7 Permalink

The no-show iPhone 5 and the tech press

Just about everyone that was on the Internet yesterday heard about Apple’s new iPhone 4S. But the biggest surprise was what wasn’t unveiled — an iPhone 5.

Gawker already has a fantastic piece on iPhone 5 failure. It points the fingers back at Mashable (PaidContent’s Rafat Ali had some words for this awful this awful Mashable piece), ReadWriteWeb, Boy Genius, Wall Street Journal and others for what turned out to be empty hype. Ali summed up the iPhone 5’s failed expectations best:

Apple didn’t “fail to manage expectations” on non-existent coverage iPhone 5, tech press failed to manage any sanity in coverage.

This should be a cautionary tale for all news organizations. Be careful what you publish and be especially careful of over-hype. There can be a great backlash if you get something big — especially Apple big — flat out wrong. Relying on anonymous sources hurts credibility and too much hype and anticipation for something unconfirmed can also lead to “what if” journalism — the terrible type of journalism. (I think of the first time the Big 12 almost dissolved and the media pushed for “coverage,” “insider stories” and “what if” pieces that were to surely be truth in days. There was no grand finale. The Big 12 shrunk a little, but it remained intact.) 

And there is such thing as over saturation. Granted, I am no fan of Apple — I don’t even use iTunes — but every stream I had open blew up when Apple’s event began. There was no other news today for the tech press — though there was — and that’s a problem. Just because you have a big event on one day, doesn’t mean you should ever devout numerous resources to it (I’m looking at you Mashable, TechCrunch, The Next Web). I believe Americans had enough media-given over saturation during the 10th anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Seriously, there is such thing as too much coverage.

I guess the press still hasn’t learned its lessons.

13 Permalink

Journalism meets RollerCoaster Tycoon

I attempted an journalism experiment earlier this year but let it escape me after a couple days. I plan to revisit it later this week. The one item needed: RollerCoaster Tycoon.

I played the game a lot when I was younger — more than I’d care to admit — but this time I will be playing in a different mode. One where there’s little profit.

In the game, unlike a typical theme park, you can charge money for anything. But if you charge too much, people won’t buy. And charging a lot for basic needs makes people unhappy. So I will lower the price to $0 for just about every ride but roller coasters (and maybe a couple thrill rides though they’ll still be very cheap), which will be higher than I charged as a young child.

Where does journalism fit into this game? The rides equal news. You shouldn’t charge for a basic necessity. People need and want news. Roller coasters are premium content — something like a specialty database. You can charge some money for that. The food and vendor stalls are specially made by the news organization. An ebook or a cool app. Also, no entry fee — you know what that would be.

With this in mind, I need to create a profitable park. I still have to pay staff. Marketing. Research. Ride Operations. Food. Gifts. Building. Expanding.

While profits will be small, the big payoff will be happy guests. They have more money to spend on the top-notch rides and treats. It’s a lesson that the advertising operations of news organizations should note. Profits shouldn’t be money alone. Profits should also be happy customers.

0 Permalink

George Bailey is a media model

Watching “It’s a Wonderful Life” this past Christmas weekend, it came to me that George Bailey should be a model for the media business. He was loved enough by the community that the people came to help him when he was in dire need. And they did so because they know he cared for the community. His building and loan company was small, community focused and didn’t always make as much money as he could on building.

Media companies should operate the same way. Be local and be involved. Make your community better. You won’t always make a large amount of money, but you will earn trust and loyalty from the locals.

All this with the idea that when tough times arrive, the community will rally to save the company because businesses are a success from the services they received from the company.

2 Permalink

Advertising in the content streams

I have a huge interest in the advertising side to the community service/journalism business model — you could say I’ve sold my soul, as some have told me.

Thinking of the future as a stream, which I begin to see more and more as Facebook and Twitter evolve, and RockMelt treats the content of the web as a stream; a social RSS.

Advertising should be a part of the streams.

The case for incorporating advertising into a news organization’s social media strategy can be seen at some organizations already. Now bring it to the website.

News, sports, opinion, entertainment, lifestyles … all are content streams of news and analysis on a website. Put advertising spots in the streams because it can create better advertising. As news becomes more social people are less likely to look at your ad, much less click on it. Media evolution says make it stand out without being intrusive or annoying. Make it relevant to the community. Make it like content that is in the stream.

I often question whether the web has a sizable amount of money in it. The web has created so much atomization that creating a large and engaged community that can help sustain enough money to be profitable for a small organization seems unlikely.

I don’t believe ad spots are bad, if done right (read the first point) they can be effective and they should be an option for a business when selling to them.