of late has been Obama. The so called political commentary now includes direct and personal attacks, which seem to the new norm in politics.

Closer to home in Australia, we’re seeing a similar trend.

The Prime Minister has been re-branded as Juliar Gillard and is regularly on the receiving end of that jibe during parliamentary sittings and Question Time.

You don’t see this kind of behaviour in the business world or amongst normal people, how can it be acceptable in public service?

Shouldn’t politicians in all countries be setting standards for respect and constructive debate between people rather than lowering the bar.

One option is to move away from the convention of neutral news reporting and move into more opinionated territory.  This opinion could take many forms  but fundamentally newspapers either become more political or more activist.  I think a good example of the latter is The Guardian campaign in support of the International Year of Biodiversity.

On the political spectrum we have the politically aligned Fox News, which as Paul Krugman of Princeton University says in this article for the New York Times has ‘decided that it no longer needs to maintain even the pretense of being nonpartisan’.

“Nobody who was paying attention has ever doubted that Fox is, in reality, a part of the Republican political machine; but the network — with its Orwellian slogan, “fair and balanced” — has always denied the obvious. Officially, it still does. But by hiring those G.O.P. candidates, while at the same time making million-dollar contributions to the Republican Governors Association and the rabidly anti-Obama United States Chamber of Commerce, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, which owns Fox, is signaling that it no longer feels the need to make any effort to keep up appearances.”

Of course, political alignment in the media is not a new thing but out and out political bias, control and affiliation is.  Perhaps its inevitable given the completely unfettered nature of the blogosphere but a potentially worrying trend nonetheless.

Will political opinion and vested interests characterise the future of media?  Do you think activism is a sustainable strategy for traditional media in print and online?

It is an interesting area for PR consultants to get involved with as it provides an issues rich environment for them to really add value through research, insight and execution. 

The best PR practitioners recognise that thought leadership presents an opportunity for their client to add value to its customers and differentiate itself.  In practice, PRs often struggle to find clients that can enunciate and commit to a thought leadership position.  

Organisations encounter a number of issues when it comes to executing against a thought leadership strategy:

1. They believe that thought leadership exposes them to risk – what if people disagree?
2. They’re happy to fly below the radar – no-one else is taking a position so why should we?
3. They don’t have the industry insights required to take a credible position on a topic
4. They don’t have the individual talent to deliver the content or are unwilling to invest in it 
5. They’re focus is lead generation and sales – they don’t see the reputational value in thought leadership
6. They’re not prepared to invest in the necessary research or partnerships required to establish a thought leadership strategy
7. They unable to take an industry view - their industry perspectives are insular, biased and self serving
8. Marketing investments are focused on promotional outcomes, rather than ongoing corporate objectives

Occasionally, you see organisations jumping onto an issue because it has become a business imperative, a good example of this is the Environment where many organisations are keen to be seen to be doing the right thing.  Don’t get me wrong, I believe that most companies are genuine in their intention to reduce their impact on the environment but the adoption of these goals was largely responsive in nature – it become a business imperative.  It was not a proactive altruistic motivation that could be described as genuine thought leadership.

The challenges in this area can be mighty frustrating for the PR agency and in-house team that recognise the opportunities presented by thought leadership to:

1. Build positive brand perceptions
2. Proactively lead the media agenda and add value to media relationships
3. Initiate discussion and generate publicity
4. Provide PR campaigns with a consistent theme or message
5. Raise the profile of senior executives
6. Add value to their industry and been seen as a positive contributor
7. Motivate and engage employees and partner organisations
8. Help drive a shared agenda with stakeholders
9. Engage new audience groups; Government; Industry Associations; Industry Leaders

I think the importance of thought leadership will grow in the future as brands become more attuned to their customers and marketplace.  Brands will need an agenda in order to ensure the sustainability of their online communities.  They’ll need to have opinions and insights in order to drive activity online and empower customer advocates.  They’ll also need to respond to increasing customer expectations about the role that their brand of choice plays in the community.

As a result, we’ll see brands re-assessing their thought leadership strategy and working to identify the relevant opinion platforms for their business.  I think we’ll begin to see support from brands for thought leadership topics that genuinely reflect the interests of their community and, as a result, more credible, personalised, actionable and specific. 

What do you think? Does this also apply to individuals online?  Will it become more important to take a personal position on an issue or are we more likely to exist in communities that reinforce our own world view?

• Will digital advertising revenue alone support quality journalism?
• Will readers pay for quality content?
• Will micro-payments scheme work on a pay as you go basis?
• What will happen if I start charging for content but no-one else follows suit?
• Can we maintain objectivity within an advertising-only funded revenue model?

The Internet has caused massive fragmentation of the media landscape, bloggers and news sites have sprung up that cater for the most niche of audience groups – this is a good thing. They attract large numbers of readers but few of them are profitable.

In the medium to long term I believe that the blogosphere will face its own challenges when it comes to funding and sustainability. The net result will be drastic consolidation of the blogosphere, which will have a knock on effect for the niche audiences many of which will lose their ‘media’.

There is a simple solution to all of this. Every publisher charges a fee.

Online publishers whether they be heritage media publishing houses that have made the transition to web, new media houses or independent bloggers should charge a micro-fee for their content on a pay per use basis.

Its a win win win situation.

• Readers are served by quality mainstream media and coverage of niche interests.
• Advertising revenue can be devoted to social networks, search, communities, forums, discussions groups and so on.
• Journalists and bloggers get to maintain their objectivity as part of a sustainable and value industry.
• Journalism is sustainable.
• Government, institutions, business, interest groups are held to account by an objective and sustainable Media.
• Consumers make informed evolved decisions based on influence and information, as opposed to mindless subliminal advertising.
• Media becomes a true marketplace – quality shines.

I recognise that there are practical issues associated with this model but for me this is the true evolution of the Internet. A force that has democratised information and influence. Lets now apply a workable marketplace for the influence economy.

Thanks for visiting, click here to Subscribe to Just Another 24 Hours – Daniel Young by Email.

]]> http://justanother24hours.com/media/readers-should-fund-online-media-and-that-includes-journalism-and-blogs/feed/ 1 http://justanother24hours.com/media/media-directions-forces-at-play-that-will-determine-the-future-of-media/ http://justanother24hours.com/media/media-directions-forces-at-play-that-will-determine-the-future-of-media/#comments Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:59:49 +0000 Daniel Young http://justanother24hours.com/?p=930

It’s the question on everyone’s lips: What will media look like in the future?

I was riding the 6:02 from North Sydney to Central station on the way home from work this evening. The girl sitting in front of me was reading two forms of media simultaneously.

In both hands she held The Metro newspaper, a free city newspaper here in Sydney and in her right hand she also held her mobile handset, which was clasped at eye level. She was switching between the two – old media and new.

It was a good metaphor for the forces at play in media. These well reported forces are transforming the media industry and giving media industry moguls like Rupert Murdoch major headaches. Every dogs gets its day, as they say.

I have been thinking about the forces at play on the media industry – it’s relevant to a project I am working on at the moment.

Media in the future won’t necessarily be re-shaped by one  extreme at the expense of another but I think its safe to say that the chips have to ultimately fall on one side or the other, in most if not all cases.

The sooner the better because media is important and sustainable and credible industries need certainty.

So here’s a black and white analysis of some of the forces influencing the future of media. There’s no thinking behind the black and white. The direction that media takes has fundamental implications for the marketing industry but also for our society, communities and families in the future.

It’s with great pleasure that I announce the launch of a new Just Another 24 Hours Series entitled Media Directions. This follows the short and sweet The Microhoo Application series.

The Media Directions series will tackle the forces outlined in this post one by one and seek to pick one winner over another (if possible). The series will capture the characteristics of future media . This analysis will be highly subjective with the occasional statistic and fact thrown in for good measure.

And if you have any suggestions about other forces impacting the media industry then please add them to comments and I will tackle these in due course.

The outcome for Media Directions will be a definitive mind map of the media industry of the future, which will act as a foundation planning and strategy tool.

Watch this space.

Subscribe to Just Another 24 Hours by Email

]]> http://justanother24hours.com/media/media-directions-forces-at-play-that-will-determine-the-future-of-media/feed/ 0 http://justanother24hours.com/technology/options-still-on-the-table-to-support-the-future-of-quality-journalism/ http://justanother24hours.com/technology/options-still-on-the-table-to-support-the-future-of-quality-journalism/#comments Sun, 07 Jun 2009 00:59:30 +0000 Daniel Young http://justanother24hours.com/?p=703 Simon Sharwood, a freelance journalist in Australia, recently blogged two out of his three ideas for new business models in print journalism. Both ideas are based on the concept of industry funding.

In the first, funding would come from industry associations and industry groups. In the second, the PR industry funds print journalism via a licensing system, which grants the license holder access to those journalists – similar to the registration of lobbyists.

Both concepts seem to create dependencies that would undermine journalistic independence and integrity, although the risk of this occurring in the second model could be minimised: “…to be a registered PR, one would stump up a fee that goes into an independently administered fund that is then redistributed to publishers with oversight to ensure it goes on wages” (Simon – in comments).

Putting aside the practical challenges of this model, some of which are discussed in the post, I doubt that the model would be sustainable. Funding from the PR industry would be a diminishing return as media relations become a smaller part of what PR agencies do.

Here’s where I come up with my alternative solve all solution.

I might need to get back to you on that but here are some other funding alternatives:

• Newspapers earn not for profit status and the associated financial and tax breaks
• Introduction of a subscription/ micro-payment system that covers multiple competing publications. Check out ViewPass, which would process payments and collect data to drive targeted advertising or trade content for information about the reader’s preferences and interest.
• Newspapers regulate the re-use of content – in the same way that the music industry does.
• Philanthropy may sustain some publications.

The subject is such an emotive and complex issue. I am definitely in the ‘newspapers are a good thing’ camp – but at the end of the day if the model ceases to work then we have to let ‘nature’ take its course.  Consolidation is inevitable but I think that the concept of a newspaper-less society is somewhat alarmist.

By the way, newspapers are flourishing in the developing world. 

Ultimately, I see a small number of print publications containing analysis and opinion available internationally, nationally and in major cities. They’ll play a key role in holding institutions, business and Government to account and would be supported by the not-for-profit- funding model if advertising revenue alone was not sufficient.

I am positive that the pendulum will swing back from digital to traditional media and that things will balance themselves out.

Quality print journalism will survive even if the industry is vastly consolidated and readers will turn to the Web for breaking news, trade/niche content,  entertainment and video. I don’t personally have an issue with a micro-pay scheme – I’d be happy to pay a small amount for quality content from someone that ‘appreciated the technical nuances of the fields concerned’.

There continues to be considerable opportunity for the newspaper industry to reduce cost which makes this scenario seem feasible. Moody’s estimates that just 14% of newspaper operating costs are related to content creation. It’s not all doom and gloom – there are still workable options.

Elsewhere in the B-M world, we (not me) launched TweetElect09 – a real-time European election monitor and dashboard that is tracking – you guessed it – the European elections.

1. Wayward Dominos’ employees in Conover, North Carolina
2. The UK Labour Government’s political smear campaign

I have heard much discussion about the brand and political impact of these unfortunate exposes and lots of experts talking about the need for the victims (or culprits) to engage social media to clean up the mess caused by these indiscretions.

All of this is interesting to a point.

I have heard commentators sprouting the following nonsensical claims; that organisations will withdraw from social media programs as a result of the Dominos experience – in particular. And that Dominos in particular needs to get out there – i.e. into social media – to address the issue. Something that they eventually did.

Let us face the facts.

• Employees in fast food restaurants mess with food.
• Political smear campaigns are as old as politics.

The community is so obsessed with social media at the moment that we are failing to address or consider the underlying and age-old stories and issues here.

Social media has become the story – for everything. Its like a veneer that corporations and institutions can paint over their shoddy and unethical practices to make everything alright.

We’ll quickly move onto the next thing but I doubt that much will change at Dominos or within British politics.

Social media can be a means to an end (i.e. changing stuff) but its not an end in itself.