Alert Blog Reviews

“You gotta be freakin’ kidding me!” That was my reaction to a Reuters article that I came across. I am still a little taken aback, as they say, about the even the threat of the US government looking into ways to bailout the struggling newspaper / old school media industry. Right now it’s more talk than anything else but if someone said it in a public forum then you know there are greater rumblings going through Washington with a similar stink on them. I guess you can guess where I stand on this one, huh? The Reuters article starts off A top Democratic lawmaker predicted on Wednesday that the government will be involved in shaping the future for struggling U.S. media organizations. House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, saying quality journalism was essential to U.S. democracy, said eventually government would have to help resolve the problems caused by a failing business model. Waxman, other U.S. lawmakers and regulators are looking into various options to help a newspaper industry hurt by the shift in advertising revenues to online platforms. Can you see me shaking my head now? Did the government bailout the horse and buggy industry when the automobile was invented? Did the government bailout the radio industry when TV came along? Did anyone bailout the transcribers of the world when the Gutenberg press started producing the printed word? If journalism is essential to the US democracy then let the free market system that has built this democracy into one of the greatest powers of the modern age (at least until recently that is) take care of how this plays out! The last thing we need is the government handing tax benefits and even worse, more deficit funded handouts to the likes of the Washington Post, New York Times and anything that Rupert Murdoch is whining about these days. So who will profit from this concept more: our democracy or the likes of Rupert Murdoch? Hey let’s just go out and figure out which failing business model victim looks the most like AIG, Bank of America or Government General Motors and throw money at their executives business and see just how much better it gets. WTF! This is not a government issue for goodness sake. This is a paradigm shift issue. The world is changing and not everything survives change. Why are we so obsessed with keeping something alive that may not have a place in the new world media order? And if it does have a place let the free market principles that allowed it to thrive for so long determine what piece or pieces will move forward as we boldly go further in the digital age. Of course there is some press constituency that thinks this a great idea. Wonder who pays their bills? Free Press, a public interest group, said the search for solutions to the crisis in journalism should be premised on the idea that news-gathering is a public service, not a commodity. Waxman’s “indication that government has a role to play is both bold and soberly sensible,” said Free Press Policy Director Ben Scott on the sidelines of the FTC conference. I call BS on this one. Honestly, if the newspapers were truly a public service shouldn’t they have acted more responsibly to the change that very public is undergoing in how it consumes news? Business change is not always about failure; it’s usually more about progress and smarts or lack thereof. If the newspapers have ignored the myriad tell tale signs that have been written on the wall for years now why should MY TAX dollars save them from their own arrogance and stupidity? What have they done for me and my business? Geesh, just the rumor of this happening really ticks me off! Hey, Senator Waxman and anyone else who thinks this is a good idea! Shut up and go read your Washington Post while it’s still here! Phew! That felt great because I am part of the new free press and I plan on being around in the digital age as long as I can identify what people really want. Will it last forever? Probably not but if I am not smart enough to get on board the next train that is heading for the future don’t bail me out. That’ll be my problem not yours.

Excerpt from:
News Bailout Next?

You wonder who could have ever coined a term such as viral marketing. But, if you were to draw an analogy with a virus you would understand why. The virus is perseverant and lives on its host without doing anything. It also multiplies in great numbers within no time. Viral marketing is a specific strategy that you would apply to pass on the information about the products or services. This creates a chain of people passing the message and hence a huge number of people get to know about it within no time. When you hear people talking about word of mouth publicity it is similar to viral marketing. The way viral marketing works is that you let people know that you are giving away something free. As soon as they know of this they will create a buzz around it and spread the word around. When this is done you will be able to reach out your message to large tracts of audiences you would have never ever been able to get in touch with. Viral marketing is almost like a ripple effect. One action of yours will get you unforeseen amounts of publicity. There are a few factors that work exponentially in viral marketing. The first thing is when you are offering something free. People get attracted to this like bees to a pot of honey. Secondly, in viral marketing the information should be easy to pass on. The message must be able to transfer itself from small to large. Another aspect of viral marketing is that it is able to judge people based on what motivates them, form patterns and trends about their behavior and work on those. Viral marketing in order to reach out to loads of people makes use of extensively the communication tools that are available in the modern world. The information that you have under your fold must be such that it is able to spread like wild fire. This gives it the feeling of being exclusive and everyone clambering to be a part of it. This form of marketing has become a boon in today’s scenario as anything that is visible and showcased well enough will get you enough buyers for it. Also it is a form of marketing that is absolutely cost effective. You do not end up paying huge amounts in order to get noticed. It can start off on a small scale and then ultimately snowball in to a large thing. The example of hotmail is one of the best examples that could be ever cited. They achieved unprecedented growth by applying all the principles of viral marketing in order to be able to get ahead.

See more here:
The tenacity of viral marketing:

Not to ‘dog pile’ on an industry and a company, in particular, that is obviously struggling, it is important to keep track of where traditional media buys (newspapers, magazines, TV etc) are heading. It’s important to see where the balance may occur between online and traditional as well as a barometer on the economic environment we all are living with but seemingly saying less about these days. Conde Nast has already cut four titles this year which sent a shiver down the spine of the magazine industry as a whole. Now, as the company reports on its 2009 ad page sales it becomes obvious why that kind of move may have been the only choice. The New York Times reports The company’s ad pages at monthly magazines have declined by almost a third since last year, with the company losing 8,359 ad pages this year, according to estimates it released Wednesday. Condé Nast began cost-cutting this fall, closing Gourmet, Modern Bride, Elegant Bride and Cookie. The worst-hit magazines for the year were Architectural Digest, where ad pages fell 49.9 percent; W, where ad pages fell 46 percent; and Condé Nast Traveler, where pages fell 41.1 percent. Details and Wired both fell about 39 percent. Ouch, those kinds of numbers usually have a sound effect attached to them (cue the Wile E. Coyote plummeting to his demise audio). The sound that everyone is waiting for next is the thud of when this trend finally hits bottom. What needs to be watched is that this kind of result is seen as a referendum on the magazine industry as a whole. It’s actually not. The reason that Conde Nast is taking such a beating is that their titles are almost all pointed at the luxury market and the advertising money in that segment has dried up. On the other side of this is the Meredith , publisher of titles like Family Circle, Better Homes & Gardens, Fitness and more is actually doing better than last year. Why? They are reaching more mass market audiences and there is an emphasis from food advertisers and other marketers who provide products and services that focus on people doing more at home so they can save money. Makes sense. So while the newspaper industry as a whole is declining that same kind of blanket statement may not be fair in the magazines because magazines do something that the Internet does as well; provides targeted content to particular segments. As a result, marketers to these segments will buy because there is value. Wow. How about that? You provide value and people buy things. Who woulda thunk?

Read the original:
Conde Nast Ad Pages Plummet but Not All Doom and Gloom for Magazines