The New York Times—No More?

by J. Butler, Applecore Content Development Specialist

The big news this past month was the possibility that within five to ten years, heavyweight the New York Times could either be gone or drastically altered.

Way back in the 20^th century, that announcement would have been unthinkable—since 1896, the Times has been a sonic force in modern journalism. In 2002, the publication won seven Pulitzer Prizes, largely for their superhuman coverage of the September 11^th attacks (the standing record had been four). But these days, suggesting the New York Times’ eventual absence from newsstands is no longer an outrageous statement—in fact, it comes off as pretty tuned in.

Back in 2008, the paper had announced plans to borrow up to $225 million against its new Manhattan offices. Then, amid reports of faltering ad revenue and circulation, January 2009 saw a 48% plunge in the Times fourth quarter earnings, blamed on the natural decrease of advertising in a weak economy.

The Times is treading waters dotted with several scandals (see Jayson Blair, a Times writer who had faked at least 36 of his stories) and controversies—like the costly 2006 re-design, which decreased page size by half an inch and slashed content, hoping to make the paper more “reader friendly.”

The paper has slowly been shifting focus to its online division, and the numbers aren't lying: there are 1.1 million daily subscribers to the print edition - and 1.5 million readers online. Arthur Sulzberger, chairman of the New York Times, has made his priorities clear: "I really don't know whether we'll be printing the Times in five years...Internet is a wonderful place to be and we're leading there."

The New York Times is a high-profile example of a shift in print media which, depending on who you ask, means one of two things: reinvention or extinction.

Worried parties turn to the Internet for the real scoop—in particular, to voices like The Media is Dying. As a Twitter feed, it’s fairly straightforward: it reports industry lay-offs, big name agency moves and closing publications. And it does all this without adding an ounce of commentary or bias, relaying only the facts.

It’s created a lot of buzz in a relatively short amount of time—over 10,000 unique subscribers since its November 2008 inception—and has spawned a sister site meant to help the recently jobless (@themediaishiring).

On paper, things certainly don’t look good for traditional print media. But as the anonymous contributors to @themediaisdying will tell you, this looming change isn’t necessarily a bad thing:

Old media is not doomed but it certainly is changing, and fast. [New] generations are growing up with a myriad of technologies and options to get their news. . . social media [allows people to] get their news faster, easier and more personalized than ever before.

After the initial growing pains, while the economy is shaky and new media finds firm footing, this change will bring positive results. As the @TheMediaisDying creators suggest, it’s a demand that traditional media step up to meet modern technology, and enter a world where the gap between consumer and producer is smaller than ever before.

For the Sake of Facebook Friendship

by J. Butler, Applecore Content Development Specialist


A recent Burger King viral marketing ploy lost steam before it ever left the ground—but not for lack of publicity.

The campaign, called “Whopper Sacrifice,” took the form of a Facebook application. In exchange for dropping ten Facebook friends, the ruthless user would get a coupon for a free Whopper. It was a cute, funny way to plump up Burger King’s brand, and more importantly, get their product in the hands of would-be customers.

But of course, that’s not the whole story. The campaign was taking off—a total of 233,906 users found themselves on the Whopper chopping block—when a little hitch appeared.

A key point of the campaign rested on informing the dropped friend that they had been “sacrificed” for the sake of a Whopper. Well, that was a clear breach of Facebook’s “de-friending” policy, which allows users to cull their friends list without fear that their former pals would be notified.

While Facebook only asked that the notification feature of the app be disabled, the agency (the controversial but attention-grabbing Crispin Porter + Bogusky) decided that the spirit of the campaign would be lost, and chose instead to shut down the whole works.

The Whopper Sacrifice website now reads that the "Whopper Sacrifice has been sacrificed." But clever Burger King has the last word: they’ve kept a feature that allows de-friending victims to strike back—with an official Burger King Angry-Gram.

Watching The Future of TV

by J. Butler, Applecore Content Development Specialist

The days of appointment TV are looking like a thing of the past.

In recent years, viewers have found themselves with more choice than ever when it comes to television, with even basic cable clocking in at nearly 75 channels. More specialty channels crop up every year, with interests so finely tuned that you have to wonder who exactly tunes in (are there really enough viewers to justify WealthTV?). But something else has changed about TV: it's not just what we watch, it's also become a choice of how we watch it. 

The writing on the wall came when Tivo first appeared on the horizon. It eclipsed the sometimes unreliable, unwieldy technology of VCR, replacing tapes with a hard drive and human forgetfulness with automatic recording (which meant that viewers would never miss an episode of their favorite shows). A pioneer in digital video recording, Tivo allowed viewers the freedom to watch their favorite shows whenever they had the time, instead of making the time.

That, it turns out, was the first wave.

Now, the internet has taken it one step further, bypassing the need for a subscription or even a special device. With the advent of YouTube, Hulu and other online resources, the only thing many viewers need to catch up on their favorite shows is a speedy internet connection. In just one year, the percentage of Americans watching some prime time TV on their computer screens instead of their TV sets went from 6% in 2007 to over 20% in 2008.

The effects of this shift aren’t hard to see. Saturday Night Live made history this year with Tina Fey’s infamous impersonation of Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin; by the following Wednesday, NBC.com reported the skit had become their most-watched viral video ever, with 5.7 million views. 

So the times began a'changing. No longer would you need to rely on external sources—such as the daily newscast or commentary programs—to catch all the highlights of the day. Miss Obama’s inaugural speech? No problem; just catch it later on YouTube. With that, history has been broken down into democratic snippets, letting everyone catch up in their own time. With the explosion of these easily uploaded, accessible video clips, the viewer is allowed to create their own highlights. 

Other networks have figured out ways to profit from this shift. New episodes of CW favorite Gossip Girl are available for purchase on iTunes the next day for $1.99, and the show’s popularity has exploded as a result—but only online, as the broadcast version consistently under-performs. The explosive online success of Gossip Girl has been called a preview of TV 3.0, and the larger networks have gradually followed suit, as ABC made popular shows Lost and Desperate Housewives into downloads for iPods, as well as streaming select episodes for free on their website. Rival powerhouses NBC and CBS quickly did the same.

This hasn't proven a huge moneymaker yet (at least not compared to the usual revenue from advertising sponsors, TV stations and cable channels) but the networks seem determined to stay on board this potentially lucrative bandwagon. It's a wise move indeed, especially as the Information Generation (that is, those born from 1980-2000 who grew up using computers) become the overwhelming majority. This kind of instantaneous delivery system is poised to only increase. 

What might be the next step in television's horizon? Telling stories in a way that lets everyone play along. A Finnish network has developed Accidental Lovers, a new romantic drama. The twist? Its concept puts the viewer in a pivotal storytelling position, encouraging text messages to influence the outcome of the story:

On the screen, viewers will see their text messages and will hear the characters respond to their messages. A glowing heart will show whether their messages are warming or cooling the hearts of the romantic couple, and viewers will see the relationship develop according to their wishes. 

If the romance doesn't progress as viewers wish, they can try again later as four runs of the programme will be broadcast showing 12 different evolutions of the love affair. Each one will be different, with each reacting to the viewers' wishes. 

Such a concept could mean the revival of appointment television once and for all—and a whole new meaning to how we see interactive media. 

Newspapers need to reinvent themselves

It’s no secret that the rise of the Internet has hit the newspaper industry hard. A recent survey by Pew Research Center illuminates this fact, revealing that more than 50% of 259 papers surveyed reported significant layoffs of newsroom staff.

To combat this attrition, newspapers are fighting back by creating blogs and microsites that allow readers to focus their attention on specific topics, and journalists are being trained to create and upload video content for the Web. Niche online ad networks are also gaining popularity, whereby newspapers band together to sell ads online. Industry observers are suggesting that newspaper publishers should publish digital editions for PDAs and cell phones and also publish more Web-only content.

Source: Mediaweek

TV and Internet ads go hand-in-hand

According to the president of CBS’ research unit, the Internet enhances TV advertising. David Poltrack points out that while the Internet is an efficient medium for turning consumers into purchasers, it’s useful only if the consumers are already aware of the products. Simply put, consumers turn to the Internet to learn about products that they are already aware of.

That is where television advertising plays a key role. It is Poltrack’s opinion that, as a medium, TV is still unrivalled when it comes to developing awareness of a product, service or product feature. To leverage this connection between television-based awareness and internet-based information gathering, marketers need to coordinate the TV and Internet components of their ad campaigns.

Source: Advertising Age