Keen On… Sir Martin Sorrell: We Have to Get Consumers to Pay for Their Content (TCTV)

Andrew Keen is an Anglo-American entrepreneur, writer, broadcaster and public speaker. He is the author of the international hit “Cult of the Amateur: How the Internet is Killing our Culture” which has been published in 17 different languages and was short-listed for the Higham’s Business Technology Book of the Year award. As a pioneering Silicon Valley based Internet entrepreneur,... ? Learn More

It’s Stream time again. Last year, when I interviewed Sir Martin Sorrell, the co-founder and CEO of WPP at the company’s annual Stream unconference in Athens, Sir Martin argued that “free=fail.”

And this year, Sorrell, who presides over the world’s largest advertising company, a global leviathan with 153,000 people working in 2,400 offices in 107 countries, was equally scathing in his attack on free online content. Arguing that giving away quality content was a “dreadful mistake” that resulted in many digital media companies “crucifying themselves”, Sir Martin said that not charging for online content is the “wrong” business model.

“We went down the wrong road from the beginning”, Sorrell told me about early Internet business models. And he argues that we are making the same mistake with our obsession today with “openness” and “transparency”. The pendulum will swing, Sir Martin predicts. People are going to demand what he described as “closed systems” in which they will happily pay for privacy from the transparent social web.

Sir Martin Sorrell has been Group Chief Executive Officer of WPP Group PLC of Grey Global Group Inc. since its founding in 1986. Sorrell started his career as Marketing Associate of Glendinning Associates of Westport, Connecticut. In 1997, he was appointed as Ambassador of British Business by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and subsequently appointed to the Office’s Panel 2000 aimed at rebranding Britain abroad. In 1999, he was appointed by the Secretary of State for Education and Employment...

Learn more

Andrew Keen is an Anglo-American entrepreneur, writer, broadcaster and public speaker. He is the author of the international hit “Cult of the Amateur: How the Internet is Killing our Culture” which has been published in 17 different languages and was short-listed for the Higham’s Business Technology Book of the Year award. As a pioneering Silicon Valley based Internet entrepreneur, Andrew founded Audiocafe.com in 1995 and built it into a popular first generation Internet music company. He is currently the...

Learn more

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Qwiki Embraces HTML5 And Takes The Next Content Step With The Qwiki Editor

MG Siegler has been writing for TechCrunch since 2009. He covers the web, mobile, social, big companies, small companies, essentially everything. And Apple. A lot. Prior to TechCrunch, he covered various technology beats for VentureBeat. Originally from Ohio, MG attended the University of Michigan. He’s previously lived in Los Angeles where he worked in Hollywood and in San Diego where... ? Learn More

Today at TechCrunch Disrupt, last year’s winner, Qwiki, took the stage to give an update on their business. We originally noted that they may be the future of information consumption. But that information was largely pre-packaged at the time. Today, they’ve starting to give people the power to make their own Qwikis.

CEO Doug Imbruce announced the Qwiki Editor today. With it, publishers will be able to create their own Qwikis. For example, Imbruce showed off a Qwiki made for this TechCrunch Disrupt. This turns the roughly 3 million reference topics that are on Qwiki now into a possibly limitless experience.

Qwiki is going to start testing this WYSIWYG editor with a limited number of partners. (Imbruce notes that they’ve been pinged by hundreds of publishers). But eventually, the plan is to open it up so anyone can make their own Qwikis. The tool offers a simple drag-and-drop experience.

Imbruce also announced that Qwiki has a new HTML5-based experience on the web. Previously, the experience on the web was Flash-based only. This gives Qwiki even more potential reach in terms of devices. They’re on the web fully now with iOS and Android as well.

A “Qwiki” is a short, interactive story: a drastically improved information experience provided via interactive video. Unlike traditional rich media content, all Qwikis are created on the fly from web sources (without any human intervention). Today, our technology produces 3MM+ interactive, narrated Qwikis describing all the topics on Wikipedia - complete with relevant images, video, and structured data imported from linked sources. These Qwikis are embeddable anywhere on the web and compatible with all iOS devices. Via the release...

Learn more

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

3 Commandments for the Next Online Content Leaders

Dermot McCormack is the executive vice president of digital media at MTV Music & Logo Group.

The electronic and egalitarian publishing era ushered in by the blogosphere has created a unique set of problems. Digital publishing volume continues to expand, and in its growing wake, users are left in a constant state of uncertainty.

In an age when anyone with an iPhone or a Twitter account has essentially become a broadcaster, users must navigate the clutter of digital content to arrive at trusted sources.

The answer is simple: Confirm authority through curation and context. On the other hand, the process has changed quite a bit.

As new delivery mechanisms and distribution platforms emerge, both new and established media are able to reach a mass audience. Those media outlets now find themselves contending with hundreds, possibly thousands of competing brands. And the lines only continue to blur for consumers.

Therefore, authority will become the next sought-after currency for the app-social generation.

What is authority? Who has It? How can it be earned? How can it be proved? Simply put, an authority is an accepted source of expert information or advice. For example, I trust BBC News when it reports on a story about UK politics (and even U.S. politics sometimes). I trust MTV’s Matt Pinfield when he directs me to a good song or cites a band’s influences. I trust ESPN to provide accurate sport scores.

In today’s fragmented media landscape, trusted and authoritative brands run the gamut from traditional media companies like The New York Times, to small niche-specific music bloggers like Arjan Writes.

However, it takes time to build this type of trust, and consumers are quick to skepticism when information is reported inaccurately or presented in an inauthentic manner. While there’s no blueprint, remaining relevant and trustworthy requires ongoing work and periodic self-evaluation. Brands must frequently ask themselves:

Who is my audience?What do they care about and believe in?Is my voice authentic?What distinguishes my brand from my competitors?What do my competitors do better than I do, and how do I fix that?

Brands committed to honestly answering these questions and fine-tuning accordingly will gradually start to feel their influence rise. While the transition may not immediately translate to traffic spikes or press coverage, influence can be measured non-traditionally — for instance, a rise in the number of retweets and link backs.

It’s through link banks and social media sharing that we’ll start to actually measure authority. And with advertisers eagerly looking to lock arms with key influencers, the importance of building authority is more important and critical than ever.

There’s an overabundance of distracting media clutter. It seems everyone has a megaphone and access to a million or more channels they’re using to share their thoughts, spanning everything from world politics to their lunch menu.

With all of this noise, people have begun seeking safe havens in the form of trusted sources. Those sources provide a valuable, curated experience that selects and spotlights the best news, sports, music, technology, etc.

Simultaneously, however, new technologies and algorithms have allowed a variety of services to attempt to recommend the same news and information. While innovative, the technology alone isn’t enough to service a super savvy consumer market. Nor can crowd sourcing, since the general public is not professionally trained in reporting or branding.

The missing and always relevant piece is experts — human experts. Yes, humans still have a role alongside technology. The future of curation is one part experts, one part crowds and one part algorithms.

Over the past 10 years, much of the movement in the content world has been driven by machines and crowdsourcing. It’s time to bring the human expert back into the mix, but to give him or her the companion toolkit of great technology and access to crowd wisdom. That way, he or she can truly curate thoughtful content that will cut through the noise, and ultimately rebuild the trust and authority severely damaged by content overcrowding.

The element of surprise and delight is also key to the art of curation. Human experts still have an edge here. An algorithm may tell you what song you are “most likely” to enjoy. An expert has a chance of surprising you with a tune you never expected (“Wow, I didn’t know I liked German opera music!”).

Fans are pleading for their favorite brands to help them cut through the media mess, to provide destinations that highlight and showcase valuable information. If your brand relies solely on algorithms or on inexperienced and unknowledgeable editors, don’t be surprised to find your install base quickly deteriorate — if you ever had one to begin with.

While authority and curation are important, without context, they mean nothing.

Context adds essential meaning to information. It answers the questions: Why should I care? What does this mean for me and for society?

Brands that can clearly articulate the proper context around curated information will build authority by bringing the big picture into focus for their audience.

People are tired of scratching their heads, feeling like they’ve received fragmented, re-hashed or irrelevant information. Social media provides brands the amazing ability to not only speak to, but also to listen to their audience. By asking questions and then implementing feedback, brands can increasingly contextualize the information they present. Failure to do so will frustrate and deplete a brand’s fan base.

Finally, social networks may allow for super distributed data, but humans crave context, the knowledge of how information relates to a larger scheme. The brands that put the effort into providing context will win in the app-social media future.

Build your content future around the three pillars of Authority, Curation and Context. No brand is exempt from these rules. If you think you have time to coast, even just a little, you’ll soon find yourself and your brand out of vogue.

Taking an internal audit and implementing change is not easy, nor is it cheap. But in the end, the payoff will be felt all around.

Image courtesy of Flickr, AppleTone ??, HumanAdventure.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Starz Ends Renewal Negotiations With Netflix; Will Cease Content Distribution In 2012

Leena Rao currently works as a writer for TechCrunch. She recently finished graduate school at the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University, where she studied business journalism and videography. From 2004 to 2007, she helped lead Congresswoman Carloyn Maloney’s community outreach and relations efforts in New York City. She graduated from Columbia University in 2003, where she was... ? Learn More

Starz and Netflix have been embroiled in negotiations over the network’s premium movie content. For the past year, the Liberty Media-owned Starz has had ongoing discussions over the terms of the agreement, which is set to expire in February 2012. The LA Times reported earlier this year that a renewal would cost Netflix more than $200 million per year. And today, Starz issued a statement stating that renewal discussions with Netflix have ended and the network would be removing its content from the Netflix library once the agreement ends next year.

From the release: Starz Entertainment has ended contract renewal negotiations with Netflix. When the agreement expires on February 28, 2012, Starz will cease to distribute its content on the Netflix streaming platform. This decision is a result of our strategy to protect the premium nature of our brand by preserving the appropriate pricing and packaging of our exclusive and highly valuable content. With our current studio rights and growing original programming presence, the network is in an excellent position to evaluate new opportunities and expand its overall business.

The Starz four-year deal gave Netflix more than 1,000 movies per year, including Sony and Disney titles. The deal with Starz is important to Netflix because it actually provided the movie streaming service with newer titles.

It’s definitely not a good sign that content owners are fleeing Netflix’s platform. The assumption is that Starz and Netflix couldn’t come to a financial agreement that would fit both parties (Perhaps $200 million is too much). Starz could have also been under pressure from companies like Disney, which reportedly wanted to limit the movie channel’s ability to provide movies to Netflix. Showtime also recently pulled some of its content from Netflix.

But Netflix has been able to strike new content deals for its international markets.

The first day of September hasn’t been a great day for Netflix, whose controversial price hike just rolled out today. Shares of Netflix are down over 8 percent in after-hours trading.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Now Can We All Agree That The “High Quality Web Content” Experiment Has Failed?

Paul Carr is, by process of elimination, a writer. He writes a weekly column for TechCrunch, loosely focussing on media and technology. For the first part of what he laughingly calls his ‘career’, he edited various publications and founded numerous businesses with varying degrees of abysmal failure. After getting fired from every job he’d ever had – including at least... ? Learn More

It’s hard to imagine anything more perfect that Slate’s decision to lay off its respected media critic Jack Shafer. Not perfect in a good way — I count myself amongst Shafer’s legions of fans — but perfect in the way that Alanis Morissette not understanding the meaning of ‘Ironic’ is perfect, or the way that a safety inspector falling out of a tenth story window would be perfect.

“I tolllldddd yyoooouuu sooooooo…”

I mean, what better illustration could there be of online media’s woes than an ezine laying off its media critic because the economics of web content don’t support a writer of his stature and specialism? At least Shafer can take some satisfaction in the fact that his departure is in and of itself an absolutely perfect piece of media criticism: Jack Shafer as both medium and message.

Slate’s admission that, even with a minuscule staff of 60 and the financial “might” of the Washington Post company, it can’t make money from online content is also perfect. The perfect opportunity, that is, to acknowledge once and for all that the grand experiment in free online content has failed.

Over on Forbes.com, Jeff Bercovici nails the problem thus…

“General interest is a pretty good concept for a physical product that gets delivered to your doorstep, where getting all those disparate sections bundled together makes sense. It’s not such a great concept on the web. The web hates artificial bundles. If you’re going to do a general-interest news product online, you have to be prepared to do it on the cheap, as Matt Drudge and Arianna Huffington do (or at least used to do, in the latter case). Conversely, if you want to put out an expensively produced, professionally-edited product, it’s better to stick to a niche, preferably one with a demographic that advertisers want to reach, like technology or business.”

…and he’s right. Up to a point. In fact, many niche publications are feeling the pinch too. It wasn’t long ago that Bercovici’s own employer, Forbes, abandoned its status as a professionally written and edited financial publication and decided to style itself as a kind of HuffPost for finance; embracing cheap guest-posters regardless of what conflicts they might churn up. Meantime, it would be petty of me to name those of our rivals in the technology blogosphere who have embraced bullshit slideshows and top ten lists over their more costly cousins: actual fucking reporting. (So far TechCrunch’s acquisition by AOL hasn’t lead to our editorial arm having to choose between God and Mammon, but a cynic might say it’s only a matter of time until we too are tested.)

The blunt truth is, online advertising is a numbers game. And, even on niche sites, the number of salable page impressions required to even break even is huge. There are just too many pages of content being produced for advertising to remain a viable long-term business model. The New York Times can’t make money online, the Guardian can’t, Slate can’t and Salon barely can. As Bercovici points out, even Slate’s attempts to launch verticals aimed at business readers, and women, were relative failures.

There are maybe two general-interest publications which can reasonably claim to have cracked the free content code: The Daily Mail and the Huffington Post. But in truth the only way those publications can afford to pay their growing armies of real, grown-up editors is by selling millions of pages of animal stories and celebrity fluff, churned out by underpaid hacks. (One day I want to produce a HuffPost slideshow of the best Daily Mail celebrity slideshows — it’ll clean up.)

AND YET. It’s easy to wail and moan about how the Internet is killing journalism, but that dystopian future only exists if we assume that the Internet is the only place that editorial content can possibly live. In fact, over the next five years or so what we’re likely to see is a bifurcation in digital content.

On one side, those content producers who choose to stay on the free-and-open web will be forced into making more and more ethically dubious decisions to stay profitable. Out will go professional writers and church-and-state separation of content and commerce; in will come more Groupon-style “reader offers”, affiliate links behind every keyword and an Idiocracy of dumber and dumber linkbait. Ten ways to make extra income with Lady Gaga Sony Porn — Kittens!

But on the other side? The fact that the Economist’s North American circulation has just reached its highest ever level tells us that the audience for quality content isn’t going away. It also suggests that those of us who prefer our content unsullied by payola, and who appreciate the beauty of a well-crafted headline are turning our backs on the web. Increasingly the best writing and reporting is to be found in books and Kindle Singles, where readers are happy to pay directly for high-quality information and entertainment. As web content continues to get dumber, and more ethically compromised, the market for high quality content away from the web will continue to grow.

Of course, it would be idiotic to suggest that publishers should rush back to print, in the hope of emulating the Economist. But nor should they be wasting money publishing their content on the web. As any wildly profitable app developer will tell you, the web is a great marketing tool, but it’s on dedicated portable devices that the real money, and attention spans, are found. A smart publisher looking to launch a new magazine today — focusing on business, technology, or just about anything else — would be wise to develop it specifically for e-readers rather than wasting more money chasing the dumb eyeballs of the web. Oh, and they should hire Jack Shafer. He’s brilliant.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.