Posts tagged ‘GigaOm’

The New Age of Media Consumption

I saw two pieces of news today that illustrated how consumers are dictating content delivery.  The Internet continues to accelerate the move to personalized media consumption, when and where the consumer wants it. This trend has decimated the b2b magazine space, and now video usage is rapidly going mass market.

In January Ziff Davis will become the first b2b publisher to cease publishing print issues altogether. I’ve written previously on this blog about how hard the Internet has hit the business model of technology magazines like Ziff Davis pubs eWeek and CIO Insight. The company claims that it will publish more frequently online than it did in print and that no layoffs will result from the move. But the publishing business model that worked in the past hasn’t followed reader eyeballs online, and until a new one is discovered revenue will be a challenge.

The other news was a post from GigaOm reporting how mobile video consumption is exploding due to the increased power of mobile devices and the availability of true mobile broadband. The theme of the post is the strain on mobile carrier networks, but the numbers are impressive. Every day 17% of laptop users access video, 11% of iPhone and 7% of Android users. The survey doesn’t identify a number for tablets, but that has to be a big number and one increasing rapidly.

These numbers really reinforce the concept that consumers are now in the drivers seat. Free market advocates love to talk about the creative destruction brought about by disruptive technologies, but businesses can be awfully slow to adapt. It’s amazing how much faster the Internet has remade the media landscape than earlier advances like radio and television.

Consumers want their content delivered digitally, and increasingly they want it sent to mobile devices. It will be up to publishers and carriers to devise new business plans that account for the age of personalized media.

October 27, 2011 at 9:36 am 1 comment

Why (Not How) Are You Doing Social Media?

Too many times when I talk social media with clients, they want to start with tactics not strategy. Facebook! Twitter! Q&A sites!

The questions you should start with are — Why are you looking at social media, and what do you have to say? This is why a post early this month by Om Malik really hit home for me. Titled “Why the Medium is Not the Message,” it was about just that, not confusing the channel with the communication. New media like Facebook and Twitter have replaced old media like newspapers and television, but those are changes in delivery, not (necessarily) in content.

The act of communicating is where the power comes from. And in the case of b2b and b2g, the audiences you want to reach are often already well defined. You just have to jump in and start doing it. One of my favorite expressions is “never let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

So the next time a new client is letting a banner design or brand guidelines delay a launch, I’m going to send them this post. It was part of a new series on GigaOm called “Om Says,” and looks to have been launched to promote the site’s paid service. Regardless it’s a consistently good read, and if you subscribe you get the posts emailed to you before they are published online.

BTW, if you click through to Om’s post you should scroll down to the comments. Some of them go very deep, referencing the author Marshall McLuhan who coined the phrase “the medium IS the message” back in the early 1960s. That is who some readers thought Malik was paraphrasing (and disagreeing with) in his blog title, although he says he was not referencing McLuhan. Don’t miss the movie clip from Annie Hall provided by one of the commenters, which features McLuhan in a quick cameo role.

So a final thought here might be, be careful using a phrase or expression unless you know its origin!

March 30, 2011 at 12:08 am 1 comment

Genachowski Lays Out the Plan — and the Problems

Yesterday self-professed “broadband nerd” Om Malik and Stacey Higginbotham of GigaOm hosted a revealing interview with FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. It was a great opportunity to hear the Chairman in real time talk through some of the issues facing the commission as it races to prepare its national broadband plan by February. Genachowski was impressive — he comes across as a technologist who has landed in DC, not a lawyer looking for things to regulate.

Here’s the video link — it’s over an hour long. So while watching I took notes for you my loyal readers, and I jotted down the video times where Genachowski shared some interesting nuggets so you can listen for yourself if you’d like. Here they are, note I paraphrase slightly in spots for clarity:

  • (57:00) “Historically, the FCC has focused on regulation of the network. Now, that can’t be the only perspective, with so much innovation happening at the edge. This perspective is what I’m trying to institutionalize at the FCC.”
  • (46:45) “Bits are bits.”
  • (44:30) “There are broadband deployment gaps, and there are broadband adoption gaps.”
  • (44:00) “There are three broad sets of goals for the national plan: 1. Economic — an open, robust platform will be a productivity engine and an economic advantage globally; 2. Societal — pervasive broadband will benefit healthcare, education, public safety, energy; 3. Civic Engagement — spur participatory democracy and better government.”
  • (39:00) “Sometimes people don’t realize that startups are small businesses.”
  • (36:25) “There’s an historical comparison in what we’re going through now in the development of the electrical grid in the early 2oth century. In the last century we had household appliances, with the information grid we have waves of news apps.”
  • (29:45) In response to a question from Om about the fact that most consumers today face a duopoly for broadband service: “What I’ve found at the FCC is that there isn’t much established literature around addressing what we have today. It’s not a monopoly — there are accepted ways to deal with that. It’s also not unfettered competition with a low barrier to entry, which also has accepted steps. It’s something in the middle, and it’s tough.”
  • (24:00) “We have the chance to lead the world in mobile broadband, but the biggest risk is the lack of spectrum.”
  • (17:30) In response to a question from the audience about the FCC sending a letter asking for information from Apple about refusing to allow Google Voice onto the iPhone: “Let’s look at the situation for a minute. What I want the FCC to be is proactive, to ask questions and to be informed. What we found was there was an agreement between Apple and AT&T to keep VoIP applications off the iPhone. Then, that decision was changed.”
  • (10:00) In response to a question about open Internet and what acceptable network management should be: “The issues around Open Internet can be put into three buckets: 1. There is the bucket of things that almost all would agree clearly should not be allowed; 2. there is a bucket of things that clearly the government should allow and leave alone; 3. and then again there is a tricky middle ground. The goal of the FCC should be to make that middle category as small as possible, and to create a transparent, workable process for resolution.”

So that’s my take on this incredibly educational discussion. Here’s Stacey’s.

We don’t do policy work at Strategic, but I’m fortunate to have fast growth clients who are very involved in markets that are greatly affected by broadband. GovDelivery provides government to citizen communications and is leading the adoption of Gov’t 2.0 technologies by the federa government, BroadSoft is a VoIP application provider to hundreds of carriers and the authors of the Broadband Ignite blog, and TANDBERG is the leading provider of video conferencing that powers telework and  improves the delivery of education and healthcare (and is soon to be acquired by Cisco).

I’ve had conversations with these clients about the critical juncture this country is at vis-a-vis the migration to all IP networks. The entire regulatory structure currently administered by the FCC — with its reciprocal compensation, termination charges, subsidies, taxes dating back to the Spanish-American war — is a legacy of the circuit-switched past. Much of it makes no sense in an IP world in which “bits are bits.” Making sure the commission strikes the right balance in negotiating the “tricky middle ground” described by Genachowski will have far reaching implications on all businesses that rely on the Internet.

The FCC is facing a tabula rasa, with a chance to totally re-write the rules of the road. After watching yesterday’s interview and listening to Genachowski, I’ve got more faith they can get it right.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

January 7, 2010 at 11:11 am 1 comment



Traffic Sources

Alexa Rank

Twitter Stream

Become a Strategic Communications Fan

Add to Technorati Favorites


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: