I’m in the media business, so I think about it often. Actually, I had been an editor for a few months when it suddenly dawned on me that I had become something I didn’t like–a journalist. When I was a sales engineer, it took me years to actually say the word “sales,” although professional sales people make it a delight to buy something. My journalism training came from reading everything I could get my hands on, reading the Columbia Journalism Review while I was in college (must have had a premonition) and not much else. There are people I now like to read in order to further my education. One is NYU professor Jay Rosen. His blog, Press Think, has been an excellent resource. It went dormant for a while, but he has started it up again–and this post is a coherent description about why I don’t care for journalists–at least political ones.
I used to read newspapers cover to cover. Did it for many years. Now I spend about 30 minutes a day max with a newspaper. John C. Dvorak, in this PC Mag column, points out much of what happened to the newpaper business–they shot themselves. Craigs List, of course, took away a lot of income from the classified sections, but as local papers began to lay off staff and just use AP and The New York Times for content, they lost their way. Heck, just get the NYT, in fact, be like me and get it on the Web. By the time I get a daily newspaper I already know all the news except for some local stuff. No wonder news weeklies struggle–news dailies aren’t real time enough anymore.
TV news is geared directly at ratings, so it has become mostly hype. I watch no TV news. I’ve even tuned out the Weather Channel.
Journalists love to ponder the demise of media. The iPad is going to kill all of us off–so they say. Content is still necessary. People still come to good content. I get exasperated by all the search engine optimization wannabes who try all manner of gimmicks, hype, over the top hitting you and so on. Print–magazines and books–are still around. Sometimes technology has a negative impact–e.g. the news weeklies–but most often the cause of problems is the demise of the niche the magazine is serving. But other niches spring up that need the services of a magazine. Don’t do linear extrapolations of limited data sets. And don’t get caught up in artificial SEO. (the web guys will hate me, but so be it) Put out good content and make friends.
I’d love to see Automation World on the iPad–but that would be too expensive for a small magazine like us. And then Steve Jobs controls the distribution. Print still works.
I’m finding myself in a similar position – waking up one morning and realizing I’m an "author." Also, becoming more involved in the ISA Publications Department has focused my attention more and more on the publishing business.
You’re absolutely right – when most people talk about "X" will kill print or "Y" will save print, what they really mean is their old content distribution system isn’t working. Compelling content will always have a place in our lives; it’s part of the human condition and we can’t help it. The question will be where the content will be consumed and in what format. Having said that, I’m more convinced every day that iPad-like devices will change the game dramatically. Stay tuned for a blog article or two on that soon.
Incidentally, no web guy who knows what he’s talking about would hate you for bashing "artificial SEO." The number one factor in SEO authority (by a long, long shot) is links pointing to your content. This means that creating compelling content that is worth talking about is literally half of the SEO battle. Good use of keywords in titles and within the content makes up the bulk of the remainder, so the bottom line is that "put out good content and make friends" is a pretty good SEO strategy.
While I jump on "new media" things, I think it’s wise to not go for the early hype on things. If the Kindle is so wildly popular, why have I only seen one in all my airplane travels? Reading some tech blogs, you’d think that 75% of people on a plane were reading one.
I’ve also read where companies are now sending people to Facebook instead of their own Website. Don’t they know that Facebook owns everything on it, and they are now at the mercy of one company?
I’m also starting to hear that corporate bloggers have stopped with the conversation and are only pushing press releases. As an editor, I wouldn’t mind Twitter as a source for news. Some companies send so many links per hour that I can’t keep up. And the shortened URL is not good. I’m suspicious of clicking on them unless I really trust the sender. I want to see where I’m going.
Oops, covered a lot of ground there. But the sum is, are you changing the way you communicate with the method of communication? Or, are you just trying the same old tired stuff just with a newer, cheaper way of pushing "crap?"
Funny you should mention that – I just had a similar conversation this morning with a book publisher. I told him that most reactions to new technology are to try the same old techniques in the new medium, which rarely works. All the mistakes you mention are examples of this.
I don’t think that the iPad-like devices will change things dramatically overnight. I’m talking over the next 5 to 10 years. And the reason I say that is I’m looking at the way my daughters DEMAND their content now. It’s eye opening. In brief, they want to download it immediately, take it with them, and consume when and where it’s convenient for them. And I’m including my 4 year-old who is already asking for her own iPod and consistently borrows her sisters’. These kids are growing up with expectations that will demand portable, on-demand content of all kinds. This includes books, articles, music, television shows, and movies.
It will take time, but I think this shift is coming. As Clay Shirky says, "Tools don’t get socially interesting until they become technologically boring."