check out my newest project Sometimesdaily with Amanda Congdon

Amanda UnBoomed

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Dear Old Media (OM),

Although the letter below is written in reference to a specific article, it is not directed to the WSJ in particular and actually The Journal is not even among the OM organizations I find most offensive. There have been a slew of other articles and television news reports which have been much further off the mark.

This letter is the beginning of what may become a series of letters to THE BIG GUY: Old Media (OM). OM is a guy, by the way, in case there was any question.

Dear OM,

While I am flattered, for sure, to be included in the WSJ article, and found it pleasant speaking with its author, John Jurgensen, it smacks of that familiar OM condescension and suffers from a real lack of understanding of this space and its inhabitants. Case in point, this line:

The greatest hope of most Web amateurs is to cross over into "old media" outlets like TV networks and Hollywood.

Really? I know a lot of "web amateurs" and that's not what I am hearing. I would rewrite that line to read: The greatest hope of most Web professionals is to continue working online and to be paid what they are worth while doing so.

Right now... you can make money. But you can't make what you are worth... yet. One year from now I think the whole landscape will be different... we'll see sustainable independent online video projects everywhere we look. Goody!

You're afraid, OM, just afraid. And that's totally legitimate. Media is moving in beautiful and scary and exciting ways. Look at new media (NM) as a challenge, not a threat.

Or, coming at you from another angle, let us in cuz we are coming in anyway. You know it, man. So let's find ways to co-exist in harmony.

NM wants to make friends with you but we want a true friendship... not one of those ones where we get to be your little sister who doesn't make bank... or some lame-o sidekick that gets your runoff.

How long until you take us seriously? Do you have an ETA?

Carson Daly is apparently cool with locking Brookers up and "figuring it out later". OM, OM, OM...tsk, tsk, tsk. You, OM, need to get out of the business of trying to lock people up! As an executive at a major new media empire recently said to me: "ubiquity is the new exclusivity".

P.S. OM, hire better consultants, please... ones that are familiar with this space because they live in it not because they've researched living in it.


  • At 5:59 PM, Blogger kingdom2000 said…

    Ug don't get me started on consultants. Its those that can't do, consult. Ever notice that you rarely find a consultant that has actually worked in the area they are consulting on? They never have the "street" level view so while what they advise is full of the crap that managers eat up, it rarely creates good policy.

  • At 6:00 PM, Blogger OrlieOmegamu said…

    loved it.

  • At 6:22 PM, Blogger globetrottr said…

    My question is how do you suppose that OM hire consultants without compromising the integrity of the NM and emerging distaste to 'selling out' to corporate media? Without a doubt independentcy is taking over, but how can there be a fair trade off of money for newfound success while allowing the NM to 'continue working online' as they wish? I believe that OM won't budge without their name on it and NM won't compromise their integrity, cuz thats NM's underlying character. Might I propose a creation of new 'companies' (sites like amanda's last job), places, that can allow OM to sponsor without namedropping and NM to be paid based on success and hits? OM gets renamed and gets to reinvent itself through its NM participants... just brainstorming.

  • At 6:30 PM, Blogger Mike Macauley said…

    I agree completely. We'll said!

  • At 6:48 PM, Blogger The Villager said…

    While I agree that we are definitely in the early stages of a power shift away from Big Media as the Voice of God - I can't help but think that the online community still is publishing largely "for each other". The big difference between NM and OM, besides the history, is the access to BIG NUMBERS of people that read or consume, but have no stake in the media spaces themselves. I don't hink the blogging community, or the vlog community is there yet - WE are still our our main audience. Of course, this is fine as soon as there are enough of us. No, we don't want to be part of Old Media, we just want their mass audience - then the money will come.

  • At 7:05 PM, Blogger globetrottr said…

    Good point. Could the online community overcome this by meeting OM in its own territory? What about creating a low-budget channel that would broadcast webcasts on say, something like cable. Sponsors would jump to the idea because of the popularity of webcasts. Over time, TV and the internet will become one... so we might as well jump in while the viewership has proven this successful.

    Granted, this would be a tremendous amount of work, but I believe if someone were to put forth the effort, there would be a following that would make it financially successful and professionally well done. If you can't beat em, join em... then beat em.

  • At 7:30 PM, Blogger globetrottr said…

    and of course the same could be said for newspapers, just to cover all OM bases. Like a covering sweetass webcasts and interesting stories, on and off the net.

  • At 8:05 PM, Blogger Justin said…

    I think there's a lot of dispute about what the ultimate goal of NM is; you hit a big nail on the head with the pay-for-your-worth issue, but I think that pod/vidcasting has seen the rise of people who just enjoy what they do and want to spread their joy with others. It's seemed to me that there are three (not necessarily mutually exclusive) areas of NM figures: those who want exposure, those who want to get paid for what they love, and those who want to fix something. I don't think it's a coincidence that a large portion of NM personalities want to reshape how OM has shaped the world thus far; this is the time to do it better.

    I also find it funny that OM is trying to capture NM figures as some sort of "stars of tomorrow" set. One of the advantages of NM is that there will always be new faces, new fads, new perspectives; there will always be the well-known few that people will recognize and remember, but the large majority will be people who the world has never seen.

  • At 8:29 PM, Blogger leron said…

    Amanda is the only person who could have written that letter. The analysis, the attitude, the spark.

    If they print it, I wonder if they'll cut the "OM OM OM" or at least trim out an OM. Their copy editors are pretty persnickety.

    Amanda also nails the problem. Web folk need to figure out how to get paid more, a lot more, not just a good salary for someone here and there but the kind of profit that builds companies. OM has a huge lead, and is run by folks who, as Amanda says, study the life but don't live it. She's optimistic, thinking that the terrain will shift dramatically in a year. I'm thinking five.

    But I'm hoping she's right.

  • At 8:39 PM, Blogger ChrisM70 said…

    Amanda, you wrote:

    "Right now... you can make money. But you can't make what you are worth... yet."

    I agree that the old media and the majority of the public don't give new media enough credit, but if you say you can't make what you are worth yet, then what exactly IS making what you are worth? Enough to pay rent? Making $100,000 a year? Making as much as Connie Chung does while falling off a piano?

    Again, I completely agree that there are a lot of talented people doing fantastic work, but I'm sure almost everyone thinks they don't make what they are worth - regardless of what field they work in.

    I guess my point is this:
    If no one is willing to give you the money you feel you are worth, then you probably aren't worth it.


    With that said, I totally agree that blogging/vlogging podcasting, etc. is going to change EVERYTHING. In the next 10 years, television will be DEAD. The web will swallow television, and those people who are already in NewMedia andhave good ideas and great content will absolutely be able to make a good (if not extravagant) living from it. Also, I love the fact that new media shows like "PhotoshopTV" and "Tiki Bar" can reach such a niche audience and bring people together!


    I am also curious... What would you define as OLD MEDIA? What is NEW MEDIA?

    Can Old Media become New Media? Can it be both?

    I find this whole future of media very interesting - that's why I'm asking the questions!

    Thanks for the forum to speak.

  • At 8:48 PM, Blogger William said…

    In the beginning there was word of mouth. Stories passed down through the generations for the purpose of educating and entertaining. Most listened, many passed on, some challenged and adapted, and a few created new stories.

    In time writing occurred which allowed those with adequate resources to publish in order to have their information read to or by many people. This was ultimately controlled by very few that dictated all content to the many.

    Television... a new media, pushed the concept of a few preaching to the many to its extreme. The many had no means of response within the same realm of technology.

    The new medium of internet has allowed many to publish to many. The most democratic of all information exchange since word of mouth. In time this will become the mainstream and viewership / authorship will reach the threshold to make it profitable to publish on the web. The answer is not to step backward into print or television but to move forward with innovative and informative work.

    The OM is too big, slow, and old to keep up with the NM.

  • At 9:28 PM, Blogger Bryan said…

    Hes a jerk-face

  • At 9:54 PM, Blogger - Terrence said…

    Now that's what I'm talking about Amanda! You hit the nail on the head when you say OM sees the wired way as a threat. A touch of that attitude is certainly seen in the journal article.

    There are new media outlets that are certainly competitive and flourishing as numbers go. I think too many have their eyes on the major three TV networks and thus don't realize that many new media outlets have higher viewership than a lot of established cable channels. Many blogs have greater readership than the circulation of known magazines.

    OM wants to keep a lid on this until he can find a way to pull it under his control, and gather all the keys to the doors to free expression. Otherwise, some regular people might take a real big chunk of the potential OM was planning to hoard for himself!

  • At 10:12 PM, Blogger Kid Jay said…

    This really hits it on the head. I wrote a tiraide on this sort of matter a week or so ago, but its more crass. More of a 'F-you to hollywood' piece. check it out if you'd like

    Keep up the amazing work, Amanda. You're an inspiration to bloggers, vloggers, creative people and people who refuse to be screwed.

  • At 11:46 PM, Blogger Crackpot Press said…


    Stop whining. You got hosed. Welcome to the real world.

    Sure the MSM is going to lump you in with all the other one trick ponies.

    Now is your time to write what you want to write. You have a big mic... rock it.

    Don't get tangled in the muck.


  • At 11:51 PM, Blogger WrongwayStoryteller said…

    Dearest Amanda,

    You hit the nail on the head with this one.

    The problem for the OM is the same as it is for other established technocrats: they are rapidly obsolescing.

    One only need look at the RIAA, MPAA, and TV/cable networks as examples of this. They aren't keeping up with the latest technology, and instead are doing everything in their power to fight change, to retain their stranglehold over the consumer, and maintain whatever miniscule power base they have left. Their days are ultimately numbered, however, and they know it.

    Is it any surprise that members of the OM are threatened by members of NM?

    After all, it's easier to be fearful of something you don't understand, and what you can't "wrap your head around".

    Also, you will notice the tendency in OM which has developed over the last many years-- the sound bite. Everything must be cut-and-dry, in little digestible pieces. The NM really bucks this trend, as it's all about personal empowerment, and the examination of complex issues which cannot necessarily be fully explained or discussed in a sound bite. Again, the OM folks can't wrap their collective heads around this... and are threatened by it.

    And they cannot understand why anyone wouldn't want to be part of OM. Go figure... but would you really want to join the crew of the Titanic?

    Oh, and by the way-- OM could also be female. There is just as much same-sexism in OM, as there is cross-sexism.

    My $0.02.

  • At 5:37 AM, Blogger Tony said…

    OM = Old Man? A ton of great points in there from somebody who has had to deal with that kind of condescension first hand.

  • At 7:29 AM, Blogger WO7 said…

    Amanda...You Go Girl!

  • At 8:33 AM, Blogger rayo said…

    Unfotunatly, OM also means Old Money.
    And NM is No Money (yet)

    Old money is usually used to perpetuate its own existence. What old media outfits are doing is trying to adapt enough of new tech but still using the old philosophy of information controlled by a few distributed to the many with no or few exchange of ideas

    Old media has slowly adapted to the new media of the Internet but it can not adopt New Media's philosophy of two way exhange of information and ideas

    But New media must develop its own business plan. It can't borrow OM business plan or hope OM will support it

    Old media was able to do it on its own. I don't think Gutenburg had a tested business plan when he created the printing press. And usual source of money then (aristocracy & Church) thought his invention was bad for thier business because it informed the peasants

  • At 8:40 AM, Blogger globetrottr said…

    Hmm, one more, then I'll lay off. You've stirred me Amanda. This is good stuff up for debate. At the bottom of the WSJ article, the kind of rap sheet of all the best blogs out there... could this possibly be the next version of how we read news? They broke it down into different categories, much like OM websites now, except they're fun, inspiring and gives the little guys something to shoot for. Someone's gotta cull all the best blogs out there and start a powerhouse. Something to express all of the web's capabilities... screw the TV idea, take your old news job, add in current popular webcasts, and vah-wollah... you got your channel. Spread the hype then wait for the concession phone call from OM.

  • At 9:07 AM, Blogger Mario Persona said…

    No, the OM professionals won't find it easy to understand NM behavior because they have a different way to see the public. OM is done by teams for the crowds, NM is done by individuals to their tribes. In Brazil we have a few cases of good bloggers and vloggers who are being hired by the OM, but it is very clear things change when they talk to the mass.

    The problem is that when you are in NM, you have a very well defined niche and many other "birds of a feather" flocking together with you. Not in OM. Once you are there, you have to compromise because there is money and there are advertisers involved and you have to find the least common denominator to talk to crowds.

    In old times this would be the same as CNN hiring those who nailed their own news on telephone poles (I think there is a name for it in English). What NM can do? Well, it can keep nailing their own work on CNN and WSJ poles. Today it is not yet a time for amalgamation, but it is a good time to get a ride, isn't it? I'm sure Amanda and others will benefit from this free ride on WSJ.

    Mario Persona (from Brazil)

  • At 10:13 AM, Blogger globetrottr said…


    NM tribes have yet to hit the masses. This marks the revolution of media, independent opinion. It's no longer the money calling the shots, it's money following the most honest and unbiased opinion. NM is in a way what OM has been trying to preach, but has had a clouded mind keeping in mind the need to impress. OM wouldn't be if there was no money. NM is (stands)... without money at all. The effort is already there for NM to express itself free from slant, without pay... and it works. This is what people want.

    Free ride/promotion now, evolution of professional opinion tomorrow.

    Brian Newhouse

  • At 10:32 AM, Blogger Jacqué RANTS said…

    what exactly IS making what you are worth? I watch three video blogs a day but wouldn't pay for them, if they wern;'t there I'd do something else. - they're just a free dalliance - you think you're worth hundreds of thousands of dollars to play Loretta?

  • At 10:50 AM, Blogger J.W. said…

    It's all about the living room.

    Right now, you make content, get a fanbase, and then have people visiting your site. That's ad revenue. Minus the cost of bandwidth and production.

    And then, people distribute your content on p2p networks or other hosting sites. That's copyright and legal headaches, possibly even legal costs.

    I'm guessing that the ad revenue is enough to feed a bloke but not buy them a Porsche, and if you want a Porsche, are you really the kind of person who gets what New Media is all about? Hmmm.

    When, eventually, you can turn on your TV, and surf videoblogs with your remote control, as easily and seamlessly as you can surf cable TV channels, then new media will hit the big time. I know, I know, you can tivo certain vlogs (*cough cough*) but it’s not as refined or easy as just turning on the TV and seeing what’s on. It needs to be. And it can be.

    A few problems that have yet to be worked out are:

    How do you get vlog-based channels to have content playing 24/7/365 when there aren't that many vlogs publishing new content on a frequent, regular basis?

    How do you decide how to schedule what, and when (I think this one's the easiest to answer)?

    And how are you going to get vlog-based channels on the TV in an uber-simplistic UI that isn't buried in legal+technical restrictions designed to completely shut out the little guy?

    I think if all those questions get answered and after most people get broadband > 5mbps down, then New Media will become more dominant than Old Media.

    However - I think we're walking a tight rope here, and if we slip a little bit OM will stay right where it is, on top.

    Basically, there needs to be protective legislation, reinforced and upheld in the courts, that will allow for this natural progression. Or else this could all be a big bust.

    That's my opinion, anyway

  • At 11:20 AM, Blogger Hester the Hound said…

    I agree with much of what you say, but I am unclear on whether you are making a distinction between news media and entertainment media. I think that there is, or should be, some distinction between the two. Without that, I think that we run the risk of having organizations that purport to be providing news when in reality they are serving a different agenda entirely. (E.g. Fox News) I think that NM is just as prone to this as is OM.

    It also seems that if NM is going to successfully venture into providing news, there will have to be some way of making NM accountable for what it reports. Otherwise, NM will be an easy target for those looking to criticize it. Directly on point, on Monday night's episode of The Colbert Report Stephen Colbert addressed the online resource Wikipedia. Colbert praised Wikipedia for "wikiality," the reality that exists if you make something up and enough people agree with you - it becomes reality. In my view, this is exactly the M.O. of OM organizations like Fox News. To gain widespread acceptance and respect NM will have to have some form of accountability, at least in the news realm.

    Finally, I think that chrism70 makes a good point that in large part the value of our work is determined by others. We have all seen that ads that offer a $60 value for $19.99. Obviously, if the seller could get $60 for their product they would not choose to sell it for $19.99.

    That's my two cents, but if you act now you came have it for free.

  • At 12:17 PM, Blogger str8curves said…

    OM is coming at you like the BORG. They want to take over and assimilate you. You are a potential user group that they can market to. The problem is that they are not sure how to interact yet. OM serves up "Entertainment, News,Stories,a View, etc." The interactive aspect of NM has them a bit stumped right now. Those that post,are servers, but it is what happens beyond the posting that they do not relate to because that is not a part of their current scene.
    It is my opinion, that the "cross-over" people ( those that work in both worlds ) will be the ones that will do the most to establish what the future will be like. The C-O people will set up the format by which all other deals will be judged against. Right now it is open season, but just how long will it last?

  • At 12:31 PM, Blogger Neantaeus said…

    I think it's pretty funny that as OM entities scurry to increase their web presence, lest they die from want of advertising revenue, their minions still hang on to the illusion of their media's inherent superiority. It's kind of pathetic really.

  • At 1:52 PM, Blogger SteveL said…

    Don't be so naive. In one or two years your "New" media will be "Old" media.
    As far as being paid what your worth, that's easy. Produce something that people would rather watch than whatever's available on 150 cable networks. Would I pay to see four feet running through the woods...nope.

  • At 1:59 PM, Blogger Christian Grant said…

    Dear Amanda,
    Here are a few OM/NM reflections:

    It’s a great idea to write messages to the big guys. I had the same idea a few weeks ago. I decided to email messages directly to the big guys, and sometimes I get replies.

    New media comedy, talk shows and news casts is replacing old media, just like MP3 and iPods replaced CD’s and Walkman. It could take some time though. New media is the future.

    I love the idea that anyone can create and publish content and make it available for everyone.

    You, Google Video, YouTube, and others are accelerating the transformation to video blogging, web casting and IPTV.

    New media tycoons will become as successful or more successful than old media tycoons. New media has lots of money. Examples include Google News, Google Video and. Old media also has money.

    Please let me know what your thoughts are in terms of how to create sustainability for video blogs.



  • At 2:07 PM, Blogger Brian Solis said…

    OM is going to learn this the hard way. It's only a question of when...not if.

    I know several folks who started vlogs for fun who have found a way to make money while staying on course. The process of selling and discovery is gaining incredible momentum. It WILL attract $ and viewers leaving OM to either invest, imitate or die.

  • At 2:17 PM, Blogger Zeke said…

    Amanda, I've been watching RocketBoom each morning for the last year and, because I was away from my office, didn't find that you had left RB until yesterday. (Aarrghh!) I recognize that you are a very talented person and it is unreasonable to hope that you'd stay at RB, and forsake the opportunities before you. But you'll be missed! At the risk of sounding like a 'dad', I hope you'll be careful as you pursue the opportunities and that you'll realize that as your potential is great, so is the potential to be exploited (etc). At your age it is easy to be nieve, optomistic, careless (etc). I hope you'll take advantage of the counsel of your parents. I've enjoyed seeing you on RB very much and I wish you the very best. I'm looking forward to seeing you again at other media 'outlets'. - Dick

  • At 8:21 PM, Blogger danielmcvicar said…

    That's a letter worth writing. I can picture its delivery.

    It will be delivered to an intern at the OM who will stack it with many other letters. Then it will be forwarded down a long hall on a trolley.

    It will get stacked up in a corner and counted. Checked for anthrax.

    In the meantime TPTB at the OM are locking up talent, locking down their territory and trying to get laid.

    And the world goes round.

    As I said at Blogher, the barrier to entry now is negligible. The barrier to quality is higher. And the NM and OM both need to get used to that.

    It's fun and interesting. Thanks for the post.

  • At 11:30 PM, Blogger TechExec said…


    Loved your post and I am a fan of yours. But beware of the old saying:

    "Old age and treachery will always win over youth and skill."

    Your Rocketboom exit proves the old saying still applies.

    I don't claim to know what the truth is about you and Mr. Baron. But, if it looks like a weasel, and it smells like a weasel, it's probably a weasel. Weasel!

    The coming reduction/elimination of Net Neutrality is about Old Media and Old Telecom taking back control from the new people. Old-everything wants that. So, there is no assurance that NM will continue indefinitely in the current direction.

    For example: When discussing Net Neutrality, AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre recently proclaimed "Nobody gets a free ride...It's best if this is worked out on a commercial basis.". Translation: Bandwidth prices are going up. What if the bandwidth required for video became so expensive that websites like Rocketboom could not exist at all without very heavy sponsorship. It would have to go OM-style in order to get that sponsorship and it would become OM in the process. It would probably have to agree to be acquired by OM to operate at all.

    Years ago, a "renegade" named Ted Turner created CNN and scared the OM of the day. Today, CNN is owned by OM Time Warner and Ted is out of the picture. Same for America Online and Steve Case is out. Learn from the past or repeat it. Again.

    Never give up, but you must respect the old and treacherous because they always win.

    You've got a lot of talent and energy that can carry you far. I am looking forward to what you do next.

    All the best...

  • At 6:25 AM, Blogger Jorge Cocompech said…

    OM??? become to NM?? (as a TV star, i don't thing so . .)

    They need a lot of information bou't the new world on the web..
    But.. they want to thing as they can move. .

    I send you a million of strawberries kisses and jaguar hugs . .
    Jorge Cocompech

  • At 8:39 AM, Blogger HenryfromHuntington said…

    How would you characterize "the 9", the daily video cast from Yahoo? When Web 1.0 does Web 2.0 is that OM? Can a video cast distributed by a major portal and sponsored by a large corporation (Pepsi) be NM? Or is NM only if it is a grass roots, started in my basement operation?

  • At 9:53 AM, Blogger rayo said…

    The old and treacherous don't alway win. They win only when the new and skillful give up and sellout. Respect & learn from them but don't be like them. They were never always old and treacherous. They were once new & skillful once also. Time magazine ,which is one of the foundation stones of Time-Warner, was founded by 2 23 year old guys back in 1922. They did not give nor did they sell out.

  • At 10:31 AM, Blogger SteveL said…

    TechExec makes some great points. Before everyone thumbs their nose at "Old Media" you should realize that in two years or so your new media will be old media. I don't think there should even be a distinction. It's all Media, just different delivery systems.
    You shouldn't blame the broadcast media for the content. They put on the air what the audience wants to see. I'm not happy that more people voted for that buffoon on "American Idol" than for any President in our County's history, or that people sit on their asses all day long watching Soaps and Oprah, but that's what they're willing to pay $50 a month in cable cost for. Not four feet walking around in a park (sorry).

  • At 8:59 PM, Blogger runner14 said…

    With all due respect (and I mean that sincerely), I find it ironic that on your own resume, on your own site, you list your television appearances above your anchor position at RocketBoom. While I don't doubt that you know people who are perfectly happy keeping their focus exclusively on their new media creations, the biggest stars of our generation will use ALL forms of media to establish themselves. Being JUST online, just as being JUST TV, is short-sided if fame and fortune is the goal (and again, it may not be for everyone). I like your point about being treated with a bit more respect... but consciously or not, you have literally put your TV success above the very thing we're all sitting here reading.

  • At 8:50 PM, Blogger William said…

    If I am not mistaken, Amanda has been put in the same league of Ted Turner during the previous posts. Amanda like the OM would like to make what she is worth or earn a living. If the old money or old media has a tendency to buy out newer and younger organizations isn't that a means to an end for Amanda as well as the OM. They can each obtain what they desire (money and/or power) if Amanda was to (to quote Bono) "sell the currency of her fame" to create a highly followed broadcast could she not form an organization that could be bought by the old media? It is quite common for a business to have the intention of being purchased at some date in the future.

    As far as the comment about her resume I think it is completely logical to quote the most recognizable items before the less so. She is looking for work and more people watch television and movies than sit around chatting on the internet.

    My question: Is she looking for work or does she want to run her own company?

  • At 12:22 AM, Blogger Y said…

    I don't understand the OM-NM argument. When you pit technology against itself, naturally the newer stuff is going to win. There is no such thing as old or new media. It's all media. Radio changed when television came along. So did movies. There was a lot of upheaval and fighting, claiming that one technology was better or more pure than the other. Older writers swear by their typewriters while young writers blog. It is dangerous to get caught up in the technology when you are a content creator because there will always be something better coming along. Are videobloggers going to complain about people who create video content for mobile phones? What if new hybrid videogame/communication videos become a new mode of communication and storytelling? Will this new technology be the upstart that the unborn children of tomorrow use to start their revolution? Focus on the content. That's what will last. Homer and Shakespeare still sell, except now you can get them on your Pocket PC.

  • At 1:49 PM, Blogger Vermont Neighbor said…

    One interesting challenge is how to get the viewers to follow-along to old media outlets.

    OM is funded by ads, sponsorships, commercial deals, product placement. Seems like all the stuff that vloggers and web content providers try to avoid.

    Hopefully, the viewers love what they love enough to follow it over to cable or network primetime. And wouldn't it be great if we saw TV return to 15-minute blocks of programming.

    That's the real question, how to move the audience from this select ad-free neighborhood they've chosen to live in: vlogs and the web.

  • At 12:44 PM, Blogger dudley said…

    I'm not so sure. I think the term Old Media is not so much a type of distribution for media as a state of mind. Old Media means exclusivity and control. New Media is about nonexclusivity (sharing) and less control (creative commons, for example).

    Distribution of media does play an important role in allowing New Media to form. Without low cost methods of distribution (ie, the internet), the traditional gatekeepers command and control the access to an audience.

    The single greatest threat, perhaps ultimately the only real threat to New Media is a loss of net neutrality. Since powerful economic forces are determined to undermine the open architecture of the world wide web (they call it offering fairness: why should hard working folks have to pay the same rate as big guzzler publishers of high octane data (video, for example)) ?

    The point here is old vs. new is the true battle. Read Lawrence Lessig's book, "The Future of Ideas". The internet is what it is today only because the govenment prevented (by legislation) the telephone companies from interfering (playing games) with the developing internet. And the telephone companies were quite smart enough to un derstand the internet would develop into a threat to their business.

    Old vs. New is also a throwback to the age of the robber barons, an era of consolidated power. I believe there are only 23 parent companies that own all the print, radio and television companies in the US today. Consolidation of power is the Old, and it will be interesting if indeed it ever goes away. One thing is for sure, as one person already commented, few of us will ever earn what we feel we are worth. It would be nice if the market were more open and fair so at least we could get paid commensurate with the value we offer to others—not the value imposed upon by a closed system.

    Thanks for putting up with my wordiness and my rather opionated discourse. By the way, the one way to effectively promote New Media (at least until Net Neutrality dies) I believe is to aggregate the best video content under one roof (as one person already commented). Create a Federated Media style company to attract advertisers and sponsors, and share equally with the content providers. On the other hand, if we are still dependent upon advertisers and sponsors to pay us to produce video content, are we truly living in the New Media realm? Perhaps we should be asking ourselves a different question. If we want a rich choice of video offerings (video is different from other media because it is still very expensive to produce high quality stuff ) should consumers be expected to pay a little as they go (subscription model)? In this country, so far the answer seems to be a resounding NO.

  • At 12:42 PM, Blogger DudeAsInCool said…

    I work in old media and new media. They are different animals. And believe it or not, Kingdom2000, there are consultants who know what they are doing


Post a Comment

<< Home