Techie and the Media

Notes From The Other Coast

So, I got in this morning from a week on the left coast. Exhausted and drained, I am happy to report that I am definitely encouraged.

You see, a year ago this time I was on maternity leave. I was watching way too much late-night TV and reacquainting myself with the perils of sleep deprivation. There was a looming strike (that did manifest itself a few months later), and we were entering the summer doldrums.

Now, a year later, I am still watching way too much late-night TV (my fault, not the baby’s), sleep deprivation is simply a state of being, we are talking about another possible strike and well, the old adage seems to be holding true. You know, the one about how the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Except for the fact that the tone in Hollywood has changed. There is an openness for talking about things new and fresh; ideas and concepts that are different (save the broadcast networks that are still a bit hesitant). I am hearing words like multiplatform, integrated, showcasing, interactive, bold, character-driven, and edgy.

Granted, I have heard all of this before — but this jaded and jet-lagged gal sees a very bright, interactive and compelling season of content coming for 2009. Stay tuned.

Turning Value On Its Head (Or At Least Thinking Out Of The Box Office)

So, The Hollywood Reporter publishes The Top 40/Film list weekly. I was perusing the numbers and analysis bytes that highlight the winners and the losers when something made me stop and think. The caption pointed to the 61% drop in the weekend gross of "Wanted," stating that this was "a big sophomore drop, even for an action pilot." A 61% drop is always a bad thing (unless it relates to the price of oil).

But as I started to think about it and put ALL the numbers together, I was sort of irked at this casual comment. Let's look at the rest of the information, shall we? The film was in its tenth day of release, the cumulative gross was over $90 million. Now, compare that to, let's say, "Speed Racer," which was in its 59th day in release and had cummed a little over $43 million. Uh-huh. Looking at other films that were in the same range of days released. "Wall-E" was down 48%, with a cumulative gross of $127 million. Totally different genre from "Wanted," way wider audience, showing in 800 more theaters — and $37 million separates the two. Uh-huh. (By the way, "Hancock" scored a $103 million in the first five days of release — so never, ever question the power of Will Smith again.)

Then I started thinking about rating drops and shifts, and it hit me that part of what we miss in the pure day-to-day analysis of ratings in television is, well, the long-term performance. How long has the program been airing? How stable is the core audience? What is the value overall of the property, and the brands that are associated with that property and its actors, etc.? And finally, what has the value (both implicit and explicit) of the program been to the network?

Sure, drops suck — but we need to start looking at the numbers as part of a much larger picture. Wouldn't you agree?

The Amanda Project

4TH STORY MEDIA PARTNERS WITH HARPERCOLLINS PUBLISHERS FOR ITS FIRST VENTURE: THE AMANDA PROJECT, AN INTERACTIVE, COLLABORATIVE DIGITAL MYSTERY

New York, NY (June 18, 2008)—4th Story Media and HarperCollins Publishers today announced their partnership in The Amanda Project, the first multi-platform series to be written in part by its audience, girls ages 12-14. 4th Story Media, which owns all rights for the property, will produce the content for The Amanda Project with a creative team including web design agency Happy Cog, young adult authors, artists and graphic designers. HarperCollins Publishers, which is a strategic partner in the venture and an investor, has acquired the rightsto publish an eight-book The Amanda Project series worldwide.

“It feels like the art and craft of publishing great stories for children is on the brink of revolutionary change,” said Lisa Holton, founder and CEO, 4th Story Media. “We are exploring new ways of using the web to tell stories, while also leading kids back to the joys of reading.

By combining talented authors with creative web designers we are fusing traditional storytelling with the interactive world of social networking, online games, and user-generated content.We are thrilled to introduce 4th Story Media with the launch of The Amanda Project and are delighted to be partnering with the exceptional team at HarperCollins to bring this series to life.”

“HarperCollins is very pleased to join forces with 4th Story Media on its first multi-platform series,” said Susan Katz, President and Publisher, HarperCollins Children’s Books. “Book publishing is increasingly digital in nature and HarperCollins Children’s, as a leader of innovative publishing, understands and embraces initiatives that engage readers in exciting new ways. The traditional book/web connection is evolving every day, and The Amanda Project takes it one step further by allowing readers to not only discuss the story but help create it as well.”

Amanda Valentino is the elusive, charismatic, and alluring new girl at Evansville Township
High School who arrives mid-year, leaves abruptly, and indelibly changes the lives of everyone around her in the process. Her story will be told across a variety of media in addition to the books—a social website where readers can interact with and become characters in the mystery, a related series of blogs chronicling the story as it unfolds, clues and seed posts on satellite sites, downloadable music and official and user-generated merchandise. Amanda’s fate will begin to unfold across the web during the fall of 2008, through the launch of the T.A.P. website in early 2009, and continue into the publication of the first book in Fall 2009.

Contact:
For 4th Story Media: Lisa Herling
917-912-4273, herling@fourthstorymedia.com

For HarperCollins: Sandee Roston, Executive Director of Publicity
212-261-6796, sandee.roston@harpercollins.com
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Welcome To The You-Name-It Zone

I get about six to 10 newletters a day. I like to read. I like to read a lot. And as such, I come across these odd little bits of information — I call them nuggets of nonsense — that amuse me when I think about how far we have come, where people are seeking new audiences, and just what programmers think is of value to brands.

Today’s nugget of nonsense was a small mention that I saw about a new multimedia company (they shall remain nameless but have developed content for online and television) that has launched a Web site that caters to a certain over-popularized, dramatized and satirized group of ethic Americans.

Forget about who it is — that is not the point. The thing that caught my eye was the fact that someone out there figured that heritage was a viable target. Interesting.

So, being ever so serious, I checked it out. Now, I am a true believer in “know they audience.” I am also a true believer in the value of the micro audience or audiences that I would consider hyper- influential. Example, invitees of TED conferences, academics, volunteers and women.

But where I have a hard time seeing value is in creating audiences that are narrowly defined, but not by an indiscrete variable. For example, athletes. Yes, athletes may share a common interest, but each has their own nuances. Soccer, baseball, swimming and golf. All sports, but brand and advertising viability is vastly different.

Getting back to my multimedia company that has launched this content site targeting Americans of a certain ethnic background — you are off the mark here. What you should have done is targeted your content to deliver to a more neutral indiscrete variable (like IFC does to independent film buffs) or narrowed yourselves down to a group that is more discrete (NFL Network).

As its stands, the content is modestly appealing; but the value to advertisers and brands will likely remain unattractive.

Peter Buffett and Akon - An Odd Couple with a Powerful Message

Full disclosure, I work with Peter but this is a great initiative.  Get involved people and yes, you can make a difference!!!

Question: Is There Something I Can Do? Answer: YES!

Peter Buffett and Akon are happy to let you know what they are passionate about. But what are you passionate about?

Or are you so overwhelmed with what’s going on in the world that you don’t know where to start? Or think that when people are giving millions to a cause (or billions!), how can a few dollars make a difference?

Well… a few dollars - a little time - even a text message can make a difference.

On this site you’ll find places to start getting involved. You’ll have the ability to talk about what you’re into and why — share your stories of how you’re making a difference — and meet others who are trying to do the same.

http://istheresomethingicando.com

A Fresh Look At An Old Standby: The Question Is, Why?

OK — I admit it. I was one of "those" girls. The ones that didn't play much with dolls, wear makeup, or ever key into the color pink. Actually, I think wearing the color could cause me to go into anaphylactic shock — but that is a story for another time. My point is, I was one of those girls who loved the geeky things — I was all about the original "Battlestar Galactica." I had all the "Stars Wars" models.

I remember my mom gave me a Holly Hobby sewing machine for Christmas when I was eight. Not knowing what it was or how to use it, I promptly borrowed a screwdriver from my father's tool box, cracked the base open, pulled out the motor and tried to rig it inside my hand-modeled Death Star to see if I could get it to fly. Needless to say, I got in trouble for that.

But I guess part of the problem was that I never really got the "girly" thing. So when I opened the paper this morning to find that Strawberry Shortcake was getting a makeover for the 21st century, I almost keeled over. First of all, she was "sweet" enough as she was. Second of all, why does the update mean that she no longer has a cat but a cell phone, and a little bit of pink lipstick as opposed to pink cheeks? I am sorry, but since when did a brand aimed at pre-tweens need to have a doll with a cell phone?

Which brings me to my next observation: Is Hollywood so out of new ideas that we need to bring back old ones with a twist? I am talking about bringing back shows like "Password" and "The Dating Game" and others from my youth. Not that I mind, don't get me wrong. It's just that I would hope that somewhere, out there, in the vast abyss that is the creative genius, that someone, anyone, would be able to come up with something, well, new.

Then again, you are reading the diatribe of a girl who couldn't understand what all the fuss was about when it came to the Smurfs or "American Idol." Then again, I have been a closet Hello Kitty and "Family Feud" fan for years — so maybe I do know a little something about franchises that last.

Back To The Big Screen

Technologists and content owners have been chasing consumers around their living rooms for years. The advent of wireless technology should have made the movement of content from PC to TV easier, but it didn’t. Portable storage devices were another answer to the problem; networked media centers, set-top boxes, routers--all failed. I don’t want to rehash history and the whys and why-nots of technical mishaps and broken promises-- but suffice to say, it has been a battle for anyone’s taking. Instead, let’s ask ourselves, what do consumers really want when it comes to mobile content, TV, and the personal computer? I would argue, ease of use--both in consumption and management.

If success is measured by awareness and usage, then Apple’s iTunes and the iPod is surely a success. The company and its leader are masters at marketing--but more importantly, they are masters at understanding the mentality of the burgeoning mass consumer.  I am going to invoke a piece that I wrote close to a year ago, that I believe illustrates the point that I am trying to make--Apple knows the mentality of the mass consumer better than most.

It was April Fool's Day, 1976 and Apple comes to be. After several product launches that rocked the industry and became the basis of what we know computers to be today, the Apple Macintosh was launched in 1984 with the now famous Super Bowl advertisement based on George Orwell's novel 1984.

Fast-forward. The year is 2001, and there are approximately 2 million MP3 players in the U.S. market--and many, many legal and illegal music services. But the market is going nowhere, fast. P2P hysteria, a global music market crash, and little-to-no mass consumer awareness, and along comes Apple with a music player called the iPod. Two years later the connection from platform to service is made, and iTunes is launched. By the end of 2004, Apple had sold 200 million units. Three months later, 300 million songs had been sold. Three months after that, the company says it has hit 460 million songs sold. In the course of 4 years, the iPod has grown to dominate the market with 76 percent market share as of June, 2005 (Jupiter Research puts the number at about 12 million MP3 players connected in the U.S.). Apple has since become synonymous with online music (much to Sony's dismay), and there are numerous derivations of the iPod that have flooded, and more importantly, been adopted by the consumer market.

So how does this relate to the living room? The consumer? Apple’s new iTV?  Well, because all great businesses need critical mass before products have more than a 50-50 chance of succeeding.. If Apple is right, and they have been up-to-date with timing of product releases, then one could argue that the iPod must have hit critical mass if the company is moving to movies and with iTV.  The fact that TV programs for the iPod cost $1.99 didn’t mater. It doesn’t matter that movies will cost between $5 and $15 It doen’t matter that the iTV unit will cost $299. What matters is that the iPod for music and video has enticed, educated and entertained an entire generation of mainstream consumers who, up until this point, didn’t care what the term "mobile content" meant--and iTV is the bridge to help them get that content from their hands and onto the TV. The company made the iPod and iTunes easy to use and easy to manage. And now that there is critical mass in the market, it is aiming to move all that content that consumers invested in content back to the big screen. Isn’t that what consumers want? You tell me.

Happy Belated Anniversary (Part Two): Now what?

Last week, we started to celebrate the anniversary of the PC. We left off at what would come next in the evolution. Here is part two to “Happy Belated Anniversary.”

While the PC is synonymous with utilitarian tasks like word processing, it has managed over the last few years to transform itself into something more--a center for entertainment.  From games to audio to video to blogging, the PC, coupled with the power of broadband, has changed the way consumers watch television, read news papers, listen to music and even how they express themselves about their passions to the outside world. Moreover, it has forced changes in the way entertainment companies have to relate to its customers.

The ability to predict the future is an elusive power. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t make some educated guesses along the way.  As we move more into the twenty-first century, armed with more gadgets and power cords than we know what to do with, we find ourselves asking, what is next?  I would argue that you not worry so much about where we are going, but focus on where we are. With the rate of technological change outpacing the average human’s ability to keep up, it seems a waste of resources to be constantly focused on the future rather than the present. 

Here is what we do know: there are distinct patters of technology adoption. We have well defined tenure in the online community. We are able to predict, with some certainty, media consumption. We have watched technology formats evolve from emerging to dominant, consumers adopt and business change.  I would posit that with all this knowledge, we should be looking at the why of technology use and consumer behavior and not the how--that part is easy.

For example, The Pew Internet & American Life Project released a report about Home Broadband Adoption for 2006.  Here is what we know: 42 percent of all American adults had a high-speed internet connection at home; nearly half of the new Internet users were taking high-speed services at home; broadband adoption grew 68 percent, from 2005, among households with incomes between $40,000 and $50,000; adoption also grew over 120 percent among African Americans between 2005 and 2006; and finally, home broadband adoption grew by 70 percent among those with less than a high-school education, and grew 63 percent among senior citizens.

So what does all this mean? What is next? Simple--a larger, more diverse online audience that will help to establish and grow the online advertising market to mass. We are on the cusp of being able to mirror the offline with the online population--and it’s all thanks to that little beige box from 25 years ago. Isn’t it amazing what technology can do? You tell me.

Happy Belated Anniversary! (Part One of Two)

Just in case you didn’t know: the personal computer celebrated an anniversary a couple of weeks ago. There wasn’t a lot of fanfare, no ticker-tape parade, or world celebration. Odd, since this machine has fundamentally changed the way the world operates. From corporations to consumers, the PC has helped drive bubbles and burst them. Twenty-five years ago, this strange box entered our lives, thanks to a rogue team of engineers from International Business Machines, and changed the face of the world.

In light of this momentous occasion, I thought it might behoove us to take a look back, if only to reflect on the how far we have come.  And maybe, just maybe, give us a sense of where we are going.

In the beginning …

It was Aug. 12, 1981 when IBM launched the 5150, the company’s latest entry into the emerging “personal computer” market. What is now considered to be the granddaddy to the modern PC, this simple beige-colored box had a price tag of $1,565--in 2006 dollars about $4,164--an expensive proposition for most U.S. consumers. Today, of course, you can buy a desktop machine starting as low as $500 with almost 32,000 times more memory. The closest thing to ripping music on the PC was the audio cassettes that were used to load and save data. Now, as the market grew, manufacturing costs dropped, capacity grew, demand rose and competitors entered the market.  The vanguard is still in the game--but the playing field today is crowded and competition is fierce.  Good news for consumers, bad news for manufactures. What this evolution has done, of course, is bring the PC into the homes, and hands, of millions of people around the world.

And then came the Internet …

The ability of any technology to transcend the confines of its present state lies with the entrepreneurship of market pioneers. Advances and refinements on technology, from sheer necessity, have given way to technology advancements that have reformed societies and industries alike--the printing press, the cotton gin, the automobile. I would argue that the Internet is to Digital Revolution what the steam engine was to the Industrial Revolution. The creation of a more efficient distribution mechanism--both in cost and resources--has shown itself time and time again as the foundation to a market sea change.

Just stop and think about the impact that this collection of inter-connected networks across the world that all use the TCP/IP protocols to communicate has done: created entirely new sectors of commerce; launched corporations and brands that exist entirely online; transformed the communications industry, everything from mail to telecommunications; and, most important, think about the power that was unleashed when the IP was plugged into the PC from the perspective of the consumer, enabling them to book travel, buy cars, obtain medical information, upload and download files of every kind--text, audio and video.

What is next? Where will the PC take us? How will it transform the way we think? Create? Share? Tune in next week for Part Two to to find out. In the meantime, why don’t you tell me what you think? What is the next logical evolution in personal computing?

Look Ma, It's Digital!

Coming out of the upfronts, one thing was clear: digital is playing a bigger role in trying to capture the interest and dollars of advertisers. Streaming full-length shows, playing games, sneak-peaks and communications forums for fans to interact with the content--it's all there. And you can advertise, too! You would think we are on the brink of something spectacular, something revolutionary, something that has never been done before. But please, don't make me open the "technology-meets content drawer of shame" to refresh your memory. Trust me when I tell you, we have been down this road before. The only difference is, this time we have critical mass. And by that I mean there is enough of a base--whether that is a platform, an audience, content, or what have you--to sustain an interest in and/or justify the investment. What concerns me, though, is this: what happens next? With everyone, and I mean everyone, on the broadband, podcast and blog bandwagon, where is the next breakthrough touch-point? Which personal media technology will capture the next-generation user? Where should we be investing? How should we be looking at the future and not merely focusing on the manifestation of technology in its present incarnation?

Maybe we should take our cues from companies like QuickPlay Media. QuickPlay has developed the QuickPlayer for BlackBerry, a streaming technology to deliver services like audiocasts from various media outlets, including international news, business, finance, and sports. The company claims that the experience will include a personalized audio service with enhanced visuals. What is interesting about this is: one, it is relevant content to the platform. I will make the assumption that the majority of BlackBerry users are business users, so making the content relevant to the platform, hence the user, is a refreshing change. Two, because we are talking about mainly business users, the service can be viewed as a business requirement and ultimately a business expense (don't discount the importance of this--WSJ.com was built on the ability of being able to expense the subscription). And, finally, it has the potential of tapping into a "high-value" target for advertisers in an old-media format they understand--radio.

Now, ultimately, the question becomes whether or not the service is valuable to the user. To be able to get the user to engage with the content is one thing; for the user to find it valuable enough to pay for, either through a subscription or by watching advertisements, is another matter. And this brings me back to my original question of what happens next? May I propose the answer? Services--relevant, targeted, valuable services that will drive user engagement. And that doesn't mean distributing video and audio through every distribution channel just because you can. It means creating services that answer a need, tap into a desire, create a relationship between the user and the content, as facilitated by the appropriate technology. It is not enough to create me-too services anymore. The race is on to see who can do it better, faster and with measurable results.