OK, it was just a very flimsy excuse to use a Queen-orientated blog heading, but I'm going to use it anyway.
It's also not a sin to pay homage to a copywrited document or published work, despite what music companies would like. It also pales into insignificance when compared to what Mr Steve Jobs said last week to the Wall Street Journal about Adobe's flagship interaactive software... Flash (see there was a relevance in the headline somewhere).
Apparently everyone's favourite poloneck wearer took time while at the WSJ to accuse Flash of being a "CPU hog," having "security holes" and a dying technology. Even better he claimed that the task of moving from Flash (perhaps to a much more iPad-friendly HTML5) would be 'trivial'.
There's currently no news on whether the creative and technical folks over that 'The Journal' have stopped laughing yet.....
More details via ValleyWag:
http://valleywag.gawker.com/5474900/what-steve-jobs-said-during-his-wall-street-journal-ipad-demo
Showing posts with label wall street journal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wall street journal. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Newspapers, an epic fail
At the beginning of 2009 I mentioned an animation called EPIC, that put forward a view of the future in 2015 where Google and the New York Times went head-to-head in an (errrr... Epic) battle.
Note: I actually found out subsequently via Wikipedia that the movie was made by the Museum of Media History and was originally produced in 2004 and subsequently updated in 2005.
We have witnessed a crumbling newspaper business model, once based upon near-monopolistic retail and classified adverts. And those 'golden days' just aren't likely to make a comeback (ever). Well in 2009 this animation took another step towards becoming realised.
Advertising revenues along with readership numbers have dropped further and so have the profits & staff of those papers along with them. The only difference worth pointing out is that the battle this year wasn't taken up by the New York Times - as suggested in EPIC, but by News Corp (owners of the Wall Street Journal).
And now even some of those papers that state their readership is rising aren't selling more newspapers. Apparently since April 1 2009 there have been new auditing rules in the USA that have made it easier for newspapers to count a reader as a paying customer... by counting both their print and digital subscriptions to the same person as two readers! (The Huffington Post explains further here)
But the decentralising of information from newspapers and their mainstream media owners, to millions of the general populace with the ability to publish for free, is just the tip of the iceberg.
What were are really hinting at here is the decentralising of power... and for some that is an opportunity (those prepared to understand and embrace digital democratisation) whilst to others it is a threat (old media owners and those who used the media to control and restrict thought & opinion).
Note: I actually found out subsequently via Wikipedia that the movie was made by the Museum of Media History and was originally produced in 2004 and subsequently updated in 2005.
We have witnessed a crumbling newspaper business model, once based upon near-monopolistic retail and classified adverts. And those 'golden days' just aren't likely to make a comeback (ever). Well in 2009 this animation took another step towards becoming realised.
Advertising revenues along with readership numbers have dropped further and so have the profits & staff of those papers along with them. The only difference worth pointing out is that the battle this year wasn't taken up by the New York Times - as suggested in EPIC, but by News Corp (owners of the Wall Street Journal).
And now even some of those papers that state their readership is rising aren't selling more newspapers. Apparently since April 1 2009 there have been new auditing rules in the USA that have made it easier for newspapers to count a reader as a paying customer... by counting both their print and digital subscriptions to the same person as two readers! (The Huffington Post explains further here)
But the decentralising of information from newspapers and their mainstream media owners, to millions of the general populace with the ability to publish for free, is just the tip of the iceberg.
What were are really hinting at here is the decentralising of power... and for some that is an opportunity (those prepared to understand and embrace digital democratisation) whilst to others it is a threat (old media owners and those who used the media to control and restrict thought & opinion).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)