Interesting discussion over on Fred Wilson's blog, AVC.blog.com, in and about his post What My Kids Tell Me About the Future of Media. Wilson, Managing Partner at two venture capital firms, was sniffing through some research on the radio business, and it led him to ponder the future of other media categories. Wilson has a Goldman Sachs chart, showing growth rates for radio and newspapers at the bottom, and internet and games at the top. He then compares his own experience watching his teenage children -how they use various media platforms - to see how things match up.
His kids are the least passionate about listening to the radio and reading newspapers, and most passionate about the time they spend on the internet and with electronic games. No surprise there, as the market, relfected in the Goldman charts, tells the same story.
Wilson has some interesting observations and thoughts about music and magazines. Despite all the negative press, he thinks the music business is still a good business, at least for those who figure out the best model. I agree that it won't be the labels. Radiohead's direct-to-consumer digital release of its latest album is a good indicator of the trend away from the traditional model.
As for magazines, Wilson says his family seems to have a growing obsession with them, fighting over new issues when they arrive in the mail. I can relate to that. I used to get tingles when the latest Business 2.0 issue would arrive in the mail (until it closed down - how can a magazine with more than 600,000 subscribers go out of business???) He thinks mass market magazines might be undervalued, and I agree. There's a big difference between newspapers and magazines. Newspapers cannot compete with the web when it comes to both the timeliness and sheer volume of news. I believe USA Today is holding steady because many of its stories are magazine-like. Front page stories on USA Today may cover things you were not aware of ... a trend or unique angle on something with broad interest. And magazines, because of their release schedules, are never about breaking news, so they're not competing with the web's strong point. They're purely about content, covering niche topics of interest, and if anything are looking months down the road at trends within and around those topics.
One of Wilson's readers (FredBlank) makes a great point in the comment section, which I believe ties everything together:
The common thread here is where their passion lies. Great music, great storytelling, compelling interactive experiences, and the like. From a consumer perspective, it is not about calling something a "blog" or a "newspaper." It is about making that connection with their passion.
I couldn't agree more. Content is still king, and there's still plenty of passion for great content. But the 'Net Generation' is not looking for the written content they're passionate about in newspapers. They're finding it online in blogs, web articles and social networks ... and offline in magazines and books. Music is still wildly popular, but teens' first impulse is not to purchase entire albums on CDs. It's to sample songs on social networks and artist websites, and then obtain digital versions (mp3s) via legal and illegal downloads.
I have more than a dozen years in the radio business, and I can say from first hand experience that radio executives were purposely deaf to calls for change a number of years ago. For instance, when satellite radio was introduced in 2001 (I was in charge of 3 XM channels for a partner company), executives from the Nat'l Association of Broadcasters, and my bosses, spent most of their time poo-pooing the new competition, claiming no one would pay for radio. What they didn't understand - actually it's more accurate to say what they would not or could not accept - was that traditional radio is for the most part boring ... stale ... repetitive ... and full of annoying commercials. Car commercials with some loud mouth yelling at you. And there were, and are, plenty of people willing to seek out alternative platforms that offer deeper and more interesting content, much of it commercial free, and with the ability to listen without interruption while driving long distances. Consumers are simply not going to stand for someone else deciding they will have to enjoy a narrow list of 'hit' songs decided by a program director stuck in the old way of thinking, and tolerate a poor radio signal that might be good for a thirty mile radius on a good day. Music radio is dead, save for satellite and internet radio. Talk radio is still viable on AM or FM talk stations, because it offers unique, live content, with the option in many cases to interact with the talk shows.
The bottom line: content, content, content ... the kind that people will be passionate about. And then you must meet your target consumers where they are, and where they expect you to be.
if print is all about "content", on web, it is all about "context". i know what to look for and start off in some direction bumping into a variety of sources and opinions.
i cannot do that with a newspaper or magazine. i have to read it first and ruminate later. not so on the web.
and now factoring in very hypnotic user interfaces and the like, the user experience consists of mere taps on the screen, all along respecting the "context". i believe this is enough power for the NOW generation to see them through.
Posted by: kumar | September 01, 2008 at 09:46 AM