-
Opinion | Features
Woz not great
In this guest post Tony Prysten argues that the thousand dollar price of seeing out-of-touch Apple co-founder Steve Wozniack on his Australian tour was a waste of money.
This week, for the cost of two iPads (yep, two) I went to the Woz Live conference in Melbourne. I was not impressed.
What the hell is transmedia?
From advertising campaigns to online video series, the term ‘transmedia’ gets quite the work out. But what does it actually mean? Cathie McGinn trawls the media landscape for a definitive definition.
Transmedia, all media and multiplatform are terms often used interchangeably when referencing modern storytelling techniques. Yet, depending who you speak to, there are distinct differences between them.
According to industry experts Encore spoke to, the key elements that define transmedia can be summarised as follows: platform, time, audience, adaptation, and creative collaboration.
Innovation is the remedy for the ailing magazine industry
With magazine circulations plummeting, FHM closing and rumours rife on future ownership of ACP Magazines, Paul Merrill says the only way forward is launching new titles.Eight years ago in the UK, nearly a quarter of all magazine sales came from magazines that were less than four years old. In Australia, the figure was slightly lower, but still significant. Today, the situation is very different. For a start there are so few new magazines. Yes, Masterchef briefly flared, and Top Gear made an initial impact. But Grazia and Alpha fizzled, and now ACP has shelved their plans to launch Elle.
More than a game: broadcasting the Olympics
The 2012 London Olympics will be the biggest televised sporting event of our time. Brooke Hemphill discovers the logistical challenges and technical requirements of producing the event.
From July 27 to August 12, the Australian media will go sport crazy as the Games of the XXX Olympiad, aka the 2012 London Summer Olympics, unfold. The games will be the most televised sporting event of our time as broadcasters look to master every manner of technology at their disposal.
The Voice - Australia's best example yet of social TV
In this guest post, Sputnik’s Rodd Messent has a theory on why audiences have taken to The Voice .I am an addict of Channel Nine’s hit show The Voice. Such is the extent of my addiction I seriously think my housemate might kick me out of our apartment for the semi-frenzied yelling and tweeting that ensues in our lounge room each time the show airs.It’s the first time in almost three years that such disagreement has resulted in less than civil behaviour towards one another, and it’s made me think it might be a microcosm of the large volume of online debate about the show and, correspondingly, an explanation for its success as a social TV experience.Why brands are the US Army - and culture jammers are the Viet Cong
In this guest posting, Dave Burgess, who painted ‘No War’ on the Sydney Opera House, claims that ‘amoral’ advertisers have copied his idea.
Culture jamming is a 28-year-old term coined by the San Francisco-based band Negativland, who declared that the ‘Studio for the cultural jammer is the world at large’.
Branded content is dead. Long live branded content
In this guest posting, Anthony Freedman argues why branded content is making a comeback.
A few short years ago, probably concurrent with the advent of the PVR, a new term emerged within the marketing communications industry; branded content. This was really synonymous with advertiser funded TV shows where programming was created by brands and deals struck with networks to broadcast them.
There were varying degrees of success with this model.
Shock advertising: 30 ads that would give Australia's ad watchdog a coronary
Is shock an underused weapon in Australian advertising, asks Robin HicksToday, Sydney agency The Cabana Boys used an image of a mouth sewn together to shock people with the idea that problem gamblers lie to conceal their habit. Is it the most disturbing image ever? No. Will it get banned by the Advertising Standards Bureau? No. But it did make me wonder why shock is not used more often in Australia – and not just by charities and government bodies. (WARNING: NSFW)
The making of ratings blockbuster The Voice
Jason Mountney goes on the set of Channel Nine’s talent search series, The Voice, to see how the format, based on an international franchise, has come together. What ingredients have gone into making this certified hit that’s rated more than two million viewers on three consecutive nights?
Mike Goldman has one of the toughest jobs on the set of the Nine network’s new talent show, The Voice. He not only has to narrate the show, but also keep the audience from losing their enthusiasm as they realise shooting TV programs takes a lot longer than the one-hour bursts they see in their lounge rooms. A lot longer.
Nine problems stopping The Global Mail from getting an audience
While it’s a shame The Global Mail has failed to make an impact on the media landscape, the signs have been there for some time.I love the concept of a well resourced, philanthropically-funded independent news site. Anywhere in the world, that’s a rare and wonderful thing. In Australia even more so. So I hope that Grame Wood gets to see his investment make a difference.
And I have no inside info on whether Monica Attard’s sudden departure is linked to the site’s failure to find an audience so far.
Regardless, here are nine areas they can easily start to address:
Journalism’s new model?
Does the launch of philanthropically funded news site The Global Mail signal a new era for journalism or is the model destined to be a passing fad, asks Cathie McGinn in this article first published in Encore magazine.With little fanfare, philanthropically funded news site The Global Mail launched in February this year.
The online-only title received a generous five-year funding commitment from businessman Graeme Wood, founder of accommodation website wotif.com, who donated $15million.
Five things that make a great suit
In this guest posting, Gareth Collins argues that the role of a great account manager is to make the work betterI’m surprised at how many suits I meet who don’t know their role in the advertising business. The question ‘what does an advertising account manager or director do?’ is frequently met with answers such as project manager, relationship manager, plate spinner or go between … and those are the nice ones.
Success is judged on the ability to manage a process, be strong administratively and get stuff done. And while a good suit needs to do all of these things brilliantly, if these are the traits that define a great suit, then I’m in the wrong job.
What the hell is transmedia?
From advertising campaigns to online video series, the term ‘transmedia’ gets quite the work out. But what does it actually mean? Cathie McGinn trawls the media landscape for a definitive definition.
Transmedia, all media and multiplatform are terms often used interchangeably when referencing modern storytelling techniques. Yet, depending who you speak to, there are distinct differences between them.
The top seven...most patronising pieces of communication
Sometimes brands have big ideas. Sometimes marketers get so caught up with a grandiose idea that instead of finding engaging ways to sell breakfast cereal, they start to believe their own rhetoric. And sometimes it’s just lazy marketing. Here are my top seven inadvertently patronising pieces of communication…
1) Last night thousands of women gathered in Sydney’s Centennial Park to take part in She Runs the Night, an event created by Nike.
TV audience measurement – why big isn’t always beautiful
In this guest post, Chris Walton argues that the media industry needs to take a new approach to TV tradingThere has been a significant amount of coverage recently about how successful The Voice has been. Indeed, audience figures of 2.6m+ people are very impressive these days. Based on reports, this is apparently double the size of audience that Nine was hoping for in the lead up to the programme launching.
Fairfax ‘could drop newsprint’ when broadband rolls out
One way for Fairfax to raise its profits could be to eventually stop printing its newspapers and transition readers to a paid online model, says broker Merrill Lynch.
The comments come in an analysis of the newspaper sector reported, ironically, in Fairfax’s Sydney Morning Herald today.
The analysis looking at the effects of the planned national broadband network on publishers, says that costs would fall by 45% if Fairfax drops its print editions and that it would need to persuade readers to pay $12.50 a month to receive its output online. As well as the SMH, Fairfax owns The Age in Melbourne.
According to Merrill Lynch, Fairfax – with the strongest mastheads – would have the best chance at making such a strategy work while West Australian Newspapers, now controlled by Kerry Stokes, is worst positioned.
May 28th, 2009 at 8:31 am
-
-
Follow Us
-
Email Newsletter
Latest Jobs- Account Executives $45-$55 - Syd
- PPC / Search Manager - Brisbane
- Search Director – Columbus Sydney – attractive salary package – immediate start - Walsh Bay, Sydney
- Account Director - St Kilda
- Senior Account Manager - St Kilda
- Senior Account Exec/Junior Account Manager - Sydney
- Outdoor- Acct Manager $100-$130k - Syd
- Sunglass Hut Brand Marketing Manager - 6 month Contract - North Ryde -Sydney NSW
- TV ACCOUNT Manager - Syd
- Digital Manager – Diverse role at top media agency - Sydney
Comments
28 May 09
10:13 am
Huh, they needed an analyst to tell them the facts that are staring them in the face? They don’t need a crystal ball for this one, a rearview mirror would provide enough!
Oh, and small typo Tim – newpapers, but maybe it was your subtle message – new papers??
28 May 09
11:30 am
“it would need to persuade readers to pay $12.50 a month to receive its output online.”
How does that work?
28 May 09
11:40 am
…and so it begins
28 May 09
12:21 pm
Thanks, Annette typo corrected. Never wrong for long is my (borrowed) motto…
28 May 09
1:13 pm
It’ll be a bit of a stretch to ask Sydneysiders to pay 12.50 / month. They’ve treated their online audience like children for ages and I’d say that they’ve a lot of goodwill to recover before they can start charging for the celebrity shite, reposted internet memes and lifestyle/ sport gumf they’ve served up to now.
28 May 09
2:11 pm
The recent PWC report (“Moving into multiple business models”) suggests that people *might* pay for online content, but with an important caveat:
“Free content is abundant online and consumers would choose free content when the quality was comparable or sufficient for their purpose”
So you’d have to ask – just how unique is the SMH and Age content when all other sources of news, sport, entertainment and business are taken into account?
WSJ.com currently offers subscriptions for US$1.99 per week (about A$2.50 per week). Makes $12.50 a month seem a bit ‘exxie’ …
28 May 09
4:51 pm
SMH is lucky that i read their stuff for free – and even then, its only just hanging in there.
In between the increasingly tabloid editorial, the controversial offensive extremists like Miranda, and the intrusive advertisements that they can’t even sell at full ratecard listing, fairfax is lucky to keep its readers.
The hardest question is do i spend a buck and a bit on a paper or a share? Yeah, neither – they’re going nowhere without a big change, which they won’t be able to pull off.
Oh, and if you think charging is going to work, you have absolutely no clue. But hey, we know that already from all the cash you pumped into F2
28 May 09
5:12 pm
Good luck fairfax. You have no chance.
No newspaper has succesfuly moved into a pure online model from a print model. Web traffic decreases enormously. Loosing the branding that a print mastheead gives an online product is incalculable.
Fairfax must then provide readers with something that they are unable to find elsewhere and is valuable enough to pay for.
That would mean unique editorial. Naturally as a news organisation Fairfax covers things that no one else will cover and provide for free? Oops. My fault. Every other media will provide it for free so maybe Fairfax will do it BETTER.
But of course they won’t. Their journalistic ranks have been decimated. They have no product that people are willing to pay for. After all, the AFR is a walled garden. last I heard they had 6,000 or so paying online subscribers. The AFR couldn’t exist as an online model so why on earth could the SMAGE? It’s even less specialised.
Bottom line. Whatever the SMAGE want to do in new media the ABC will do equally professionally and with even better resources.
This rubbish is so typical of an analyst who obviously has no real publishing experience. LOL Bankers.
Look at the great job they are doing over at CMH……
Fairfax must make the SMAGE work without the net or end up trading in an unprofitable print business for an unprofitable online business.
Someone from Fairfax willing tell me how wrong I am?
28 May 09
6:02 pm
Yes, Carrob, your “comments” are little more than a rant. Frustrated journalist much?
28 May 09
6:41 pm
No Peter.
Succesful publisher that once worked at Fairfax. It’s not a rant as much as a statement of facts. Perhaps you could show me using some of that smug fairfax superiority (which is kinda like that Channel 9 superiority, which I see is working out for them REAL well at the moment), exactly what the plan at Fairfax is?
The operating margins on the SMAGE are a “couple of percent”. And you’re going to lose at least another 20% of your classified advertising next year. That makes the mastheads unprofitable. Faced with decreased revenue you will be forced to cut costs further, but that is not a limitless exercise.
I am just a smart guy who understand the media business. And the SMAGE is not something I would invest YOUR money in.
But the delicious irony of all this is the head in the sand attitude of the people who work at Fairfax. When this thing falls over (and it will), it’s going to be catastrophic.
News is better placed. Basically because they have traditionally had 2/10 of bugger all of Fairfax’s classified advertising marketshare per masthead. On aggregate News may have more classified advertising but it’s spread over many titles and they have been forced to build a more efficient publishing model that is less reliant on classified advertising per title.
Fairfax on the other hand has had the rivers of gold and the internet is going to kill it. What people fail to take into account is that a successful classified advertising business needs lots of other classifieds around it. The decline of classifieds is not linear. It’s simple. I place my classified because there are loads of other classifieds around it and ipso facto there must be lots of buyers reading it. Once you reach the tipping point almost all will go at once. I don’t think Fairfax is too far from that point. In fact, the only classified advertising that is saving them is vendor paid advertising. And that is an entirely different kettle of fish. Vendor paid advertising allows your friendly local real estate agent/recruitment agent to place large ads using their client’s money. There is an enormous amount of wastage in those ads, as their primary purpose is not to sell a house/fill a job. It is to promote the Real Estate or recruitment company. And consumers are wising up to it. Think about it. Why do most houses in Sydney get sold by auction? Becasue by LAW you have to pay for the advertising of the property in advance. It’s a sweet deal for the agents!
Anyway like I said. My comments are not a rant as much my way of explaining to the simple folk like “Media Analysts” at investment banks just how they are living in delusion land.
But please Peter. Explain to me how I am wrong and how this strategy will work?
28 May 09
6:56 pm
Fairfax! Don’t lose your standing as the largest “handheld” data provider.Otherwise it would mean no more mornings in the sun, toast in hand, a cappuccino, and my favourite boardsheet spreadout before me. It’s always been my respite from technological gadgetry.
28 May 09
10:23 pm
Carrob
I guess I wouldn’t describe myself as a “smart guy” so I hope you’ll just bear with me here…
Maybe I’m missing something, but I didn’t see this report as having been written by Fairfax…it’s an analyst report. And I think they were talking about 10 years down the road. Who the hell knows what anything to do with media will look like then.
I don’t know of anyone at Fairfax who believes people will pay for news content online (except maybe the folks at AFR, but that’s another story). And I think everyone also agrees that the newspapers need to survive, even if they are in a different form, which I think is likely.
But I am somewhat mystified by the vilification directed at the Fairfax websites – they attract the biggest audiences and continue to grow traffic, they have the longest time on site and pretty much everything you get in the paper you can get online (in addition to all the tabloid stuff that people seem to freak out about). It’s fair to question the business model of free content, but from a consumer perspective, what’s the problem?
28 May 09
11:17 pm
M,
Understand what you are saying, but my scarcasm is directed (in equal parts) to investment bank analysts who write these reports and Fairfax managers who believe in them.
I am not villifying Fairfax’s websites. The fairfax websites are OK. I don’t hate them. They are about as good as most other newspaper websites worldwide. In an Australian context they are very good. I am simply saying that as of yet, no Newspaper that has closed has managed to hold on to their online audience as the print edition closes.
I am not some online evangalist or rabid newspaper lover. I am, at heart a publisher. And as a publisher I can only see a broken publishing model with the SMAGE. I would love to see Fairfax adjust to the new reality of newspaper publishing but fear that this is unlikely to happen in the case of Fairfax.
If a mumbrella reader can come up with an example of a newspaper that has managed to grow it’s audience share when the print edition closed I would like to hear of it. My point is that the online brand benefits enormously from the offline brands presence. It’s the newsagency marketing, it’s seeing other people reading it. It’s the logos that are everywhere. The effect that these offline activitie have on the online brand that helps it’s growth. If you were to pay for this sort of promotion for an online brand only you would probably come up with a value of (say) up to $100M a year. That income would need to be recouped online.
I cannot do anything but question the ability of a newspaper to hold this audience if the print edition dies.
It will be a tragedy if the fairfax newspapers die. But the only way out for Fairfax that I see is to be able to run the company with at least 20% less print revenue for the business. And for Fairfax I fear that would be a bridge too far.
All that brings about this clutching at straws speculation. Bottom line we live in a world where the amount of content on the net doubles every six months. Online yields will continue to fall in this all supply and no demand scenario. Which is what breeds the tabloid nature of the faifax websites in relation to their more staid and measured print editions. So people look at other revenue streams, such as charging for online content. Which we all seem to agree that at present there is no value proposition for that.
Which leads me back to my original point. In a world of rich online media Fairfax are not providing the sort of rich, online content that consumers MAY pay for.
And if it’s news? The ABC will do it better. For free.
29 May 09
1:09 pm
The only way paying online for news is going to work is if all the media companies do it at the same time.
The question is HOW?
Surely News Ltd wants to make money online as badly as Fairfax, but both are scared that the second they start charging everyone will just go to the free online paper in their market.
Then even if you get the big media outlets to be on the same page and charging similar rates at the same time, you still have all the small start ups that would compete.
I don’t think anyone has figured out a business model here that will work.
29 May 09
1:22 pm
And of course, even if the major publishers got together to do that (one subs passport that does for multiple sites?) that would look dangerously like a cartel and attract the attention of regulators.
29 May 09
2:04 pm
With newspaper profits dropping rapidly, it’s no surprise publishers are looking for alternatives. However I don’t think online paid subscriptions are the way to go. I agree with the previous posts – why would people pay to get information when they can go to another online source and get exactly the same news for free.
I’m standing up for the print media on this one. In my opinion, a society without newspapers is simply wrong. Fairfax and the other major publishers should be doing all they can to revive public interest in reading newspapers – not just speculating to throw in the towel because profits have slumped.
On the other hand, perhaps it’s time that the government stepped in on this one to prevent newspapers sliding into oblivion. The French government put forward the scheme to offer free newspaper subscriptions to everyone who turns 18 years old. Maybe the Australian government should look into a similar scheme which would revive the newspaper industry and prevent publishers from packing up shop and running to the internet ?
29 May 09
4:17 pm
The Government is never going to subsidise newspapers, Gemma, and why?
Because the Government hates newspapers. Newspapers hold Governments to account more than any other news source. They have the space to do the in-depth reporting that makes Governments look bad.
Those in power are crying crocodile tears over newspapers. Once they’re gone, pollies will have much more of a free kick all round.