Ty Ahmad-Taylor is the founder and CEO of FanFeedr, a real-time personalized sports feed. Previously, he was SVP of Strategy and Product Development at Viacom (NYSE: VIA) and, before that, Comcast.
I worked at two large cable television networks, and both believed — and continue to believe — that they are in the television business.
That seems logical enough
This is an excellent description of the pervasive “they don’t get it” syndrome that afflicts old media executives. In my area of focus, local television news, I find it frustrating to watch as companies continue to see alternate platforms as means only to drive viewers back to the 1950′s era product: the 6:00 or 11:00 newscast. It’s like using new technology to reach the audience you already have, instead of the other way around.
Thanks for the insightful piece.
Excellent piece. Couldn’t agree more
I think the fact that metrics exist with respect to the Gossip Girl experiment is indicative of the fact that they do indeed get it. What they don’t get is how to deal with making much less money in a multi-touchpoint world when production costs remain the same or are even rising.
You seem to be missing one thing: if the all that consisted of the business was connecting the media with the consumer in whatever way was possible then you would be right. The reason discrete channels have prevailed is because that is the only way companies got paid. That’s also why they don’t want to give them up.
Until you can generate as much money in open channels as you can from discrete channels, discrete is going to win.
Philanthopy? Bragging rights? Being cool by being “on line”? None of those things pay the bills. There is a very simple reason why no one wants to canabalize their existing revenues – it would be fiscially insane to do so.
If and when there is a tipping point towards massive multi channel distribution, and I believe it is inevitable, then you will see canabilazation of the discrete channels en mass. Until then only a fool would do so. (An unemployeed fool at that).
@Dan S. agreed about Gossip Girl. I think that the CW has been very forward-thinking about this once they had actionable data.
@Not a Hippie: Point understood, but I think that the economics of the old models are not guaranteed moving forward, and consumers are not obligated to support them.
@Dumb Article: my underlying point isn’t that everything should be free, my point is that the music industry pursued the same set of tactics you suggest, and they are both greatly diminished and less relevant despite the fact that people consume more music than they did 10 years ago.
While your metaphor is clever, I agree with several other commenters (ors?), that you’re oversimplifying the challenge faced by the media companies (as metaphors often do). I too have worked at several lareg nedia companies (Fox, Scripps and Viacom for me), and believe few would dispute your central tenets–what most are wrestling with is how to get to an endpoint like you describe, without accelerating a deterioration in profits which at least in today’s business model, would undoubtedly occur. Not only do media companies have to make the “right” strategic choices to serve the evolving needs and demands of their audience, but the measurement systems necessary to allow Madison Ave. dollars to follow, need to be in place, and the psychology of advertisers needs to move as well. I think advertisers will follow if given the tools, but those tools really aren’t here yet today. Until that time most media companies are, I think, looking to move towards a world not unlike you describe, while continuing to optimize within the constructs of the business model today. Billions of dollars are literally at stake, and it would be irresponsible to look to accelerate the move without a clearer picture of the new status quo than is evident today.
i agree as a technical director for a new england media company its rediculous how much they put towards banner ads and paper ads and not into web content, pre rolls video and playing the numbers game of giving it away for free but use preroll advertising …. get more people in watching, they see more you get more for your ads.
@Ty: What I don’t understand is how people can’t see that this is exactly the same thing that the recording industry went through. We just saw this play out, and we know how it ends for the companies that grasp onto old models instead of innovating new ones.
The lessons are right there for everyone to see. You can’t stop consumers from adopting new technologies. They’re going to do it with or without you. You can sue ‘em, you restrict ‘em, you can charge ‘em more, but they’re going to find a way to consume media in whatever way they want to consume it. Learn how to make money off these new habits instead of fighting with them.
I totally agree with your analysis especially on NY Times, bad idea indeed