Mobile Impact: Citizen Journalism

Advances in mobile technology and the continued proliferation of mobile devices will mean a greater boon for citizen journalism. The idea behind citizen journalism, also known participatory journalism, is that individuals with no professional journalism training play an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analyzing and disseminating news and information. Mobile technology is opening up more channels of participation for people (aka citizens) who have been marginalized for lack of access to a public media sphere.  

Mobile phone subscriptions in the world are estimated to reach four billion by the end of 2008. Mobile communication hardware is growing cheaper, smaller, and more portable. Mobile technology is offering users hand-held technological convergence. The masses now have access to communication devices that can record a live broadcast, photograph or videotape an event, conduct interviews, write articles or conduct a survey or poll, all of which can immediately published to a global audience. .

The power to collect and distribute information used to belong only to media companies – a rigid, expensive and profitable information system of “one-to-many.” Mobile technology has broken down those barriers, giving all users read/write access to the larger information world – an affordable, open information system of “many-to-many.” 

So if “many to many” is the new model, citizen journalism backed by the power of mobile technology will continue to challenge the traditional structure and function of news organizations. The type of news being published by citizens ranges from highly personalized content, to groundbreaking news stories or pictures and video, as well as information neglected by mainstream media. Individuals with mobile devices are capturing ‘news’ in real or close-to-real time, often faster than professional journalists. This will continue to happen with greater frequency. For many people in the world, short message service (SMS) is their main news delivery channel, both for receiving information as well as live reporting of information.

Mobile phones are also being used by activists as tools to engage, organize, mobilize, and inform people in advocacy and social action campaigns. For example in 2001, when Philippine President Joseph Estrada was forced from office, he bitterly complained that the popular uprising against him was a “coup de text.” Protests once publicized on coffeehouse bulletin boards can now be organized entirely through text-messaging networks that can reach vast numbers of people in a matter of minutes.

Increased collaboration between traditional news companies and mobile citizen news gatherers can lead to better news coverage overall and ideally, a more informed public. Successful companies will learn to be inclusive. For example, the news content of the successful Northwest Voice newspaper and website in Bakersfield, California comes from its citizens. “We are a better community newspaper for having thousands of readers who serve as the eyes and ears for the Voice, rather than having everything filtered through the views of a small group of reporters and editors,” said Mary Lou Fulton, the publisher.

Serious competition from anyone armed with a decent cell phone and an Internet connection will also force also professional journalists to make better use of mobile technology. The “mobile journalism toolkit” that Reuters and Nokia tested in 2007 should not be a one-time experiment. Mobile phones with cameras, keyboards, small tripods and solar chargers should be required for every professional journalist. If not, how can today’s journalists expect to remain relevant in this new mobile news environment?

 

SOURCES

Bowman, S. and Willis, C. “We Media: How Audiences are Shaping the Future of News and Information.” The Media Center at the American Press Institute: 2003. http://www.hypergene.net/wemedia/weblog.php

Jordan, Mary. “Going Mobile: Text Messages Guide Filipino Protesters.” Washington Post: August 25, 2006. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/24/AR2006082401379.html

Verclas, Katrin. “A Mobile Voice: The Use of Mobile Phones in Citizen Media.” MobileActive.org: November 2008. http://mobileactive.org/mobile-voice-use-mobile-phones-citizen-media

Wikipedia: Citizen Journalism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism

Mobile TV: Today, Tomorrow

I’ve never watch Mobile TV on my outdated phone, but I have spent an hour or so watching YouTube clips with my cousin on her iPhone.

One of my co-workers regularly downloads TV shows to her iPod and watches them while traveling. I can  see the appeal of that, if I was on a long flight or train ride and I didn’t want to cart around a bulky portable DVD player or laptop computer and I wanted to keep my 7-year-old occupied.

I have watched TV shows online, like the whole first season of “Lost.” I’ve also watched entire movies online through Netflix. But I only do that on my laptop or desktop computer.

If I had cheap, easy access to watch these same programs through my tiny screened cell phone, would I? I probably would, occasionally.   

But mobile TV is way behind in the United States. Look at what happened to Mobile ESPN back in 2006. The sports network – backed by the big dollars of Disney – offered potiential users access to awesome live TV content and an engaging interface. But it wasn’t enough. ESPN’s Mobile Virtual Network Operator business failed after only garnering about 30,000 subscribers in about 9 months. The company’s goal was 250,000 subscribers. Scaling back, ESPN Mobile is now offered as an application through other mobile providers such as Verizon.

So why didn’t ESPN’s MVNO get more traction? I think it is the cost has a lot to do with it. The value of such a portable service, no matter what the content, isn’t worth the money in the US market. You need the right phone ($$), the monthly service contract ($$), great bandwidth, lots of battery power and have a such a mobile lifestyle that you rarely get to watch or record a more traditional TV broadcasts. That formula is quite the niche.

TV viewership is declining. Audiences are shifting to online interactive media. And yes, for any TV brand to survive in the future, it has to start migrating to mobile. But consumer information consumption habits of TV content in the US haven’t shifted enough yet. Broadband cable TV, HDTV, TIVO, on-demand, premium channels – we are already paying a lot for these services. I know I don’t have enough money left to pay for TV on my phone.

An October 2008 report from Juniper Research, says that although more than 330 million mobile users worldwide will own broadcast TV-enabled handsets by 2013, less than 14% will opt for mobile pay TV services. It’s not necessary.

If anything, it will probably be the porn industry that  figures out how to make mobile TV profitable. Supposedly, the mobile porn market is projected to reach $3.3 billion by 2011 – mostly in Europe and Asia.

“Adult content business models have succeeded in other major delivery media: print, cinema, DVD, pay-per-view TV, etc. There is no reason why the mobile channel should not be equally profitable for adult content industry players,” said Bruce Gibson of Juniper Research.

Mobile is about utility, fun and instant gratification. Mobile is about connecting people with other people.

“They aren’t entertainment boxes waiting to receive content to display to a passive user,” wrote Regina Lynn, a columnist at Wired.com.

So unless mobile TV providers find a way to make mobile TV more than just a mini-sized broadcast, it is not going to become a regular part of everyday life that people will shell out their hard-earned money to have.

Mobile News: New York Times, WTNH-TV

The following is an examination of  mobile products offered by two traditional news organizations.

The New York Times Mobile

The New York Times is the benchmark for news media organizations in terms of depth of content, audience reach, and elegance of design. The newspaper’s mobile products are no different.  The Times’ mobile site drew 500,000 page views in January 2007, grew to 10 million hits by December 2007 and then rocketed to 19 million views in May 2008.

Among the offerings:

•  Headlines or full text of all articles from today’s newspaper, as well as the Sunday New York Times magazine.
• Stock quotes, market indices and charts
• Local movie show times and movie reviews
• Search for articles and Real Estate listings
• Personalized news alerts
• Share articles with friends feature via email or SMS
• Save articles to a personal “Times File”
• Podcasts by favorite New York Times journalists (also available on iTunes) – http://www.nytimes.com/ref/multimedia/podcasts.html
• NYT Crossword puzzle

The Times’ iPhone application is even more comprehensive. It provides all of the standard mobile site offerings, as well as: 

• Offline reading
• Photo view, where users can browse the news in pictures and link to the related articles
• Customization options – select four favorite sections of The Times for one-touch access.

 According to Robert Samuels, the Times’ director of mobile products, the most popular content items are business and politics news, blogs and most-emailed stories.  Text messaging applications continue to grow for specific uses, such as stock listings or weather forecasts, he said.

In a nice example of convergence, the Times’ also connects its different mobile products to each other. For example, text message alerts allow users to easily link to related full text stories on the Times’ mobile site.

When the Times conducted focus groups on what mobile readers wanted, most of the feedback the news organization received is that “users want to have access to everything – specifically what interests them, with the least amount of clicks,” Samuels said.

——–

mobilewtnh.com

This is the mobile version of WTNH-TV Channel 8 in New Haven. The mobile site is created by LSN, Inc – http://www.lsnmobile.com/.  The site is spare, yet functional. The design is hardly engaging, but the content is useful to someone in Connecticut with a mobile device.

Among the offerings:

• Updated news and sports headlines which lead to full text articles from WTNH.com. The articles include small thumbnail images, adding some visual interest, the ability to text message the story to a friend, and a link to the next headline. Many of the articles are from the Associated Press, which tend to be available from dozens of other sources.
• Local weather. Doppler radar and satellite images,  8 day forecasts, and the ability to search by town name or zip code. All nice features.
• I-95 Traffic Cams with updated images. Very useful.
• Storm Team 8 Delays and Closings. This is an excellent offering for a mobile product.
• Connecticut parents can access this information from wherever they are. Although, it seems out of place since it’s not snow season. The same goes for the ski report, which isn’t relevant all year long. They should take it down in the off season.
• Local movie listings, searchable by zip code, and TV listings, although it offers only what’s on WTNH, not other channels (limited value).
• Flight tracker for travelers, including departures & arrivals from Bradley International Airport and Tweed-New Haven Airport (good local content)
•  Connecticut Lottery Results
• Send news tips
• Horoscopes
• Lastly, users can search for cheap gas prices by zip code. This is a super-useful application for Connecticut drivers on the go who want to save a few bucks on gas and need to find a cheap gas station nearby. I might start looking at WTNH mobile now that I know it has this feature.

SOURCES

Chainon, Jean Yves. “US: Mobile news market nearing maturity, according to NYT.” The Editor’s Weblog: August 14, 2008. Retrieved on 9/3/2008 from http://www.editorsweblog.org/analysis/2008/08/us_mobile_news_market_to_be_ripe.php

Emmett, Arielle. “Handheld Headlines.” American Journalism Review: August/September 2008.  Retrieved on 10/17/2008 from http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4582

The YouTube Shift

Just before the end of 2005, programmers Chad Hurley and Steve Chen launched a simple, social website that allowed anyone with an Internet connection to upload video clips and share them. Within a matter of months, YouTube.com had become a phenomenon–recognized as one of the fastest-growing websites in the world. Some 100 million video clips were being viewed daily on YouTube by summer 2006, with 65,000 videos being uploaded onto the site every 24 hours. [1] Further acknowledging YouTube as the medium of the moment, Time Magazine named “You” (referencing YouTube) as the Person of the Year for 2006.[2]

YouTube’s exponential growth in popularity serves as evidence of a revolutionary shift in the media landscape: consumers have become producers. YouTube’s user-friendly interface and social networking elements invited people to create their own communications and distribute it for free to a wide audience. People accepted the invitation en masse.

The videos posted on YouTube include home videos and remixes, personal rants, television excerpts, music videos, movie trailers, commercials and highlights from television history. Most clips are posted by users and increasingly, by producers and networks themselves.

Now, much of the content available on YouTube is frivolous. But some videos are serious, including clips of incidents that have political consequences or document important trends, reveal truths, or spread disinformation, propaganda and lies. The weighty stuff has caused some scholars to question whether video sharing sites like YouTube have the power to bring greater accountability and transparency to governments around the world. “International news operations may have thousands of professional journalists, but they will never be as omnipresent as millions of people carrying phones that record video,” argued Moisés Naím in a January 2007 article in Foreign Policy. [3]

The media business traditionally has been defined by three characteristics: information production and distribution is expensive, arduous, and usually outside of the control of ‘ordinary’ citizens. YouTube has broken that mold. Video sharing sites open doors for democratic participation, both in terms of entertainment production and political communication. And open access/sharing websites like YouTube allow for forms of expression to be distributed that might not otherwise be available to a broader audience. [4]

“The YouTube motto (‘Broadcast Yourself) is indicative of the idea that the system is designed to allow members of the general public to engage in an activity (‘broadcasting’) that was traditionally the domain of large, powerful media corporations,” wrote Christian Christensen, a new media scholar at Karlstad University in Sweden. “The importance of distribution in the media process is often overlooked, yet it is perhaps almost as important as the actual media product itself. What YouTube and other video-sharing websites do is eliminate the need for attracting the interest of the narrow number of distribution companies from the media mix and allow media producers to self-distribute by simply uploading their films straight onto the web.”

The histories of communication technologies have shown time and again that audiences rarely adopt and use media in the ways they were originally envisioned. YouTube was developed by two 20-somethings who wrote code. The audience decided how to use it. “Everyone wants to consume their media the way they want to consume it. You can’t control that,” acknowledged Stefanie Henning, a senior vice president at Fox Television Studios. [5]

YouTube is also unique in that it didn’t rely on traditional multi-million-dollar marketing campaigns to gain popularity. People learned about the site through electronic word of mouth – forwarded email links, blogs, embedding and MySpace profiles. [6] “Users want to be passionate about what their interests are. The habit of sharing them has become a cultural phenomenon,” said Richard Rosenblatt, founder and former chairman of MySpace. [7]

YouTube’s success has been attributed in large part to its easy-to-use, straightforward interface. Users do not need to log-in to view clips, or need to worry about software compatiblity, downloading files or even clicking a play button. Videos begin streaming as soon as the webpage loads, and relational videos are offered to users in a scrollable sidebar, so users can click from one clip to another without doing multiple searches. [8]

Another primary draw of YouTube is its vastness. The more users contribute to YouTube, the more value it acquires. And to be sure, consumers like YouTube because watching and/or participating is free.

Others attest that YouTube exploded into a cultural and business phenomenon over many other video-sharing websites because no other site was as willing to turn a blind eye to illegal content. “What turned it into the world’s most popular video-sharer was a series of widely watched videos that the uploaders didn’t have the legal right to put on the web,” wrote Jaime J. Weinman in MacLean’s magazine in November 2006.

The first “illegal” clip was of the Saturday Night Live sketch “Lazy Sunday.” It became a viral online phenomenon. NBC eventually demanded the skit be removed in February 2006. But by then, an estimated 5 million people had viewed the clip on YouTube, helping the site to become part of the cultural zeitgeist. [9]

The rise of YouTube has contributed to the culture of “the clip.” Specific moments that users want to watch can be searched and accessed without having to watch live broadcasts, make recordings, or wait through commercial breaks. The instantaneity of YouTube panders to the immediacy desires of modern media consumers. [10]

YouTube does have a policy of taking down a copyrighted video if the owner complains. But YouTube does not prescreen videos to make sure they’re not in violation of copyright. It allows any video to be immediately processed and distributed. By the time the owner has it taken down for violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the site has already gotten lots of exposure. And though entertainment companies like Universal have entered into agreements with YouTube to post authorized TV and movieclips, they’re still outweighed by the hundreds of other users still posting unauthorized clips every day. [11]

“You write YouTube a letter and the content gets removed within eight hours,” explained Alan Bell, a Paramount Studios’ executive. “But the site is so vast that the next day it’s up on the platform again, posted by another user.” [12]

Now YouTube’s premise–a website where people freely upload and view video of all sorts–has nothing to do with traditional journalism, but it is teaching mainstream journalists a few things about modern media consumers.[13] Audiences today are part of a networked society, and members of that network want to produce, publish and share their own content. If traditional media companies want to remain relevant, they need to become active members of the network and offer users the opportunity to create and contribute.

One positive for journalists: the YouTube shift is creating a strong demand for reliable guides – individuals, institutions, and technologies that people can trust to help sort through the morass of content and distinguish the good stuff from the bad stuff, the facts from the lies. [14]

References:

1, 4, Christian Christensen, “You Tube: The Evolution of Media?” Screen Education; 2007, Issue 45, 36-40.

2, 6, 8, 10, Lucas Hilderbrand “YouTube: Where Cultural Memory And Copyright Converge.” Film Quarterly 61, no. 1 (October 1, 2007): 48-57.

3, 14. Moisés Naím “The YouTube Effect.” Foreign Policy no. 158 (January 1, 2007): 104,103.

5, 7, 12. Michael Goldstein, “If You Can’t Beat ‘Em…” MediaWeek, vol. 17, Issue 21, (May 21, 2007)

9. Wendy N. Davis, “Downloading a File of Copyright Woes.” ABA Journal 93, (March 1, 2007): 10-11.

11. Jaime J. Weinman “Say hello to the YouTube losers.” Maclean’s, November 6, 2006, 70.

13. Francis Pisani, “Journalism and Web 2.0.” Nieman Reports 60, no. 4 (December 1, 2006): 42-44. http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/06-4NRwinter/p42-0604-pisani.html

*Note: This essay was written by Marie K. Shanahan for a graduate level course at Quinnipiac University in Spring 2008. A collaboratively-edited version of this essay is included in a Wiki called “The New Communication Professional” at http://newcompro.halavais.net.

Blogs and Journalism

“The invention of the Weblog has shoved journalism into a reformation, perhaps a revolution,” wrote Joseph Rago, an assistant editorial features editor at the Wall Street Journal[1].

The majority of blogs on the Internet are simply personal web sites — sites that exist because blogging software is free, readily available, and automates much of the HTML coding needed for web publication[2]. But for many of these “bloggers,” the motivation to use these tools is frustration with the traditional media. Now that the publishing tools are at the people’s disposal, blogs are “giving voice to those who, in the pre-Internet era, may have felt voiceless” [3].

So mainstream journalists and their traditional news organizations can hardly ignore the exponential proliferation of blogs. Blogs are challenging the news industry to embrace new ways of practicing journalism, one that places value on collaboration as a way to re-establish credibility with readers.

There is a line to be drawn between the short-form, diary-type information presented in the average blog and “journalism.” Most weblogs do not provide verifiable sources or original reporting. Most weblogs do not present news of interest to the broader public or adhere to an ideal of objectivity and fairness. Rather, the typical blog is personal, laced with a tone of informality, aimed at a niche audience and deeply opinionated.

“We rarely encounter sustained or systematic blog thought – instead panics and manias, endless rehearsings of arguments put forward elsewhere; and a tendencies to substitute ideology for cognition,” criticized Rago of Wall Street Journal[1].

But despite the news industry’s displeasure with blogs and typical bloggers, almost all major news organizations now feature professional journalist-driven blogs of their own. Seasoned journalists are using blogs to expand their own writing repertoire in the days of shrinking news hole. Others use the self-serve publication software to expand on their regular news stories, provide live ‘breaking news’ updates or eyewitness accounts, to express opinions, start conversations, and, for those who know how to blog well, build community.

Blogs are able to break down many of the existing barriers between journalists and the public because they propel journalists into a larger community where “a posting is picked up and passed from one blogger to the next, each adding community and expanding the discussion”[4]. Instead of following the highly-structured narrative of print journalism, blog writing style is more informal and approachable, inviting the reader to participate [5].

Hyperlinking is a fundamental aspect of blogging, and it is being done by journalist bloggers. Good journalists weave together information from many sources to make a bigger whole and to provide perspective. Hyperlinking allows journalist bloggers to directly link to online resources. Linking to numerous primary sources allows writers to give context to complex stories. Hyperlinking provides a level of transparency that is impossible with a printed news story. Willing readers can determine for themselves whether the subject matter has been accurately represented[6].

According to Rebecca Blood, author of “The Weblog Handbook,” “Bloggers who reference, but do not link material that might, in its entirety, undermine their conclusions, are intellectually dishonest.” Not surprisingly, blogs serve as a corrective mechanism for bad journalism. Sloppy reporting and mistakes are likely to be quickly publicized and passed around the blogosphere. The ever-watchful eye of the blogosphere is nudging the print media to pursue more balanced sourcing outside the traditional halls of government and corporations[7].

“By widening the disclosure circle through information sharing, Weblogs along with other Internet mechanism, have contributed to the truth-finding process,” observed Paul Andrews, a columnist and blogger at the Seattle Times[8].

Journalist bloggers are also taking on the role of “conversation leaders.” A blog entry is a “stub for conversation,” according to Vincent J. Maher, lecturer in new media studies at Rhodes Univ., S. Africa. News reports, generally, also start a lot of conversations. Blogging allows that conversation leader role to become more explicit. Because they offer instant interactivity, blogs engendering dialogue and exchanges[9]. Journalist bloggers can guide their conversations by being active in the dialog, linking to additional sources, sifting through new information, aggregating, encouraging good contributions, discouraging bad ones, and highlighting smart ideas from the public. What the public has to say about what’s being written on a blog is regarded as just as important as what the professional journalist wrote. Readers opinions, posted publicly, add value to the blog as a whole.

“Journalists bloggers can essentially work with citizen journalists to enrich news stories with the perspectives of “everyday Joes and Janes, who offer more voices, more texture to public debate,” wrote Jose Vargas in a Nov. 2007 article in the Washington Post.

Some mainstream journalists have even used blogs to “float” story ideas before the public and get reader input on how to pursue them[10]. Andrews, the Seattle Times blogger, observed that “in the sense that many minds contribute to greater understanding, blogs are helping journalism expand from a centralized, top-down, one-way publication processes to the many-hands, perpetual feedback loop of online communications”[11].

Journalistic blogging is taking on new forms, too, such as microblogging. Some mainstream news organizations are now using a social networking website called Twitter to text message 140-character-maximum reporting ‘updates’ from the field.

“One of the things were are supposed to do a journalists is take people where they can’t go,” John Dickerson, chief political correspondent for the online magazine Slate, told the New York Times[12]. “[Microblogging] is much more authentic, because it is really from inside the room.”

Microblogging often amounts to about two sentences of information, presented with typos and incomplete sentences. But it has been called “genuine” and at times “enlightening” because it takes advantage of the immediacy of the web and mobile information and communications technology (ICT), and taps into the curiosity and impatience of modern information consumers [13].

But blogging by professional journalists does not come without problems, and risks. Bloggers can’t help but thrive on their opinions and the medium is fast and furious. Less rigorous editing, if any at all, is the norm because of the web’s immediacy. Readers will not perceive a difference between a news organization’s online blog post and a story that is printed. Weblogs maintained and written by professional journalists at traditional news organizations will be judged as “journalism” if they uphold the same standards as the entire organization[14].

‘Behaving in a manner that safeguards the integrity of the news institution and avoids real or perceived conflicts of interest is central to the compact between a journalist and his employer,” wrote Brian Toolan, former editor of The Hartford Courant[15]. “Journalists should operate in ways that don’t display bias or predisposition. These are ethical considerations, not legal ones, but they are central to the conduct of journalism.”

References:

1. Rago, Joseph. The Blog Mob. Wall Street Journal, (December 20, 2006). Eastern Edition.

2. Andrews, Paul. Is Blogging Journalism? Nieman Reports. Vol. 57. No. 3 (Fall 2003): 63-64.

3. Vargas, Jose Antonio. Storming the News Gatekeepers; On the Internet, Citizen Journalists Raise Their Voices. The Washington Post. (November 27, 2007).

4, 5, 10. Grabowicz, Paul. Weblogs Bring Journalists Into A Larger Community. Nieman Reports. Vol. 57. No. 3: 74-76.

6. Blood, Rebecca. Weblogs and Journalism: Do They Connect? Nieman Reports. Vol. 57. No. 3 (Fall 2003): 61-63.

7. 8, 9, 11. Andrews, Paul. Is Blogging Journalism? Nieman Reports. Vol. 57. No. 3 (Fall 2003): 63-64.

12, 13. Cohen, Noam. Campaign Reporting in Under 140 Taps. New York Times. Jan. 21, 2008, Late Edition. C3.

14. Howell, Deborah. A Blog’s Blast Damage. The Washington Post, (February 11, 2007). Final Edition. http://www.proquest.com/ (accessed February 2, 2008).

15. Toolan, Brian. An Editor Acts to Limit a Staffer’s Weblog. Nieman Reports. .Vol. 57. No. 3 (Fall 2003): 92-93

*Note: This essay was written by Marie K. Shanahan for a graduate level course at Quinnipiac University in Spring 2008. A collaboratively-edited version of this essay is included in a Wiki called “The New Communication Professional” at http://newcompro.halavais.net.

Marketing to the Long Tail

A powerful new model has emerged within the economics of e-commerce, observed Chris Anderson in his 2004 Wired magazine article, “The Long Tail.” [1] Today’s consumers have highly-individualized tastes that include more than just mainstream fare. With the help of foresighted, all-inclusive online retailers, people are getting what they want: offbeat movie rentals from Netflix, obscure books from Amazon.com, indie music downloads from iTunes, and outrageously specific auctions from eBay.

The long tail theory asserts that consumers are willing to seek out those niche products that appeal to their innermost sense of self. [2] Long tail retailers are first attracting people with their prominent mainstream offerings, and then keeping them clicking and buying with the obscure. These online purveyors combine infinite shelf space and unlimited selection with real-time information about buying trends and public opinion. Recommendations – generated by either human editors or genre databases – drive demand deeper into vast catalogs of choices.

“Everyone’s taste departs from mainstream somewhere, and the more we explore alternatives, the more we’re drawn to them,” Anderson wrote.

Niche markets have become big business. Where marketers once ignored the “tail” because they did not have the means to make obscure products available to their audiences, the internet is allowing companies to reach well-defined micro-markets. The limitations of distribution costs and shelf space have ceased to exist. Successful online retailers are now making just as much money from “esoteric” purchases as they are from mainstream “hits” [3].

Make everything available. “Almost anything is worth offering on the off chance it will find a buyer,” Anderson recommended.

But the more products retailers make available, the harder it can become for consumers to sift though the choices to find the product they want. People will be overwhelmed and less likely to buy if the catalog is poorly organized. So it is imperative that long tail retailers create user-friendly web sites with interfaces that are easily navigable and provide intiutive search tools to facilitate ’self-discovery’ of products [4].

There are three other long tail forces that have become prevalent. First, the tools of production have been open-sourced, giving the masses the ability to make their own products and media. Second, The tools of distribution have also been ‘democratized.’ EBay, for example, allows any user to reach millions of potential customers by listing a product on its web site. And third, supply and demand have been connected. Consumers can be introduced to new products and drive demand for them through recommendations, electronic word-of-mouth, blogs or customer reviews. [5]

Long tail success seems to boil down to a finely-tuned “open network of more.” So as consumer attitudes and expectations shift, so must marketing strategies. Marketers are dealing with a networked public. As such, the principles of the long tail must also be applied to the marketing of the long tail.

Marketers should use all possible venues to get a message in front of the intended audience. Marketing is being made “viral” with the diffusion of information about a product and its adoption over the network.[6] Companies can find new opportunities for “customer retention” and “lifetime value” by applying the concepts of dialogue marketing and network-building. Traditionally, most companies have believed that 80 percent of their business came from 20 percent of their customers. However, by applying long tail relationship-building principles, companies can do a better job of retaining all customers, specifically those customers who are not in the top 20 percent of revenue-producers. [7]

Word-of-mouth marketing is especially notable in a long tail world. Word-of-mouth exchanges are no longer restricted to small-group interactions between individuals. Consumers are using the internet as a personal publishing tool and sharing their experiences and opinions regarding products and/or services with anyone and everyone through emails, message boards, reader recommendations and/or blogs.

Blogs are able to quickly spread information at the grassroots level. They are open to frequent widespread observation, and “offer an inexpensive opportunity to capture large volumes of information flows at the individual level.” And within the blogosphere, sharing discussion of a new and interesting topic with others in one’s immediate social circle may bring pleasure or even increased status to that individual. [8]

Marketing strategies for products and services can incorporate the all-inclusive nature of the long tail. Marketers are continuing to use traditional public relations methods, such as press releases and media kits sent to mainstream media journalists, as well as garnering the attention of influential people within a community who can really help boost the exposure of a product. Marketers should not abandon paid advertising in mainstream media – newspapers, radio, television, billboards, as well as in online media such as Google ads and banner ads on target-audience and genre-specific web sites. Any product or organization should also have its own web site, serving as its public face to the world.

But to tap the long tail audience, marketers have to expand upon what they’ve done in the past. Consumers are showing increasing resistance to traditional forms of advertising such as TV or newspaper ads. When it comes to niche products, using a traditional advertising approach is impractical and probably not very effective. Long tail marketing is more feasible because it exploits existing social networks by personalizing the experience for customers and encouraging them to share niche product information with their friends and the world-at-large. Targeted marketing at networked virtual communities is more advantageous both to the merchant and the consumer, who will benefit from learning about new products.[9]

Movies, for example, take advantage of this type of marketing. Movie trailers and film photo galleries are made available on the official movie web sites. The same marketing assets are also distributed to mainstream media groups such as newspapers, niche web sites such as IMDB.com, and social networking sites such as YouTube and MySpace. Fan web sites, particularly fan bloggers, also play a big part in the marketing. Marketers are tapping into a highly-captive audiences and allowing the network of fans to play a part in the development and release of films. This niche audience — a networked community — can build even more momentum and resonance for a product.

References:

Chris Anderson, “The Long Tail,” Wired Magazine 12, no. 10 (October, 2004).

Rick Ferguson, Kelly Hlavinka. “The long tail of loyalty: how personalized dialogue and customized rewards will change marketing forever.” The Journal of Consumer Marketing 23, no. 6 (September 20, 2006): 357-361. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0736-3761.htm

David Meerman Scott. “Chase the Long Tail to the Next Frontier.” EContent, September 1, 2006, 48. http://www.proquest.com/ (accessed February 28, 2008).

Erik Brynjolfsson, Yu Jeffrey Hu, Michael D. Smith “From Niches to Riches: Anatomy of the Long Tail.” MIT Sloan Management Review 47, no. 4 (July 1, 2006): 67-71. .

“PROFILE: What is the ‘long tail’?” Brand Strategy, March 12, 2007, 19.

Jure Leskovec , Lada A. Adamic , Bernardo A. Huberman, The dynamics of viral marketing, Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Electronic commerce, p.228-237, June 11-15, 2006, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. Also, ACM Transactions on the Web, 1, 1 (May 2007). http://www-personal.umich.edu/~ladamic/papers/viral/viralTWeb.pdf (accessed February 28, 2008).

Rick Ferguson, Kelly Hlavinka. “The long tail of loyalty: how personalized dialogue and customized rewards will change marketing forever.” The Journal of Consumer Marketing 23, no. 6 (September 20, 2006): 357-361. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0736-3761.htm

Gruhl, D., Guha, R., Liben-Nowell, D., and Tomkins, A. “Information Diffusion Through Blogspace.” In Proceedings of the 13th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW’04), May 2004, pp. 491–501. http://people.csail.mit.edu/dln/papers/blogs/idib.pdf (accessed February 28, 2008).

Jure Leskovec , Lada A. Adamic , Bernardo A. Huberman, The dynamics of viral marketing, Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Electronic commerce, p.228-237, June 11-15, 2006, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA . Also, ACM Transactions on the Web, 1, 1 (May 2007). http://www-personal.umich.edu/~ladamic/papers/viral/viralTWeb.pdf (accessed February 28, 2008).

*Note: This essay was written by Marie K. Shanahan for a graduate level course at Quinnipiac University in Spring 2008. A collaboratively-edited version of this essay is included in a Wiki called “The New Communication Professional” at http://newcompro.halavais.net.

Horse Drawn Carriage Ride

Final video project for my Media Imaging & Sound Design class: a 90-second news/feature story with on-air interviews. I did mine on a holiday horse-drawn carriage ride through historic Old Wethersfield, Conn.

Architecture Video

The assignment: shoot, edit and add a soundtrack to a video that features a piece of architecture. I did my piece on the Phoenix Co. headquarters in Hartford, Conn. The two-sided building is more commonly referred to as the “boat building.” (Music provided by www.freeplaymusic.com)

Remix That Video

Before the 2007 MTV Video Music Awards aired on cable television, the show’s producers announced that the network would broadcast the ceremony only once in its traditional linear form. Any future TV broadcasts of the VMAs would be ‘remixed’ versions of the show, producers said, as created by viewers and/or MTV.

The change in how MTV produced and distributed its annual awards spectacle this year serves as a key example of how traditional broadcast video is being influenced by the popularity and ‘personalization’ aspects of Internet distributed video.

On MTV’s website, viewers aren’t forced to watch the awards show in its original 2-hour broadcast TV format. MTV repurposed the content for online, dividing up the show into separate, 2- to 4-minute video segments. The short video clips can be accessed by viewers in any order and at any time, as well as multiple times.

Now, the Internet-distributed video segments don’t look nearly as good as they did originally on the TV broadcast, especially if you saw it on a big screen plasma high definition television. Online, the videos display in a relatively small window (400 x 300 pixels) embedded on a HTML page, accessed by an Internet browser.

But by putting all of the scenes from the Video Music Awards online, including clips that can only be seen on the website, MTV significantly expanded its potential viewing audience and handed users some control over how and when they can view the content.

TV versus Internet: Production Values

Audiences consume Internet-distributed streaming video differently than traditional broadcast TV. Watching online video tends to be a private viewing experience, while TV viewing can be communal.

“My relationship with television is different from my relationship with the Internet. While I’ll catch an occasional news clip online, I don’t cozy up for extended viewing in front of my laptop,” wrote Jennifer Woodard Maderazo, a media blogger at PBS.org, in August 2007. “Lazing on the couch with a remote control is much more enjoyable than hunching over a desk and maneuvering a mouse to make things happen. Video clips stop, connections time out, sound turns choppy and I end up turning off the computer and turning back to my trusty television, which lets me lean back comfortably and effortlessly rather than forward.”

Traditional TV has its advantages, especially with high definition televisions (HDTV) becoming standard. Watching HDTV can be an amazing experience – lifelike, detailed pictures with stereo surround sound. Production values are high in this medium, since HDTV viewers expect perfect quality video, incorporating more types of shots and quicker edits, finely polished. They also expect it to be seamless – not 2 to 4 minute clips that stop and start – and viewable on a huge screen, ideal for collective viewing.

But traditional broadcast video as a communication form is limited. It is one-sided and passive. It doesn’t give the audience any choices. Internet-distributed video can be digitized to take advantage of the strengths of computing, such as searching and linking, to enhance understanding and usability of the material. Online video can also be wrapped with user-controlled applications so the audience can be active, communicate and share content with each other. This participation and personalization may make for a better overall experience, despite less-than-perfect video quality.

Video that will be accessed in a tiny window on a computer monitor or mobile device needs to be produced with those parameters in mind, so the picture quality, sound quality and file size are optimized. Lynch & Horton’s Web Style Guide suggests the following guidelines to tailor video for Internet distribution:

• Shoot close-ups. Wide shots have too much detail to make sense at low resolution.

• Shoot against a simple monochromatic background whenever possible. This will make small video images easier to understand and will increase the efficiency of compression

• Avoid zooming and panning. These can make low frame-rate movies confusing to view and interpret and can cause them to compress poorly

• Use a tripod to minimize camera movement. A camera locked in one position will minimize the differences between frames and greatly improve video compression.

• When editing your video, don’t use elaborate transitional effects offered by video editing software, such as dissolves or elaborate wipes, because they will not compress efficiently and will not play as smoothly on the Web.

• If you are digitizing material that was originally recorded for video or film, look for clips that contain minimal motion and lack essential but small details. Motion and detail are the most obvious shortcomings of low-resolution video.

There are also factors of compression (codecs) and formats for consider, so Internet streaming video looks good, sounds good and be accessed by the widest possible audience.
There’s also the issue of cost.

With traditional broadcast TV, new viewers tuning in don’t cost the broadcaster anything. But webcasting has a price attached. Digital media files are very large, requiring huge amounts of server space. According to Lynch & Horton’s Web Style Guide, one second of uncompressed NTSC (National Television Standards Committee) video, the international standard for television and video, requires approximately 27 megabytes of disk storage space. Producing and distributing large amounts of popular video over the Internet may require a big investment in server infrastructure.

The landscape of consumers watching video really big on a HDTV screen and really small on a iPod means that video producers have to be willing to follow MTV’s example and ‘remix’ how they work to provide the best product to audiences no matter how or when they choose to watch.

References

Creating & Delivering Podcasts & Other Downloadable Media. 2006, June 27. Akamai. Retrieved 9/12/2007 -http://www.akamai.com/cfcgi/forms/podcasting_whitepaper.html

. Lynch & Horton. 2004, March 2. Web Style Guide: 2nd Edition. Retrieved 9/12/2007 – http://www.webstyleguide.com/multimedia/strategies.html

Maderazo, Jennifer Woodard. 2007, August 10. “Is the Future of Television Online? Not Yet.” Mediashift blog | PBS.org. Retrieved on 9/12/2007- http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2007/08/tvshiftis_the_future_of_televi.html

“MTV shakes up Video Music Awards.” 2007, September 7. Associated Press. Retrieved 9/12/2007 – http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20644178/

Siklos, Richard and Carter, Bill. 2006, December 18. “Old Model Versus a Speedster.” New York Times. Retrieved 9/12/2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/18/technology/18youtube.html?ex=1324098000&en=c4674e65ba242ce4&ei=5090&

Go ahead. Regulate me.

If you wanted to go see the pros play golf this week at the Travelers Championship in Cromwell, Conn. you had to do it without your cell phone. PGA tour event organizers banned all cell phones, PDAs and other electronic devices from the tournament regardless of “silent mode.”

In return, officials set up sponsored “AT&T call centers” in three locations at the tournament, offering spectators free local and long-distance calls, as well as computer terminals for checking email.

Why the total ban on electronic devices? It’s not hard to surmise an answer. Tournament organizers probably would like spectators’ full attention. They don’t want to have to compete with the private social and work life that everyone seems to carry around with them inside their cell phone or blackberry device.

And the PGA tour certainly does not want its players or spectators to have to suffer an endless stream of interruptions from individuals’ mobile ICTs – whether it be ringtones going off at crucial moments or people conducting “private yet public” conversations on the golf course.

The ban can be viewed an example of how society is realizing that it needs to regulate mobile ICTs and their use in public spaces, because individuals aren’t responsible or capable enough to do it themselves.

Clive Thompson’s 2005 New York Times article, “Meet the Life Hackers” describes how nowadays to perform an office job, “your attention must skip like a stone across water all day long, touching down only periodically.”

Workers, like me, use computers to multitask. I, for example, have no less than six windows open on my computer screen at any one time. Right now, as a write this in Microsoft Word, I also have four internet browsers open – two for my full time job at courant.com, one for this class on Blackboard and one for my student email account. I’m also running my work Outlook email and Photoshop CS. Occasionally, I’ll open up another browser to search Google or I’ll open up Notepad to take some notes.

“Our software tools were essentially designed to compete with one another for our attention, like needy toddlers,” Thompson wrote.

Also, to offer full disclosure, I’m taking a short break from my full-time job duties today to write this essay. And I’m not working in the office today. I’m at my parents’ house, connecting remotely to my office computer using my laptop and Wi-Fi. My cell phone is lying on the desk nearby.

My daughter keeps coming into the room where I’m working to ask me questions. My co-workers are also emailing me questions. My best friend just called me on my cell phone a few minutes ago to tell me to watch this funny video she found on the Internet.

Now, what I was just doing? Oh yeah, I’m arguing a point here. My attention, like so many other people, is constantly being diverted from one task to the next or interrupted by one form of communication or another. There’s the telephone, email, radio, TV, SMS, the web, and good old fashioned face-to-face.

During the work week, I’m often not willing to “isolate” myself by turning off one of these routes of communication. Most people aren’t these days. We’re addicted to the novelty of it all, even though it stresses us out. I keep my email program open all the time because don’t want to miss an important work message, (and hopefully that cute guy I’ve been emailing will write back to me today). I keep my cell phone on all the time, including when I’m driving in the car, because my family or friends might need to reach me in an emergency, or because I might feel like making a call.

I’m always on, always connected. And if I went to the Travelers Championship this week, I’d want to take my cell phone with me onto the course. The tourney organizers, rightfully, aren’t giving people a choice. That’s probably a good thing. If they don’t manage the crowd’s inherent desire to stay connected, most people will only give “partial attention” to the golf.

Until the general public is willing to “turn off” and practice responsible, respectful use of mobile ICTs in public spaces, we need someone else to regulate their use for us.

Citations:

Thompson, Clive (Oct. 16, 2005). “Meet the life hackers.” New York Times, Section 6, p. 40. Retrieved 2/20/2006, http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/printdoc

“Travelers Championship: A Fan’s Guide,” (2007) Courant.com. Retrieved 6/17/2007, http://www.ctnow.com/events/hce-fansguide0617.artjun17,0,7973634.story

SMS Connections

Louise Horstmanshof and Mary R. Power wrote in their 2005 paper, “Mobile Phones, SMS and Relationships” that people are embracing SMS (Short Message Service) communication because it is quick, efficient, cheap and convenient. I agree. More than ever before, SMS is allowing human beings to maintain social and familial connections both locally and overseas.

When it comes to text messaging using my mobile phone, I’m mainly attracted to its efficiency. I consider myself to be very “time poor.” Between work, motherhood, grad school and taking care of my never ending list of daily household tasks, I have little time left during the work week to socialize with people in person or chat on the phone.

And I hate calling people on the phone when my attention is overly divided – screaming child in the background, doing work on my computer, etc. It’s rude and a waste of time for both parties.

SMS and email allows me to “make a connection and affirm my relationships” (Horstmanshof & Power, 33) with friends and family, according to my schedule.

My free time lately seems to only come along late at night – a time of day when it would be inappropriate for me to call someone’s house. So writing email or text messages, regardless of the hour, lets people know I am thinking of them. It helps me maintain friendships that otherwise might have ended due to lack of communication.

SMS is often used by those who feel like making contact, but don’t want to become engaged in a long oonversation. (Horstmanshof & Power, 46)

Now, should SMS take the place of old-fashioned face-to-face or telephone conversation? Absolutely not.

Talking to someone in person, seeing the expression on their face, looking them in the eye, hearing their voice and their tone – that kind of communication can’t be replaced by SMS or email. Despite all the technology that consumes our attention these days, we are still human beings, not machines. “Being” with other people is essential to the human experience.

Citations:

Horstmanshof, Louise & Power, Mary R. (2005). “Mobile Phones, SMS, and Relationships: Issues of access, control, and privacy.” Australian Journal of Communication, 32(1), pp. 33-52.

Why people use media

Diversion: escape from routine or problems; emotional release

Personal relationships: companionship; social utility

Personal identity: self-reference; reality exploration; value reinforcement

Surveillance (forms of information seeking)

- from “McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory: 5th edition,” 2005