Diminishing Returns: Magazine Publishers Market Online

With advertising continuing its trend toward straightforward communication, it’s no surprise magazines are looking to promote their product — advertising — with a simple straightforward message: “They make people want to buy things."

The Gawker, emphasizing that magazine ad pages are down more than seven percent, presents some tongue-in-cheek logic behind a campaign that appears mostly on the Internet. The Gawker also pulls our favorite sentence from the article that offers an explanation:

” The goal is to show that advertising in magazines encourages consumers to consider buying products — a phenomenon known as purchase intent — and stimulates them to go online to shop or to learn more about items they might want to buy.”

Wow! The logic is nothing new. Magazine publishers have been pushing this message — that print advertisements drive online searches, Web site visits, and word of mouth (among other things) — for some time but public relations and direct marketing wasn’t preventing the decline. Why not? Target audience.

The vast majority of print ad purchasers are at agencies. Yet, media buyers are much more likely to consume content online. But that has little to do with the real challenge that magazine publishers are facing today.

Most magazine publishers have spent so many years promoting cost per impression; it will require significant effort to reverse the most pervasive magazine marketing sales message in history. In fact, they have to retool their message to be more like the small publications they used to browbeat based on numbers provided by the Audit Bureau of Circulations because Internet content beats them in free content, niche consumers, and numbers. Is there anything left?

Yes, and no.

It seems to me that the only thing that magazine publishers can hope to do is refine their niche, improve quality content, and provide some or all of their content online while still retaining some semblance of differential between the print publication and online content. Impossible? Not really.

Entertainment Weekly seems to be doing a reasonable job at differentiating its online and print content. But Time seems slightly more challenged. Dwell, which is one young print publication I do enjoy receiving in the mail, not so well.

But more importantly, they might do a better job bundling print and online space. After all, if magazines have something right, it’s this: most advertisements are starting to have a singular mission — drive the consumer to the Web site where every inch of content is controlled by the company.

That’s something to think about. And so is the logic behind a marketing campaign that makes consumer look unhappy with their magazine-influenced purchases.

Trending The Inevitable: Retail Leaves Print

It’s no surprise that Kohl’s and JCPenney are reevaluating their newspaper-circular strategy. online advertising has been chasing newspapers for some time.

Losing even a small share of two retail giants will hurt. Last year, JCPenney spent an estimated $149 million in newspaper advertising. Kohl’s spent $136 million. Like many companies, these two retailers are finding that online marketing works.

Since July, JCPenney has seen steady increases in site traffic since July. Kohl’s is up slightly during the same period. The appeal of both sites seems to be their ability to attract online shoppers and entice online window shoppers, with the latter group sourcing online catalogues before visiting brick-and-mortar stores.

Their reasons are simple enough. They can save travel time and money when they know which retail store is having a sale or what particular styles might be in stock. In other words, consumers don’t have to visit four or five stores in person.

Newspapers aren’t dead. Not by a long shot.

While newspapers continue to be hit, they aren’t dead. Early online adopters such as The New York Times seem to be well ahead of the curve. Sure, online advertising revenue has yet to make up the diminishing print revenue, even for The New York Times as Scott Karp, creator of Publishing 2.0, pointed out. Stuff that the Washington Post has been covering even longer.

However, it seems to me that newspapers will eventually make up the losses as online advertising doubles in the next five years, spurred by the realization that they need their own version of product placement — advertising buys that are tied to specific subjects and stories.

In other words, if newspapers can dominate search terms and continue to lead as sourced content, then advertisers will be there. It makes more sense for marketers than the current model, which used to work when people spent better than a few minutes glancing at headlines or waiting for a friend to prompt them to read an actual story. It requires some to rethink media buys.

Ergo, instead of JCPenney relying on newspapers to carry a truncated circular to your door, it relies more heavily on online newspapers to provide content along with direct messages that are designed to entice online readers to visit an entire online catalog. (For example, a back-to-school sale advertisement seems suited to stories about education or fashion.)

Done right, a future JCPenney site will not only provide you the option to buy online, but also let you know which brick-and-mortar store near you has that specific item in stock, and maybe which size. Who knows? You might even be able to place a hold on the item before you pick it up.

Nothing But Net: TheWB.com

A little more than two years ago, Warner Bros. Television Group (WBTVG) announced it would make hundreds of movies and television shows available for purchase over the Internet. They’ve come a long way since then.

Today, WBTVG announced digital distribution deals with Dailymotion, Joost, Sling Media, TiVo and Veoh. It already has a channel on AOL and a surprisingly dynamic Facebook application, with a trailer that ends “the next great network will not be televised.”

“The launch of TheWB.com [beta] represents a natural progression of the Warner Bros. Television Group’s digital strategy and complements our core business, which is based upon episodic storytelling, first-class distribution and providing value to partners through advertising in a premium environment,” said Bruce Rosenblum, president of WBTVG.

The move also solidifies the continued shift toward total broadcast-Internet convergence, especially since Warner Bros. will be adding original short form content. Currently, the WB beta site is offering full episodes of All Of Us, Blue Water High, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Dangerous, Friends, Gilmore Girls, One Tree Hill, Smallville, The OC, and Veronica Mars.

What will be especially interesting is if the new site might even provide viewers another opportunity to resurrect some shows that did not perform well according to Nielsen ratings. Several had developed strong Internet fan bases, including Veronica Mars, Moonlight, and Supernatural.

Moonlight fans found out their show was cancelled in May while Veronica Mars fans are still working hard to see their favorite detective move from the small screen to the big screen. (Supernatural has at least one more season left on The CW; we hope many more.) According to fans, all of these shows have a following that is not well represented by Nielsen.

For WBTVG, the move toward an all-digital network might also provide marketers and advertisers with more options than investing exclusively in their own original content to reach an audience that is already outpacing traditional media. The primary advantage for WBTVG over other networks seems to be that they are unencumbered by any attachments to traditional media. For them, it’s simply full steam ahead.

Advertising Connections: Branded Content

A little more than a year ago, I was the guest on the Recruiting Animal Show to talk about a subject that few people believed would ever happen. Branded content, a variation of income marketing as I sometimes call it, was already taking shape.

A few months later, Procter & Gamble made it sound more serious. And most recently, Digitas, which is part of the Publicis Groupe, formally became of one the newest entrants into the branded content game.

"It's more and more difficult for brands to get their messages in front of consumers," Mark Beeching, global chief creative officer at Digitas told AdAge. "But at the same time there are more opportunities for brands to create content."

Digitas punctuates a social media concept on its Web site. Beeching's quote even sounds like the message we share and shape every day.

"Instead of marketing at customers, our job in the digital age is to get customers working with us and for us,” he says. “And you do that by working with them and for them. This is where the new marketing energy and breakthrough results are to be found."

It’s refreshing to hear it in advertising, and underscores that agencies are more than ready to move forward into the social media space. Their approach? Here are the first three:

• new ways of listening harder to customers for actionable insights
• ideas that earn customer engagement through valuable and motivating experiences
• new ways of being responsive to customers across channels and over time

And to think all this time that some people thought advertising was a dying one-way communication art form. No. Like all art and media faced with new possibilities, opportunities, and technologies, it survives, adapts, and improves.

We look forward to seeing what they cook up next at Digitas. It's about time.

Taking Aim: Nuts To Nielsen

It’s not a great year to be Nielsen. Every time the company attempts to move forward with Anytime Anywhere Media Measurement — A2/M2 — someone is ready to stop them: clients, competition, consumers.

For Project Apollo, a three-year joint project with Arbitron to monitor buying and radio-television habits of 5,000 households, it was clients. They did not want to pay for the results. Consumers weren’t thrilled with the number of tasks they were asked to perform either. It’s not as cool to be a Nielsen family anymore.

It might not be that cool to work at the company either. Jericho fans dumped 4,000 pounds of peanuts on the company’s property last week. It’s a statement to Nielsen that its small sampling sizes are costing consumers their favorite shows, even when they have enough fans to support a convention.

"It's an antiquated rating system that does not count 99.999 percent of actual TV viewers," Jonathan Whitesell, a Jericho fan and organizer of "Nuts To Nielsen!", told Tampa Tribune on May 10.

"We respect the passion of the 'Jericho' fans, but the decision to cancel the show was made by the network, not by Nielsen," spokesperson Gary Holmes said in a statement after receiving the nuts. "We measure programming that is viewed live, on a video recorder and on a PC, and we are confident that our ratings provide a fair measure of what people are viewing."

But fewer and fewer agree. Diane Mermigas, editor-at-large at MediaPost, recently called Nielsen the “about as inane an advertising value as can ever be justified” in her article about other initiatives to find effective measures. She’s not alone.

The differences between Nielsen ratings and other measures continue to grow, more and more shows are seeing 20 percent to 25 percent ratings gains when DVR viewing is calculated and some other are shows doubling their viewership online. It’s easier to get the numbers from TiVo or local cable companies that can count everyone.

A recent Universal McCann study supports how much the Internet has changed. More than 80 percent of the online population watches video clips online and their choice of viewing options goes well beyond YouTube. If you forget to set the DVR, there is always Hulu, CBS, or Apple iTunes.

It’s also one of the reasons CNN’s Veronica Del La Cruz asked how many people watch live news last Friday night. “Fifty percent? Maybe?”

We’re paying attention, she said, before outlining CNN’s iReport, which allows anyone to submit live reports and videos online. More than 900 of these videos have also been featured on CNN. The idea, which originally grew out of citizen submitted coverage of Hurricane Katrina, represents an opportunity for anyone to decide what might be newsworthy.

“Use the tools you find here to share and talk about the news of your world, whether that's video and photos of the events of your life, or your own take on what's making international headlines. Or, even better, a little bit of both.” — iReport.

What makes this significant for Nielsen is that if the company hopes to survive the long-term, it might consider that it has customers on two sides of the aisle. As consumers continue to lose faith in Nielsen, the more likely consumers will pass on being a Nielsen family. Not to mention, no one wants one company to collect all the data.

In fact, from what Whitesell and Jericho fans tell me, Nielsen is not to be trusted. And these fans are not alone.

Anyone who has a show facing cancellation (most recently, the show Moonlight) is continuing to send Nielsen a message — Nielsen might be confident in the rating system, but they are not. It’s a mounting public relations problem that Nielsen has yet to successfully address. For many consumers, Nielsen’s truncated research, not actual viewers, is the only reason their show was cancelled.

Waiting Games: Jericho Season 3?

With no official word from CBS, fans of the cancelled, resuscitated, and now on the bubble show, Jericho, are taking no chances. For several weeks, they have been writing letters and hoisting up banners of the “Don’t Tread On Me” flag that appears in one of the episodes of the second season. No more nuts yet.

Many critics have warmed to the show, but maintain it’s unlikely to see a third season. Some are even campaigning for faith in the rating system and against renewal, despite saying they like it.

The latter criticism came after Patrick Keane, vice president and chief marketing officer for CBS Interactive, speaking Monday at MediaPost's OMMA Global conference in Hollywood, used Jericho as an example of how online audiences can have a positive impact on a show, especially because online viewership doesn’t cannibalize the broadcast audience.

The online video audience for one episode of Jericho boosted the show's TV ratings by almost a full point: from 4.2 to 5.1.

Even for those who have never seen the show, the significance is in that it represents the transition for television. As cross-convergence seems eminent, Jericho provides a glimpse into just how forward-thinking networks can be, if they want to be.

With two different episodes — one that offers closure and another that provides a cliffhanger — CBS can justify a Jericho renewal as easily as a cancellation. Enough so that I wouldn’t want to hazard a guess. See for yourself…

Five Reasons To Keep Jericho

• Fans are engaged, watching episodes and embedded ads over and over.
• The online audience continues to grow, with ample consumer evangelists.
• Even with less-than-stellar ratings, the rating are better than many other shows.
• It’s a leading program among the network’s growing online inventory.
• There were notable flaws in engaging the fan base that saved the show while CBS continues to get up to speed on how to best engage online fans. There is an opportunity to do it right with a third season.

Five Reasons To Let Jericho Go

• The ratings are just not there; no matter how flawed the system.
• The fan base did not meet Nina Tassler’s condition of more live viewers.
• The fans were never able to develop solidarity or sustained buzz.
• The network met its commitment to deliver a wrap-up with seven episodes.
• There are too many financial limitations to give the show the budget it needs.

Of course, there is also the possibility that network executives at CBS have secretly acquired a taste for nuts. But that is purely speculative.

The real questions CBS might ask is what kind of network does it want to be. Is there an opportunity to take the lead position as an online content provider? Is Jericho the right show to help usher in a new era? And can it preserve this fan base to help lift up new original content in the future?

Everything tells me that the network is split on the decision. Rumors suggest that CBS may be answering these questions as early as today. The clock is ticking and the worst thing the network could do is keep its decision a cliffhanger. Maybe part of the answer lies in non-traditional thinking: Jericho has helped boost other CBS and CW programs online and provided more brand recognition for the network than broadcast ever did on its own.

Making Everyone Famous: YouTube On TiVo

Innovation doesn’t wait. It happens.

As major networks consider how they are going to bridge the content gap between broadcast and the Internet, the Internet is coming to some televisions.

TiVo Inc., largely responsible for the creation and popularization of digital video recorders (DVRs), will be adding direct access to YouTube videos via TiVo later this year. TiVo users will be able to search, browse, and watch videos on their television sets through their broadband connected TiVo DVRs.

“TiVo’s strategy is to bridge the gap between Web video and television and make as much content available as possible for our subscribers,” Tara Maitra, vice president and general manager for content services for TiVo, told The New York Times.

While this only represents single step toward convergence, there are some significant long-term outcomes.

• Marketers who are already establishing a YouTube presence can direct prospects to clips on TiVo television, increasing the pressure on networks to retain engaged fans.
• Amateur content creators will be able to expand their reach into a distribution platform that was once reserved for cable and broadcast channels. Well-produced content could find product placement and sponsors.
• A major overhaul of the rating system needs to keep up with changes as YouTube content creators could feasibly demonstrate better analytics against Nielsen reliance.
• Producers of network-cancelled shows may have an opportunity to consider going it alone if they believe strongly enough in their fan bases.

The move completely bypasses the concept of embedded advertising needed by networks. The move is bold, but there will be a need to step up consumer accessibility. There are 4 million TiVo owners nationwide; only 800,000 have the necessary broadband connection.

From TiVo’s perspective, it’s a smart move to stay viable as more cable distributors are offering DVR boxes as part of their services. TiVo’s other competitor in this space is Apple TV. However, there is more than one way to access television shows and movies from Apple iTunes and place it on the big screen. This cable will do it too.

There isn’t much room to argue the direction of television. If YouTube can find its way onto television screens, then why not Hulu.com? Why not? That small step — and the ability to download Hulu content to other devices along with a better full screen picture quality — is all that is missing. Hmmm. Looks like convergence isn’t happening. It’s happened. All that’s left are the details.

It will happen. That’s how innovation works.

Coming Soon: Broadcast-Broadband Convergence

While some people still look to the rating system, others already see the future: one in four Internet users have watched a full-length show online in the last three months. These aren’t just young people: 39 percent were ages 18-34 and 25 percent were 35-54.

Some people are surprised by these numbers, which are growing exponentially. All I can wonder is where have these ‘surprised’ folks been? There are reams of data that demonstrate everybody is online, with only those in the 65+ age group dropping off. Even then, half of those ages 65+ are online too.

What that means is a show like The Office on NBC last September drew a broadcast audience of 9.7 million, but also streamed 2.7 million views on the Web. Twelve million viewers is enough to break into the top 20 shows.

What that might mean for Jericho on CBS is third season survival.

Jericho fans are not taking any chances. They’ve already launched a preemptive campaign to save Jericho again. This campaign started shortly after CBS released numbers that confirm the show plays impressively online: adding 1.5 million views on some episodes, according to CBS Interactive Research. This does not count all other data like DirectTV, iTunes, etc. And, those numbers are still growing.

In fact, it is these kinds of numbers that are prompting networks to turn toward new media rather than away from it. Television and the Internet are closer than ever to total convergence.

“Oh come on, Rich, you don’t really believe that, do you?”

Yes, I do. You see, NBC Universal and Fox would not be testing their joint venture, Hulu.com, if it wasn’t true. Hulu opens to the public tomorrow with many live shows and limited commercial interruptions.

CBS did the same thing with vintage programming like Star Trek online. Except in this case, the network has been doing an especially good job with its presentation while retaining its brand advantage by not spinning off its programming to another site. That’s smart. Very smart.

Even better, convergence seems to have created solutions for its own monetization challenges. Smarter networks are seeing the natural development of a tiered system: You can pay for commercial-free programs via iTunes or watch the ad-embedded programs on a browser. It’s a win-win-win for everyone.

Equally important, there seems to be no shortage of advertisers willing to buy time on live streaming video — an idea that naysayers said would never happen six months ago. Yet, there it is in living color: a show developed in 1966 has suddenly discovered renewed advertising revenue.

“We would love to have more inventory,” Patrick Keane, chief marketing officer at CBS Interactive, told reporters last week. “The advertisers are raring to go.”

Perhaps there is some irony that the success of the original Star Trek is largely based on the same reason Jericho scored its truncated second season: fans that were not on the Nielsen radar. So it seems, once again, that we might be asking the same question.

Is the future of the television based solely on less than 2 percent of the viewing public? Or is there a better way?

“Forty years ago, new technology changed what people watched on TV as it migrated to color,” Seth MacFarlane, creator of another fan-saved show, Family Guy, told The New York Times. “Now new technology is changing where people watch TV, literally omitting the actual television set.”

With a better budget that takes the cast and new characters of Jericho: Season 3 to different locations across their alternate universe, the show could potentially grow into another dedicated fan franchise success story. But that all depends on CBS. It can play the numbers two ways and come up with different answers.

While I cannot speak for CBS, I know what my answer would be. Do what Star Trek did. Go boldly.

Counting Beans: Journeyman vs. Friday Night Lights

With E! Online giving hope to Friday Night Lights, a show given every advantage to build an audience over two seasons, and Michael Hinman reinforcing the decision to axe Journeyman, a show given a half season in what has become NBC’s dead zone timeslot (as fans of The Black Donnellys know), some people are wondering if Nielsen ratings really mean anything.

After all, these two shows, on the same network, rack up about the same ratings. Unless, of course, you only count select beans.

The decision to cancel Journeyman had less to do with ratings and whether or not people watched the show and more to do with the financials of a hurting network, according to an unexpected source close to the show.

Unfortunately for the fans, this means all the Rice-A-Roni on the planet is unlikely to change any minds at the network. In fact, the only reason ratings have been factored into the conversation is because that is how critics guess at network decisions. And sometimes, networks use these numbers to justify their decisions.

Why are Nielsen numbers only sometimes important? According to Nielsen: There are 5,000 households in the national People Meter sample, approximately 20,000 households in the local metered market samples, approximately 1,000 metered homes for our national and local Hispanic measurement, and nearly 1.6 million diaries are edited each year.

In other words, on Nielsen’s best day, we can expect less than 2 percent of all television households to be sampled, which doesn’t even consider how many people lie (if you were a Jericho fan, chances are you would say you watched it, even if you did not). Or, in yet other words, Nielsen only sounds good when someone like Hinman writes it up like this. Ho hum.

Don’t get me wrong, Hinman is a great guy and he presents a sound argument for the validity of Nielsen as critics want you to believe because they use these numbers to predict the fate of television. However, as someone with a foot in advertising, I do make media buy recommendations from time to time. There are a number of factors well beyond audience reach to consider.

Sometimes these other factors are simple. It makes sense to buy news for political candidates because people who watch the news tend to vote. Sometimes these other factors are about who else buys it. That’s why I recommended a water purifier company NOT buy 20 some radio spots on a station dominated by his competitor, complete with host endorsements. And sometimes these other factors might be about product placement, which is why Ford bought Knight Rider sight unseen.

And sometimes, it has to do with experience. Experience is why, years ago, I heavily recommended a local Ham Supreme retailer to place a good portion of its media buy on an unproven pilot program. The agency I was working for balked at the idea, insisting we buy a high frequency cable rotate instead. The result: Ham Supreme ran heavily at 3 a.m. in the morning instead of on a show that eventually climbed to number one. Why did I want the pilot? Psychographics suggested Home Improvement viewers might like big ham sandwiches.

My point is that the rating system has become little more than a tool to push perception instead of reality. How far from reality? Far enough from reality that when a show like Jericho, for example, is placed in a setting where every viewer is tracked, like TiVo viewers or iTunes downloads, it comes close to the top and looks more viable.

I could have made the same iTunes comparison for Journeyman or Friday Night Lights, but for all of NBC’s smart moves toward digital media, it nixed selling shows on iTunes last Sept. in favor of a platform that doesn’t work on the market's dominant smart phone. When Journeyman was there; it did okay.

No matter, the networks and studios know all this, which is why Warner Bros. is testing emerging technology; advertisers are looking to the net; and networks have any number of initiatives that are not connected to the rating system. (Hat tip: Jane Sweat.) Add all this up and ...

Nielsen isn’t nearly as relevant today as it once was and everybody knows it, but few will admit it. While that doesn’t mean it won’t be relevant in the future, it certainly means its primary relevance is a matter of convenience. It’s easy to blame the ratings or bypass them on any given Sunday, like today.

So why was Journeyman cancelled? Look at the ratings and it seems to make sense, but the truth seems to be about budget. Why might Friday Night Lights be saved? The lower-budget show has critics who love to write about it and advertisers who like the psychographics.

Ho hum. Ratings smateings. Let's shoot for the truth.

As more entertainment becomes available on the net, more people will be turning to the net more often. Advertisers tend to want to be where people might learn about and buy their products. And networks tend to want to be where the advertisers want to be. Businesses that already have a Web presence in, um, social media, will be able to engage more people as opposed to simply slicing up their budgets across multiple media streams.

Networks and publishers will eventually win in this world too. For example, more people read The New York Times today than ever before. They made their decision after counting all the beans, not just the red ones. Advertising hasn't caught up, but it will. Bank on it.

So maybe what needs to be asked is this: in a world where analytics are pure, where's the need for Nielsen? Hinman says they'll measure everything in about five years. Five years? That's too late, considering I know how many people visit this blog without them.

Yeah, I know, media convergence seems so silly to so many people. But then again, these folks used the same arguments before: companies do not need Web sites; people will never use electronic mail; and Apple will never break into the phone market, let alone allow someone like me to connect my phone to my television and watch Supernatural. Right, none of those things will happen either.

Taking Leaps: NBC Blinks, Sees The Future

The Bionic Woman will not be rebuilt, but NBC Universal wants to rebuild television. On Tuesday, the network announced it would move to a year-round schedule of staggered program introduction.

According to The New York Times, NBC will be committing to a new lineup of shows earlier than any of its competitors, while also inviting advertisers to build marketing plans around specific shows and perhaps to integrate brands and products into the plots of the shows themselves.

“We absolutely think this is going to change the industry,” said Michael Pilot, head of sales for NBC.

The departure places a real question mark on the viability and importance of the Nielsen rating system. Nielsen is not prepared to measure a 52-week season; the bulk of its measure is based on traditional sweeps. Tradition, it seems, is dead.

“The ultimate decision is going to be made by program executives who believe in the shows,” Marc Graboff, the co-chairman of NBC Entertainment, who said that they are looking to have a two-way conversation with advertisers.

That makes sense, given more advertisers want a two-way conversations with customers. And customers want to be heard.

Whether this decision plays well for the fans of recently cancelled shows, or those on the bubble, has yet to be seen. For NBC, the show is Journeyman. So far, despite the inventive Rice-A-Roni campaign, the best outcome for fans seems to be based on a rumor that a few more episodes of season one might see the light of day.

For CBS, everyone knows the show is Jericho. With season 2, episode 2 ratings being called a virtual disaster, even sympathetic critics seem to think there is little hope left.

It’s not because fans don’t watch the show (on TiVo, Jericho ranks as the 11th most recorded show on television). It was also the network's second most downloaded show after CSI. And leaked episodes were downloaded in droves. One hold up: Nielsen families don’t watch Jericho live.

And that might be enough. Nina Tassler, president of CBS Entertainment, warned fans early on that she wanted more live viewers before committing to a third season. It’s something I kept drawing attention to when some fans insisted CBS wanted them to hang out in the CBS forum instead of out and about recruiting new fans. No matter, it wasn’t the only mistake made by fans or CBS.

The best hope for fans is that this "live viewers" condition was made on a network-decision model that doesn’t exist anymore. Every show is being considered on a case-by-case basis. It’s a new era of network decision-making; the kind that shocks the system as cable shows like Dexter make the jump from cable to mainstream despite growing protest.

At the end of the day, the decision will all depend on how CBS decides to crunch the numbers. If the old model is applied to Jericho, it will die. If the new model is applied, there might be a chance.

The same can be said for other shows too. The future model will allow shows like Journeyman or even Veronica Mars to avoid current ratings system and time slot traps. But that does not mean the networks have to apply this thinking today.

Opening Hollywood: Writers Strike Ends

The writers strike is over, but the impact is permanent well beyond payment for digital distribution. People want change, and not just the actors who will likely ask for digital distribution compensation as well.

Advertisers are hoping networks adopt a year-round television schedule as opposed to the nine-month schedule currently employed by major networks. Year-round scheduling, which has been tried and tested positive by many cable networks (which purposely avoid sweeps to launch new programming), would allow viewers to consider more new programs.

“There’s a lot of hype in September,” Charlie Rutman, chief executive for the North American operations of MPG, a media agency owned by Havas, told The New York Times. “And by November, half the shows aren’t on anymore.”

Year-Round Means Better Metrics

Such a move would require a greater overhaul of the Nielsen rating system, which relies primarily on sweep weeks for its largest gathering of ratings. Currently, only a fraction of a few million Nielsen families are counted year round.

The rating system has been a hotly debated topic by consumers since last May, when fans of the Jericho television show (which aired its first episode of the second season last night) criticized questioned its accuracy and dismissal of online DVR viewership, which some estimates put at 58 to 70 percent of all cable households. Eventually, Jericho voices were joined by the fans of virtually every cancelled show.

While Nielsen has made changes since last May, including some semblance of DVR counts and video-on-demand (VOD) analytics, it continues to draw fire from, well, everyone. Enough so that Nielsen apologized for the “systemic problems in the delivery of its national ratings data” since the beginning of the 2007-08 TV season. Enough so that CBS and TiVo have an arrangement. Enough so that everyone is looking for alternative metrics while reporters mention that the rating system is less than perfect.

A year-round season is something that some networks, like NBC, are already working toward. NBC recognizes that it would save money because fewer pilots would need to be produced in the spring for the fall. It might also mean that networks wouldn’t feel pressured to put as many shows on the bubble, simply to take a chance and make a splash with a new show line up every year.

More importantly, it works for consumers because head-to-head show competition is becoming a phenomenon of the past. Consumers simply want great content rather than relying on the old model, which was based on the idea that they would “settle for the best thing on” or spend an hour surfing.

New Media Is All Media

As mentioned in January, old media is dead because the distinction between old and new is fast becoming nonexistent. The graphite is scrawled across the wall …

• Everyone wants a rating system that counts everybody, and breaks out information across various multimedia platforms.
• Everyone wants a fair compensation for actors, creators, and distributors, regardless of how revenue is generated.
• Everyone wants better quality programming that can survive longer than three episodes before being pulled.
• Everyone wants more interaction between fans, cast, and crew because viewers are paying much more attention to their favorite shows.
• Everyone wants engagement beyond passive viewership because, well, because it’s possible.
• Nobody really minds some advertising if the content is free; and advertisers don’t mind paying for programs that people watch.

This is different, but doable. It’s less about reinvention and more about innovation to diminish the difference between what exists and what’s possible.

Even the primary reason for the conclusion of the writers strike is indicative of change. Many people are crediting Peter Chernin, president of the News Corporation, and Robert Iger, chief executive of Walt Disney, for opening sideline talks with Patric Verrone, David Young, and John Bowman. Individual conversations succeeded where group negotiations failed. Sounds almost like a social media solution.

Looking for two more positive outcomes to the writers strike? The United Hollywood blog intends to stick around. It might be a very long time before a network executive ever needs to ask for a pencil. Case closed, well, sort of.

Mixing Media: The Recruiting Animal

Last March, the unabashed shock jock of recruiting, best known to the industry as the “Recruiting Animal,” launched an online radio talk show. Since, the show continues to capture growing interest, maybe even contributing to his recent win as the “Best Recruiting Blogosphere Personality” gratis RecruitingBlogs.com Best Recruiting Blogs Of 2007.

You think? No way, says Animal.

“I feel guilty about the prize because David ‘Bull Doza’ Mendoza of Six Degrees From Dave put me on his slate of candidates and sent a request to his super huge network* to vote as he advised,” explains Animal. “I have to assume that most of the voters didn't know anything about me.”

Whether they did or not, I doubt he feels guilty. At least not since the contest organizer stripped him of one coveted treat. There was no Starbucks coffee in the prize package.

“Have you ever heard the word schnorrer?” asks Animal. “Jay Dee (Jason Davis of RecruitingBlogs.com) is my friend, so he thinks that what's mine is his.”

Adding Practicality To Punch Lines

The Recruiting Animal is not the only one to add podcasting to his repertoire. Since August 2006, BlogTalkRadio has added thousands of shows, including several authors and celebrities in addition to bloggers. It makes some wonder. Is it worth it?

“I think it is easier to get other people to contribute their expertise because they don’t have to write anything,” says Animal. “But it does take preparation to do it well. Writing a good intro for the show is as time consuming as writing a long blog post, but you don't do it every day.”

In addition to the introduction, good online radio hosts have to spend considerable time researching topics and giving the information advanced thought. And, a blog or Web site is important for show promotion.

There is also considerable effort in developing a workable approach. While Animal says he is still in the process of formalizing his interview approach, there are a few things he has learned along the way.

• Always research the featured topic and examples
• Always plan questions thoroughly, including follow ups
• Sometimes pre-interviews can make a huge difference

“I did a pre-interview this past week and it made a big difference,” says Animal. “If I know something about the answers in advance, then I don’t have to struggle to get a clear statement from my guest.”

The pre-interview technique also put him in a position to clarify answers without losing the spontaneity that keeps the show fresh. And, he says, they are more appropriate than supplying advance material or scripts.

While advance material has been helpful for what he affectionately calls “The Animal Panel,” guests tend to know their subject and need more flexibility. On one occasion, he did plan a show with a guest and it backfired, with the guest refusing to stick to the script. Animal filled in some blanks, but the interview seemed like guest baiting to industry insiders as opposed to a fun show.

Balancing Acts For Guests And Listeners

Even with some tried and true tips, there are no hard and fast rules. One of the challenges Animal faces on a weekly basis is finding the right mix for guests and listeners. People don’t necessarily want a plodding question-interview session, but rather a fast-moving, entertaining, and informative show.

If he is too polite to guests, he says it makes for a less interesting show. Most people want what they are used to: blunt remarks, raised voices, and interruptions that sometimes have nothing to do with the subject. So Animal is always looking for balance between his colorful— sometimes snarky — blog persona and a radio show host who doesn’t frighten guests away.

“Since I know that I can find people to interview, I'm probably
better off telling guests that it's going to be a rough ride,” says Animal. “But if I don't sober up, I wonder if it might be hard to get certain interesting, but straight-laced types, on my show.”

Somewhere in between entertaining and outlandish seems to be the answer for him, even if it means losing certain guests to someone else. If he plays it too straight, his listeners let him know. Great introduction, they might say, but what a dull interview.

Live Listeners Are A Fraction Of Audience

Many online radio talk show hosts avoid answering questions related to live listeners, but Animal helped put this into perspective. He says live listeners aren’t as important as some people might think. While he would like more callers because they add value to the show, the bulk of his audience comes from people who download podcasts.

“I derive a lot of benefit from my regular callers. You meet a lot of intelligent, talkative people in blogging. When people like Maureen Sharib, Harry Joiner, Dave Manaster, or Jason Davis call in, they ask good questions that I wouldn't think of,” says Animal. “They also make good remarks and add a lot of variety.”

The show itself, much like The Recruiting Animal’s blog, is geared more for recruiters in the business than it is for recruiting clients and candidates. As a result, readership and listenership tend to be more narrowly focused. However, Animal is still surprised by how many people listen or write reviews of past shows, making podcasts a better measure of his reach.

“I do get the odd review in which someone I don’t know says they find it entertaining,” says Animal. “That’s a real treat.”

Currently, Animal is working to build a subscription network and that might give him a better idea of who and how people listen to the show. This may eventually help produce a show with online sponsors that will keep his Starbucks cup full.

So is it worth it? It seems to be for Animal. But like all online tools, it’s best to match what you do best with the available applications. If you have a good speaking voice and can dedicate time to online radio, it provides a richer experience and relationship than other formats. Animal is a natural for radio, and he didn’t pay me to say it. Listen for yourself.

You can also catch an essay discussion opener on BlogStraigthTalk on adding podcasts.

*note comments: Animal was dreaming.

Pocketing Portfolios: iPhone Possibilities

Last year, our portfolio measured 24 x 18 inches.

It is encased in aluminum, packed with a cross section of print and collateral. It grossly undersold our work in electronic media, but was effective in demonstrating our depth and diversity of experience nonetheless.

It was too bulky to take everywhere, except planned introductions and presentations. It was challenging to update, and eventually, even the best protected pieces became worn from handling (passing boards around the classroom didn’t help).

This year, our portfolio measures 4.5 x 2.4 inches.

It is encased in an iPhone, with a cross section of print, radio, and television. The latter is easily transported as a podcast from Revver into iTunes.

It works fine on an iPod too. And we’re slowly adding the links to various digital media platforms and social networks, allowing our prospective clients, colleagues, and associates to easily engage us any time.

I quickly put up two samples as a photo set on Flickr to provide the basic idea. New media is quietly changing communication in ways people never thought possible.

Naturally, the Flickr set will eventually mirror what is already on my iPhone. Even better, for companies bigger than ours, the possibilities are endless: imagine one quick podcast update or file download and every account executive in the company is suddenly on the same page. Clients too, for that matter.

Although many social media experts, and even colleagues of mine, are quick to tell companies that they must conform to the “rules” of social media, not all conversations have to take place in public or on a blog. New media is completely customizable and easily integrated with traditional media.

It’s one of the reasons that in addition to the iPhone presentations, we’ll be adding hardbound leave-behind pieces too. Printed on demand. Hmmm. Interesting things. These possibilities.

Ending 2007: Old Media Is Dead

If any year will ever stand out as the most dramatic change of direction for network television, it will likely be 2007. And if there is any credit is to be given, it doesn’t belong to a single network or broadcast executive, but rather the collective efforts of fans from several television shows, with Jericho Rangers leading the charge in the form of 20 tons of nuts and constant coverage from personal blogs to The Wall Street Journal.

Sure, while some networks and corporations like AT&T were quietly looking at broadcast-digital convergence long before Jericho was cast, Jericho fans helped set the agenda this year and hastened the pace. They did much more than save a television show by convincing CBS to offer up an olive branch in the form of a truncated second season premiering Feb. 12.

They demonstrated the power of organizing consumers via social media. They set a precedent of tracking signatures, e-mails, postcards, phone calls, and protest purchases. They pushed for sweeping reforms at Nielsen Media Research, enough so that Nielsen began to listen to them more than the networks it serves. They established alliances with other fan bases like Veronica Mars fans to expand their campaign five-fold. They made contact with writers, producers, cast members, and crew, giving everyone something to think about, including advertisers.

Passive viewers became active consumers

The writer’s strike is precisely what I’ve been writing about for almost two years: the transition between the era of old to the era of new media. The Writers Guild of America (WGA) even cited it as the primary explanation for the most recent stall in contract negotiations.

"The media conglomerates know that the core issue in these negotiations is new media. Their current proposals would cause writers even more economic harm in the future than they claim this strike has caused.” — Writers Guild of America

While the networks seem unwilling to make an agreement, the WGA and David Letterman's Worldwide Pants production company have reached a contract agreement that includes the proposal put forth by the WGA on Dec. 7.

In other words, production companies and writers are starting to make the deals that the networks are unwilling to make. And if that happens across the board, then network television will be reduced to a distribution channel at a time when content creation is the only tangible commodity. Distribution is easy.

Change happens in small, unseen ways

Cox Communications is one of a handful of multi-service broadband cable service providers that is beginning to offer OnDemand commercial programming, which would allow companies to produce and distribute their own television programs. This means that a company has the potential reach of 6 million residential and commercial consumers.

Once produced, segments of these shows could easily be repackaged for distribution across other platforms like YouTube, Revver, Apple iTunes, and countless others. The possibilities of programming are seemingly endless, well beyond OnDemand infomercials. It also opens the doors for enterprising producers to create their own programs, saving six to eight minutes per half hour for sponsors, much like local market home shows used to do.

The networks are hastening the need for change

As ratings continued to fall this last year, advertising rates continued to rise. The reason was that advertisers were less willing to experiment and attempted to simply purchase more spots to reach the same viewing audience that they once captured by buying fewer shows.

It’s only a matter of time before the burden of building reach shifts away from advertisers and onto the networks again. After all, the concept of last minute scatter market buys will likely die this year as marketers begin to realize they spent 18 percent more for primetime "scatter" than they ever hoped to save.

Even the classic measure of cpm (cost to reach 1,000 viewers) is being questioned. It doesn’t seem to hold as much weight as a measure as it used to. A lower cpm, augmented by Internet presence, can have a greater impact and make more sense as fans are eager to spend an hour or two talking about their favorite show on the net rather than watching the programs that follow.

Old media will become an abandoned term this year

It’s not so much that old media is dead as much as it is that old media has been challenged to become indistinguishable and better than new media. It’s the kind of challenge that will lead to bright possibilities in journalism and broadcast. The new year will be the year to decide. Will a company adapt or die?

Reality programming is not the answer. With rare exceptions like Survivor and American Idol, the net has taken over the reality programming niche. Not only can we watch real-life realty clips on YouTube, but also entire lives put up for consumption with live streaming. The networks need better niche programs.

It’s the very reason networks have to end the writer’s strike soon. It’s only a matter of time before some people begin to realize that the networks are not the only way to reach an audience. Big names in every facet of the entertainment industry are learning that the old model of distribution is dead.

Don’t believe it? Heck, even this blog, which might be considered in the minor leagues compared to what we would like to do on our own or with partners, reached 100,000 people this year. Not bad for an experimental platform.

Thank you all again for making this year a success. We look forward to seeing you in 2008! Happy New Year. Please be safe.

Advertising Focus: Online Content

Adam Mazmanian, lead editor for the American Advertising Federation’s Smart Brief, outlaid some pointed and apparent issues for 2008; challenges and opportunities that we agree will drive the conversation net year.

“Mobile marketing and social-network advertising promise to be big topics, as well as the way television advertisers grapple with an audience that is increasingly watching what they want, when they want,” he said.

Sixty two percent of Smart Brief readers, which consist primarily of advertisers and marketers, said they would advertise on an online social network. Seventy-seven percent concur that the online medium will continue to see the biggest jumps in terms of advertising growth rate.

Which medium will see the biggest growth rate in 2008?

• Online — 77 percent
• Outdoor — 8 percent
• Television — 5 percent
• Radio — 5 percent
• Print — 5 percent

Given television is counting down to go all digital and broadcast-Internet convergence seems like the next logical step in program distribution, allowing broadcasters to better develop social networks and other online support content around original programming. The future seems pretty amazing, unless eager developers like Facebook overreach.

According to Mazmanian, the FTC will be taking a hard look at the way online content providers target Web users in 2008. He said they are likely to address a growing call for a "Do Not E-mail" registry, which might be similar to the national "Do Not Call" list geared toward telemarketers.

This falls in line with what Harris Interactive cautioned mobile advertising developers about months ago. Always make it an opt-in they suggested.

All of this places a new emphasis on speed to market. Some of our own research anticipates that online content developers will be best served to have their plans in place as early as possible next year before market entrance becomes increasingly challenging, with the “shiny new object” phenomenon seeing diminished returns.

Giving Thanks: Thanksgiving

Last weekend, my son was pretty upset after his plans to spend the afternoon with a friend fell through. He was rightfully disappointed, then started to sulk.

It may come as no surprise to some, but I’m not a big fan of anyone moping around, especially when it seems to be a plea for misery to have company. So I shared with him a little bit of wisdom and set him out on a task.

“Don't waste yourself in rejection, nor bark against the bad, but chant the beauty of the good.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson

Rather than losing your present to a past you wish might have been, why not get to work on a project, I said. Thanksgiving is right around the corner and it would be great of you to make a book of 10 things you might be thankful for, using art, words, and pictures.

He went right to it.

Since I’m not one to ask another to do a task that I myself would be unwilling to take, I set out to do the same — except mine comes in the form of a post, rather than ten pages of copy paper bound between construction paper with twine (Paper? How barbaric of me, I know.)

There is a lot to be thankful for, every minute of every day, as one of my friends (and client) likes to say. Here are ten at random.

iTunes. Yep, as silly as it sounds, portable entertainment still amazes me. Music sets a great pace for the gym; lectures from Stanford add value while cleaning house; and downloadable shows, they certainly came in handy during the 4-hour wait at the DMV. It’s media snacking at its best.

Communication Arts. If there was ever a case for printed publications, CA is it. Anytime I become frustrated by the abuses within our industry (meaningless creative, distress ads, and faux rules), CA reminds me that there is some amazing commercial talent out there.

One random call. You never really know if what you teach will be applied until a student calls from a bookstore to ask which book you recommend; and then wants to make sure she’s enrolled in anyother classes I might teach this spring. I’m teaching three, including social media.

The Recruiting Animal. Sure, he might be billed as the recruiting industry’s unabashed shock jock, but he quickly became one of my most trusted friends online. Never mind that I still pack silver when I’m around him. As I am with all my friends, online or off, I’m thankful to have them.

My daughter’s feet. The staph infection that had worked its way into the bones during our daughter’s first three months of life (a year and a half ago) will leave no permanent damage. We found out last week. It’s hard to believe she was once the size of a 12 oz. water bottle. Grateful doesn’t begin to measure little things as they relate to family.

Jericho fans. Who would have ever guessed that asking a simple question, like what would you do with 22,000 pounds of nuts, last May would have resulted to our longest-running dual case study. Jericho fans still amaze me, and watching Jane Sweat evolve as a blogger has been a gift. Check out her newest endeavor.

BlogCatalog. There are many social networks, and I appreciate several. But the BlogCatalog team and its members keep it real. Although I tend to focus on social media as applied to business communication, they are the ones who remind me it is often the least linked private blogs that add real value (more tomorrow).

Our clients. I rarely write about clients here, mostly because I find the daunting demands of disclosure as set by social media often irrelevant, inconsistent, and distracting (as if relationships somehow make us less than objective when objectivity is called upon). Even though I don’t highlight them here, I’m grateful for every assignment, account, and relationship. There would be no blog, nonprofit contributions, or university classes to teach without them.

Patrick Bertoletti. He set the world record for consuming four and three quarter pounds of turkey at the Thanksgiving Invitational eating contest two years ago. He did it in 12 minutes. What better way to add wonderment to a holiday. That and 110-foot Superman balloon that floated down Broadway during the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. Thanks, George, for our nation’s very first Thanksgiving proclamation.

Where The Wild Things Are. A book that reminds me, no matter what you do or where you go in life, taking friends, family, colleagues, clients, readers, and whomever for granted is easy. That is, until you no longer have them.

"... and into the night of his very own room where he found his supper waiting for him ... and it was still hot."

Happy Thanksgiving.

Tracking Ads: Google & Nielsen

The shortcomings of the rating system as offered by Nielsen Media Research has become a popular target for television fans. And for good reason. However, if there is one thing Nielsen has been doing right, it is listening to consumers.

Recently, they told networks that they would no longer combine two airings of the same show. And, they are allowing longer time periods to count DVR viewers, which has increased some show's ratings as much as five percent. Both moves came out of public outcry.

Today, The New York Times reported that Google will be announcing a partnership today with the Nielsen Company in order to give "advertisers a more vivid and accurate snapshot of how many people are viewing commercials on a second-by-second basis, and who those people are."

“We want to bring all the advantages that we see in online advertising — like more accountability, a better sense of the audience, better tools to optimize a campaign — and bring them to television to make TV advertising more effective,” Michael Steib, director for television ads for Google told The New York Times.

Google has been experimenting with television advertising through a cable operator, the DISH Network, which reaches 13 million subscribers. Several advertising executives predicted that it would be only a matter of time before other cable operators signed up, making the measurement system offered by Google TV Ads more broadly available.

Seems we too were early in connecting the dots, seeing cable operators as both the most obvious answer to better measurements as well as the eventual convergence of television and the Internet. While no old media has ever been replaced by new media to date, it sure seems like all media is undergoing a rapid and dramatic transformation.

Drumming Up Interest: Anthony Miranda

When Anthony Miranda was playing drums for Johnny Mathis, he needed to add metal sounds to a hand drum set. But what he didn’t know ten years ago was that a single YouTube video would garner more attention for his solution than he ever received touring with the Grammy Award-winning singer and songwriter or attending trade shows and conventions for five years.

Now, Miranda will be considered as an act featured on Late Night With David Letterman. Representatives from the show caught Miranda's demonstration of his invention, Fingerstix, on what appeared to be a spontaneous YouTube performance in a restaurant.

“My marketing director brought up filming a YouTube video,” says Miranda. “So I concepted the idea of doing it in a restaurant with plates and glasses.”

In many ways, dinner plate performances had previously been proven. Always the entertainer, Miranda had played in restaurants for his friends for years. His talent is amazing; the video a must see. Almost immediately following the launch of the video, Miranda noted increased exposure and sales on his Web site, where you can catch several more dazzling clips.

“Any great idea has to find the right path to market,” Miranda told me. “I’m an inventor and creative person by nature, but even I knew finding the right people to help me take my product from an idea and onto people’s hands was key.”

Five years ago, when Miranda first decided to take his invention public, he went the traditional route. He took it out to trade shows like NAMN and had some success with resellers. It made sense. After all, Fingerstix were responsible for the unique percussion sounds on several albums and movie soundtracks

“I also used them in concerts and clinics and sold numerous sets to the attendees,” he said. “But all of these traditional methods targeted a very focused segment of the market.”

Given Miranda has performed with Mathis, Madonna, Natalie Cole, Gladys Knight, and Tom Jones, one would assume the traditional route would have been enough. However, Miranda gives ample credit to the power of social media.

“It [the video] opened up Fingerstix to a much broader audience,” says Miranda. “The YouTube video was shot in one take and the Fingerstix team posted it a couple days later. I couldn’t believe that hundreds of people watched it shortly after and they still do.”

Miranda says that the Fingerstix team has always used some guerilla marketing techniques to improve sales, but nothing like the YouTube video. Currently, they are working on his next YouTube video. And while Miranda wouldn't give up the concept, he did tell me that it is sure to be sensational.

I have little doubt about that. Who knows? Maybe the next YouTube video will include Hilary Duff. It could happen. Miranda recently added movie producer to his long list of credits and credentials.

Drinking Games: Bud TV

Two years ago, Bob Lachky had enough creative vision to become executive vice president of global industry development for Anheuser-Bush, Inc., which made him responsible for representing the company to alcohol beverage industry groups nationally and abroad, and to enhance the overall image of the beer industry with both the public and within the industry. Fresh off seven consecutive wins in the Super Bowl’s USA Today Ad Meter Poll, he seemed like the perfect match.

“I am excited and inspired by the challenge that has been put before me. And, after leading our creative team to seven consecutive wins in the Super Bowl’s USA Today Ad Meter Poll, I am grateful to be leaving my job as head of brand creative on a high,” Lachky said then.

More recently however, he showed that oh-too-transparent side as he delivered an acid-tongued review of Bud TV with a quotable or two that rivals Lauren Caitlin Upton, Miss South Carolina.

“…as you can tell, I was doing something else at the time, I think had a little stronger sell on this,” said Lachky during Masters of Marketing. “… kind of a flawed idea but a brilliant concept.”

Okay. Sure, Lachky is technically accurate, in that a concept is an abstract and an idea is a visible representation of a concept, but the rest of the summed review of his company’s own communication effort reveals Bud TV wasn’t such a brilliant concept at all. And based on the previews alone, it’s easy to see Bud TV is exactly how Lachky described it: a purposeless waste that featured ‘bizarre’ content and no branding. (A classic example of more buzz, less outcome.)

None of the content is ‘bizarre’ enough to be that funny except one gem on YouTube. The rest is simply a good indication of why Bud TV captures about 50,000 unique visitors per month (that’s on par with some mid-level blogs). Still, the company says it has faith, enough to let all it all run through 2008.

Not to be deterred, Tony Ponturo, vice president of global media and sports/entertainment marketing at Anheuser-Bush, recently tried to put the decision in perspective as the company intends to invest more in entertainment and the digital space.

"We wanted to get through the step of, 'OK, should we continue into '08 as we build our marketing plans?' and that was the decision," he said during a keynote speech at Online Media, Marketing & Advertising Conference & Expo. "I think it (Bud.TV) is something that could have an ending someday, but I think if we keep learning from it and if we keep seeing assets from it ... then it makes sense to continue the site.”

You can catch more of Bud TV talk over at iMedia. But right out of the gate, Ponturo tells us why Bud TV doesn’t work.

“We wanted to go into this sort of new world because of what we are seeing, and what our research suggests, that adults 21 to 27 are using the Internet minimally six hours a week, and obviously that's growing.”

No, no, no. If you want it to work, stop talking about why you did it and start talking about what it promises to deliver (just make sure it delivers something, which it doesn’t at the moment). And, you might ask Lachky to stop poking at the ashes with critiques that reinforce the idea that Bud TV is dead anyway. (I'm still wondering what he was doing while millions were poured away.)

So here are are quick fixes. If you want to save Bud TV, dump the ego-creative concepts and provide content people who drink beer want to see. Like, um, how to brew beer at home. Or maybe, follow a NASCAR driving team around the circuit (oh right, you more or less gave that content model over to Coors). Or maybe, you could cover the Beer Pong championship. Or maybe, you could put in some product placement, since, well, they are your shows. Or maybe, ask people who watch Bud TV to provide some content from time to time.

I dunno. Whatever Bud does next, let’s just hope they don’t launch a completely different channel and spread out their already thin fan base. Oh right, they already did that too, several times over.

Not to worrry, there is always a bright side: after spending $30 million for a site that is less than fluid, some people on the team will likely need a beer in 2008. It brings new meaning to the term case study.

Stuggling To Be Relevant: Old Media

Last year, most people said it wouldn’t happen. Now it is happening out of desperation. The people who social media participants and bloggers call “old media” are working as quickly as possible to change everything and become the, um, new new media.

Old media is not struggling; they are fighting for survival.

According to Bloomberg, BusinessWeek is doing everything possible to keep up. The magazine is undergoing a facelift and adding stories on new products and personal finance. It is updating its logo and typefaces.

Advertising pages dropped 20 percent and advertising sales dropped 15 percent. Hard copy circulation is down 1.2 percent. Online, the story is different. Its Internet readership is up to 6.5 million unique visitors a month from 1.7 million a month in 2004. But ad sales online only account for 18 percent of its revenue.

“All traditional business publishers are struggling to find the right formula,” said Peter Kriesky, Kreisky Media Consultancy in New York. “None of them have reached the promised land.''

What if there is no formula?

ABC seems to be asking the same. So while it tends to be the quietest of all networks about its plans for network-Internet convergence, The New York Times says it is the only major network that is using the staff of its evening newscast to produce a separate and distinct daily program for a Web audience as opposed to repackaging (that’s largely true).

The 15-minute Webcasts often feature Charles Gibson in the anchor chair and ABC News correspondent. Bill Blakemore recently finished a special on global warming. I watched their Web segment on the Pennsylvania shooting plot this morning. It’s not perfect (ABC needs a full screen option, among other things), but it is a step in the right direction and more promising than repackage plus option being made by other networks.

Innovation will lead the way.

This is not to say traditional media is not content relevant (they are). They simply lack in platform building, appropriate technology, and understanding active consumers (as opposed to passive readers and viewers). Too many are following old models and formulas.

Time Magazine’s Bill Tancer found one piece of the puzzle: according to the Solutions Research Group, roughly 37 percent of the U.S. population over the age of 12 use their computers while watching television at home.

What's the answer? It seems to me that consumers want integrated print, broadcast, and Internet. And while mobile devices seem to be chugging along, we’re still past prime time for a dual-device entertainment interface that allows people to watch programming on a big screen while participating online with their smaller screened laptops that function like a universal remote. Of course, all this assumes cable companies stop double dipping by charging people twice for essentially the same service.

Sounds like an Apple of an opportunity to me.

As for where print and broadcast seem to be missing the mark online right now, maybe that’s better served up in the weeks ahead. At the moment, I have some old media ads to write. As much as times are changing, some things have not changed.