| THEY’RE SO FAMOUS,THEY’RE IN-FAMOUS FOLLOW ME,I’M THE PIED PIPER BITING MY TONGUE SEMI-BIG ANNOUNCEMENT —————————————————————————————————————————- THEY’RE SO FAMOUS,THEY’RE IN-FAMOUS. That’s one of my favorite lines from the movie The Three Amigos. It comes to mind as you look at Google’s annual Zeitgeist report looking at the top searches in the world and in various countries. The United States has Casey Anthony. The world has Melania Rea and Salvatore Parolisi. People in the U.S. were worried about Osama bin Laden. People in the world,not so much. The world wanted to know more about Fukushima. The U.S. was more interested in Hurricane Irene. But everybody —people in the U.S.,and the whole world —wanted to know about Rebecca Black. At least,according to the Google report,that’s true. The California teenager and her squealing song Friday was the “fastest rising search”,meaning she and it showed the greatest increase in interest,in the world year to year. When I first introduced readers to the song,it had an amazing 13 Million views on Facebook. The latest count puts it at a staggering 167 Million views worldwide. Feeling a little stunned,are you? Well,prepare to be even more amazed by the report,but for a different reason. First,here’s what made both the American and world lists of “fastest rising” searches —Ryan Dunn,Casey Anthony,Adele,and Steve Jobs along with teenage ‘singer’ Jessica Black. The iPhone5 made both lists,but oddly the iPad2 made the world list but not the U.S. list. Here’s another ‘oddity.’ Google’s newly launched Google-plus made both lists. In fact it was the second fastest rising search year to year,just behind Rebecca Black,even though,if memory serves me right,it was only introduced in June of this year. Okay,a brief pause in this article as all of you cynics guffaw. Done? Okay,let’s move on to the rest of the story. Google calls its report “Zeitgeist” which roughly translated from the German means “spirit of the times.” And as the mother-of-all-search-engines,Google is in a unique position to provide insight into the “events,news and people who shaped the year.” But the approach they’ve taken this year has resulted in a strange concoction of issues and some equally strange definitions of news. The Zeitgeist report breaks out the searches into different categories for the world and the various countries. But,oddly,some countries,notably the United Kingdom and China,don’t have a news category. There is a ‘news’ category in Germany,France,Italy,India,and Japan,but it is only one category while the U.S. has eight sub-categories of news,including politics,political scandals and presidential candidates as well as job-related searches,economic issues,recalls and ‘news sources.’ Yeah,you read right – three political news categories. According to the Zeitgeist analysis,the fastest rising search item in the world —in the news category —was the Fukushima disaster. That’s understandable and to be expected. The second fastest rising news search item in 2011 was the iPhone 4s. That also may be understandable,although maybe a little unexpected. But the third fastest rising search item in the world perspective was Melania Rea. And if you just went,“huh?”,you’re not alone. She is an Italian woman believed to have been killed by her husband in what appears (based on Google’s English to Italian translation) to have been a love triangle. Understandably her death and the circumstances surrounding it was the fastest rising search item in the news category in Italy. BUT… and as you can tell,it’s a big BUT… her name does not come up in any of the search categories in the United Kingdom,France,Germany or any of the other European countries,as far as I can tell. Just for the heck of it,and even though I knew it was a long shot,I also checked China,Japan,India and South Korea. Nope. No mention. So,why is her story the third fastest rising search item in the world in news? Inquiring minds want to know. Now,Google says,and my researcher friends confirm,that part of the issue is that the data has been “normalized” and “scaled.” I hate to do this to you,but let me explain those terms using Google’s own definitions. When you normalize data,you divide “the sets of data by a common variable to cancel out the variable’s effect on the data.” Having done that,you then scale the data,which means you “divide each point on the graph by the highest value and then divide by 100.” With me on this? I didn’t think so. The bottom-line is that by doing this,“theoretically” it insures that you are comparing apples to apples and not apples to oranges. But Google appears to have thrown a few peaches and pears in the equation along with a kiwi fruit or two. And that’s on top of having changed the most basic search definition – using “fastest rising searches” instead of “most searched for.” It all raises questions about the value of the report. FOLLOW ME,I’M THE PIED PIPER. And,to complete the old Del Shannon song,I’ll show you where it’s at. In today’s media world,it’s at Twitter. And the undisputed Pied Piper of the digital age is Lady Gaga who has an incredible 17.2 Million people following her tweets worldwide. That puts her ahead,but not by much,of Justin Bieber (15.6 Million),Katy Perry (13 Million),and still showing that they have celebrity status despite their often-times strange behavior —Kim Kardashian (12 Million) and Britney Spears (just under 12 Million). Further proof of the celebrity obsession,noted in the Google report,17 of the top 20 Twitter accounts,and the vast majority of the top 100 accounts,are celebrities,according to website twittercounter.com. The three making the top 20 are YouTube’s Twitter stats,(8 Million),Twitter’s own stats (7.1 Million) and (this is interesting),Twitter’s stats in Spanish which has even more followers (7.5 Million) than Twitter itself. There’s also a ‘Breaking News’ Twitter account which has 3.4 Million followers,just slightly ahead of CNN’s Twitter account,also at 3.4 Million. And then there’s the Twitter OMGFacts which has a little more than 3 Million followers. All the figures are for global tweets. Oddly the site doesn’t provide stats for the United States,but instead does it for different time zones in the U.S. Now,here’s the quirky sidebar story that I think is even more interesting. Who or what do the people or twitter accounts with the most followers,follow. Lady Gaga for example follows roughly 140,000 others while Justin Bieber follows roughly 120,000 others. Britney Spears follows a whopping 419,000 others. But then there are ones with massive followers,like Oprah (who only follows 40 others) and Justin Timberlake (who only follows 20 others) while Marshall Mathers doesn’t follow anybody. So,who do these big-time Tweeters follow when they do follow people? Justin Timberlake has a more eclectic group,including two places specializing in Southern Hospitality,one of which is a BBQ joint in New York City,as well as 901 Silver Tequila,and Neuro Drinks which is a vitamin drink,and the University of Memphis’ men’s basketball team. He also follows Oprah,although she doesn’t follow him. She mainly follows people in her company,Harpo,although she also follows Shaq,Ellen DeGeneres (or at least her show) and George Stephanopoulos. One of the coolest ones (at least to me) was who Shakira followed. Her list includes President Obama,Wolf Blitzer,Arianna Huffington,as well as Spotify,Telemundo and Univision (okay,those may have been expected),and the Save The Children fund and the OneCampaign which is a grassroots campaign fighting poverty. In any case,there is a whole piece for either a Graduate student thesis,or another Message from Michael. BITING MY TONGUE. Promise. I will do that,as I acknowledge and report on the TVWeek/ NewsPro survey of the top Journalism schools in the country. They say Syracuse University “easily claimed the top spot” in its survey,followed by the Medilll School at Northwestern University,Columbia University’s Graduate School,the University of Missouri-Columbia,and the Annenberg School at the University of Southern California. Rounding out the top ten were Walter Cronkite School at Arizona State University,New York University,University of California at Berkeley,University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,and finally,George Washington University. There were 438 respondents to the survey,of which 119 said they were news professionals,98 were educators,59 were students and the rest classified themselves as “non-news professionals.” Issues raised by the respondents include the need for more emphasis on writing and a continued emphasis on digital or news media (which,actually,many said the schools were doing). My school,the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication,did make it to the top 25,although there was no order of preference outlined after the top ten. As a point of reference,there are 111 accredited journalism schools in the country. As the report authors admit,such polls are hard to quantify,in large part because the judgments are subjective. But I would note that several schools with really good programs weren’t in the list provided by NewsPro and didn’t make into the survey. They include the University of Kansas which is actually the home of the accrediting agency for journalism schools,the University of South Carolina which is the home of the association for journalism educators,or Elon University which is a communications-first university. See? I managed to bite my tongue and not say a word about how wrong the survey is. SEMI-BIG ANNOUNCEMENT. All right,that’s probably an exaggeration. To me,it’s big. Hopefully,to some it is at least semi-big. In reality it’s probably small. This is one of the last Message from Michael newsletters. I have one or two pieces to complete before the end of the year. But beginning with the new year,I will stop writing these weekly media meanderings and instead focus my attention on developing my website,blogs,Twitter and Facebook pages. Unbelievable as it may seem,I have been writing these media missives for six years. It’s time to move on. Maybe some of you will follow me. I hope so. WAILING AND GNASHING OF TEETH THE RODNEY DANGERFIELD OF FACEBOOK BA DA BING,BA DA YAHOO COCKTAIL CHATTER – MUSIC FACTOIDS WAILING AND GNASHING OF TEETH. It’s that time again. The time when pundits declare the end of civilization as we know it,after looking at the lists compiled by the various search engines and social media sites of the most searched for,and shared items,on the Internet. And that may be understandable when you consider that five of the top ten search items on Yahoo’s annual year in review are celebrities – Kim Kardashian,Katy Perry,Jennifer Lopez,Lindsay Lohan and Jennifer Aston. But there is hope – Britney Spears didn’t make the list for the first time in nine years. But then again,according to the Bing list of most searched for items,Justin Bieber dominated,as the most searched person and the most searched musician. The analysis of the Bing list in the Microsoft News Center goes so far as to admonish us not to “doubt his grip on the online consciousness.” The Bing and Yahoo list differ in a variety of ways. For example,Yahoo says the iPhone topped its general search list over everything else,including the celebrities,while Bing says it only made the fourth spot,after the Xbox,Kindle and Playstation and then only under the consumer electronics section of searches. Both lists though are dominated by pop culture which the Microsoft analysis says may or may not be surprising,“depending on one’s view of the cultural zeitgeist.” What’s most interesting in that statement is not the pop culture reference so much as the fact that the Microsoft analysts use the word ‘zeitgeist.’ That’s what the mother-of-all-search-engines Google calls its annual review of search items. Google has not released its list yet,but Facebook has released its list of the 40 most shared items,and that list has a lesson for journalists. THE RODNEY DANGERFIELD OF FACEBOOK. My nomination for that title goes to the editors of the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Three of the 40 most shared articles on Facebook in 2011 came from the Star Tribune,but hardly anybody knows it. All three articles dealt with the same subject – the signs of the Zodiac. CNN was the source for one of the articles. The Huffington Post for another,and the Washington Post for the third. CNN and the Washington Post at least credited the Tribune with the story;The Huffington Post actually credited New York’s NBC2 which got it from (where else) the Tribune. But then again,maybe the editors don’t deserve the credit. After all when I went searching for the original article on the Tribune website,it took me forever to find it. Now I admit that the Zodiac story is semi-interesting. In brief it says that the signs which are based on the stars’ positions are out of sync because of ‘moon wobble’ and the shifts that have taken place since they were first created in Babylonian times. But even so,one’s reaction (okay,my reaction) is one of bewilderment and consternation. Bewilderment because if you believe that what people search for,and share,on the Internet tells us something about our collective psyche,well,what does this story tell you. Consternation because none of the three stories came from the original source. In fact exactly half of the articles shared came from aggregation sites,the secondary source,and not the primary originating source. Of course that means half were original with the website. But half? There is an old saying that you could write the greatest novel of all time,but what good is it if no-one reads it. That basic philosophical statement underscores the question which worries journalists about the Internet. What is going to be the dominant business model – aggregation or content creation. Of course this only further emphasizes the importance of search engine opimization because,again,what good is an article that no-one,or very few people,read? Six sources accounted for all 40 of the stories shared. The biggest sharing site was Yahoo with 12 stories. The next biggest source was CNN with 10,followed by The New York Times with 7,The Huffington Post also with 7,the Washington Post with 3 and the Wall Street Journal with just one. Not surprisingly,not a single one of the Yahoo articles was original with Yahoo. Many of them were credited to writers in what they call The Lookout which,I take it,is a section on “the lookout” for stories. What was surprising though was that in at least a quarter of the cases,the Yahoo writer did not even attempt to give credit to the original source even though it was clearly not original with them. You might expect that of Yahoo. But how about about the Washington Post? Two of the three Washington Post stories came from other sources,although at least they cited the source. As noted earlier,the Star Tribune in the story about the Zodiac was one,and (I find this funny) The New York Times is the source of the other article. The Post graphic was actually a direct copy of the New York Times graphic which depicted the deficits created by the Obama and Bush administrations. (Another lesson to be learned is the use of Infographics which play to the Web’s strengths,but that’s another article for another day.) The most popular story was the New York Times very,very cool graphic depiction of Japan before and after the tsunami and earthquake. (Let me repeat it again – Infographics play to the Web’s strengths.) All of The New York Times articles were original with the newspaper which either means that either they are better journalists or,more likely,better at search engine optimization. Two,possibly three,of CNN’s 10 stories were not original and four of the 7 articles from The Huffington Post were not original,which is especially interesting since Huffington has huffed and puffed about being a journalistic organization. BA DA BING BA DA YAHOO. Okay,pundits,it’s time to go tsk,tsk,tsk and declare the end of civilization,or journalism,take your pick. But the top story on both the Bing and Yahoo list was…. Drum roll,please… the Casey Anthony trial. Okay,probably no surprise to anyone. What is surprising though is that only three other stories made both lists – the Japanese earthquake and tsunami,the death of Osama bin Laden,and one that I would not have expected,the death of Amy Winehouse. The Japanese disaster also scored on the Facebook sharing list with three articles. There was also an article on the Huffington Post about not revenging bin Laden’s death. The six stories on Yahoo’s list of news stories that didn’t make the Bing list were the Royal Wedding,Unemployment,the Arizona shooting of Gabbie Giffords,the Arab Spring,Libya and the death of Moammar Gadhafi,and the Occupy Wall Street movement. The six stories on the Bing list that didn’t make Yahoo’s list were Hurricane Irene,the Joplin tornado,the trial of Conrad Murray in the death of Michael Jackson,the 10th anniversary of 9/11,Republican candidates Herman Cain and Rick Perry,and the Haiti anniversary. Both search services create an artificial series of popular search categories. For example,besides news stories,Bing breaks out the searches based on sports stars,musicians,consumer electronics,TV shows,Movies,celebrity events,destinations and “other interesting searches” which includes such things as Rebecca Black’s Friday music video which was the ‘most searched viral video.’ Yahoo has much broader,and somewhat esoteric,categories including heroic acts,extreme weather,‘end of an era’ which includes such things as the end of the Space Shuttle program,‘Caught’ which is a listing of scandals such as the Arnold Schwarzenegger story,and ‘obsessions’ which includes Charlie Sheen as well as the Rebecca Black video. COCKTAIL CHATTER: In keeping with our trends,facts and factoids from 2011,and in the category of humorous,and not so humorous,comes these factoids from the website buzzfeed.com: Creed has sold more records than Jimi Hendrix;Led Zepplin,REM; Depeche Mode have never had a number one single,Rinhanna has 10. Kesha’s “Tik-Tok” sold more copies than any Beatles single. Flo Rida’s “Low” has sold 8 Million copies,the same as The Beatles’ “Hey Jude.” The Black Eyed Peas’ “I Gotta Feeling” is more popular than any Elvis or Simon &Garfunkel song. Celine Dion’s “Falling Into You” has sold more copies than any Queen,Nirvana or Bruce Springsteen record. Same with Shania Twain’s “Come On Over.” Katy Perry holds the same record as Michael Jackson for the most number one singles from a single album. Barbara Streisand has sold more records (140 Million) than Pearl Jam,Johnny Cash and Tom Petty combined. The cast of “Glee” has had more song charts than The Beatles. And if you haven’t gotten the sarcastic tone of the list compiled by contributor Robert Stopera,this next factoid,quoted exactly,should tell you something: “People actually bought Billy Ray Cyrus’ album “Some Gave All.” 20 Million people. More than any Bob Marley album.” And lastly next to a picture of Justin Bieber,he writes:“this guy exists.”
SUBSCRIPTIONS: We encourage people to pass on copies of Message from Michael. But if you would like to get your own copy,you can subscribe by sending an e-mail to Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “subscribe-MM” in the subject line. If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter,e-mail Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “unsubscribe-MM” in the subject line. Also,back issues of MfM are available at the website,media-consultant.blogspot.com. You can reach me directly at Michael@MediaConsultant.tv.
Michael Castengera Comments. This is from the website,the247newsroom.com,run byTom Petner,and is a different twist on my weekly Message from Michael. It looks at the 40 most shared articles on Facebook,and what that sharing process tells us about today’s journalism. Sign,Sign,Everywhere a Sign by Michael Castengera | LikeTheDew.com This is an expanded and differentiated version of my weekly Message from Michael. This one focuses on Facebook’s 40 most shared articles list,and most particularly,an article on signs of the Zodiac which was shared three different times from three different sources. Only two other subjects were shared three times —the Japanese earthquake and tsunami,and Steve Jobs death. Journalism Education in the 21st Century Imagine a news organization with more than 400 bureaus and nearly a quarter million reporters around the country. Imagine statewide news networks being set up in all 50 states. Imagine training centers for media literacy and citizen journalists being set up coast to coast. Okay,before you start humming ‘imagine all the people’ from the John  Image via Wikipedia Lennon song,let me tell you that the ‘dreamer’ in this case is a group called the New America Foundation,a self-described non-profit,non-partisan public policy institute. It recently issued a report titled Shaping 21st Century Journalism,calling for a “teaching hospital model” in journalism education.
The ‘bureaus’ are the number of universities with journalism courses,and the reporters are the students enrolled in those courses. By partnering with other media,the report says,the journalism schools could extend their influence and impact. The bureaus,the statewide news networks and the training centers are just some of the ideas raised in the report. The report says that in “this moment of industry crisis,it is important to engage in a sharp and serious rethinking of the intellectual horizons of journalism schools.” In the present economic environment that may be difficult,from both an academic point of view as well as an industry point of view. On the flip side though,the report says those very challenges may make this an opportune time to change.
The report acknowledges that the primary purpose of the journalism schools is – as they put it – to produce “professional employees.” But sometimes,the report authors argue,the need to produce students for the journalism work force of today means that the students aren’t being prepared for the journalism of the future. The schools should not only teach “mechanical skills… basic newsroom techniques” but also train future journalists “how to bring deeper context to news reports.” One of the ways to do that,the report offers,is for journalism schools to partner with law schools and business schools to produce relevant local content. The report also acknowledges that the ‘best teaching’ is by doing and some journalism schools and students are “covering communities outside the Ivory Tower.” The report calls for ALL of the universities with journalism courses to do that… and more. Even given the limitations of students who are not full time journalists,the report says the 200,000-plus students enrolled in journalism programs could,and should,play an increasing role in,what they call,“the larger media ecosystem.” Side Note: To my colleagues at the Grady College of Journalism,the report relies heavily on Lee Becker’s 2009 survey of journalism and mass communication programs. According to their breakout,there are 113 accredited and 334 unaccredited journalism programs,with another 19 in historically black colleges and universities. Of those programs,a dozen (12) have more than 2,000 students enrolled. Another 41 have between 1,000 and 2,000 students;89 have between 500 and 1,000;116 schools have 250 to 500 students;126 have between 100 and 250;62 have 50 to 100 and there are 37 with less than 50 journalism students.
That larger media ecosystem now includes so-called ‘citizen journalists’ who also need to be taught and trained. And who better to do it than journalism schools,the report asks. It advocates what it calls “read-write” media literacy – “teaching citizens not only how to intelligently consume information but how to produce it.” Such a move would solve what the report calls “the vexing problem” between journalism schools and their universities. What vexing problem,you ask. Well,interestingly,the report cites as one of the issues with getting journalism schools to play a larger role in the community is that journalism schools are looked at “disdainfully” by universities in general as mere ‘professional schools.’ On top of that,journalism majors are more expensive than other humanities majors,the report says. For universities to invest in journalism schools,either it has to be a break-even proposition,or the investment has a “clear payoff in terms of reputation or student recruitment.” Helping to develop an informed citizenry through media literacy programs is one way to deal with that. Another way to develop that value,according to the report,is for the schools to reconcile journalistic theory and practice. The report says much of the academic research on the media is carried out at schools of communi cation or media studies,which “journalism schools view as interesting but irrelevant.” Side Note: One of the criticisms in the report is that universities “fail to leverage their broadcast licenses.” The report says there are 886 radio licenses held by higher education institutions and 92 television licenses. Yet,it cites a report by the University Station Alliance that says only a third (38%) of them work with journalism schools. In universities with journalism programs,there are 228 with radio licenses,38 with television licenses and 74 with a cable access channel. Those numbers include accredited and unaccredited programs. The report contains a wide-ranging series of interesting recommendations,although the report says it boils down to four trends cited by Eric Newton of the Knight Foundation in an address to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication in 2010. One,‘connecting with the university.’ Two,‘innovating content and technology.’ Three,‘teaching open,collaborative models.’ Four,‘providing digital news in new and engaging ways.’
Side Note: One might be put off (okay,I was put off) by the way some of them were introduced. Most notably,the phrase,“we call on”,as in,“we call on the federal government to do this” and “we call on the universities to do that.” And if one weren’t familiar with the group,one might be put off when you read that the founder,Ted Halstead,says he splits his time between developing an eco-development project in Costa Rica and sailing around the world aboard his catamaran with his wife. And it’s a little hard to take when the group calls California “the nation’s largest laboratory of democracy.” But then you look at those involved,including its board chairman,Eric Schmidt… yes,that Eric Schmidt,and its founding board chairman,James Fallows… yes,the writer and editor. Or you look at the other members of its board which include several renowned university professors,entrepreneurs and thinkers. This isn’t a group to be dismissed.
The more serious problem with the report is that only 57 responded out of the 446 universities actually surveyed. (The report authors did not survey the 37 schools with less than 50 students taking journalism courses.) Among those that didn’t respond is my own University of Georgia along with many of the other major journalism schools – University of Florida,University of Missouri-Columbia,Northwestern University,University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill,along with many others. Oddly,many of those schools are nevertheless cited in the report as examples of progressive ideas. The New America Foundation report echoes a lot of the points made in the Federal Communications Commission report on the Information Needs of Communities which in turn echoes many of the points made in the Knight Commission Report on the Information Needs of Communities which in turn echoes many of the points made in the Carnegie-Knight Initiative on the Future of Journalism Education. Many still debate how impactful those reports have been. For example,the FCC report had a number of recommendations,including asking the IRA to “consider” providing tax breaks for news start-ups. The IRS still hasn’t responded. And that’s one federal agency calling on another! So,to go back to the John Lennon song,we’re still left with the question whether “some day you’ll join us and the world will be as one.” (Also,please note the article below this,which has a link to the original article published by the New America Foundation,as well as a related link to the website BigThink.com) Shaping 21st Century Journalism | NewAmerica.net. Journalism schools need to play a larger role in the community at large,in their local community and the university community. The report makes the case that journalism has a huge responsibility in this information saturated digital world,and that journalism schools need to step up to the plate in terms of delivering on that responsibility. This report echoes many of the suggestions/ recommendations made by the Knight Foundation report on the Information Needs of Communities,as well as the Federal Communications Commission report on the future of digital media in a broadband world. And like them,it suffers from the same inevitable question —will the report do anything more than sit on shelf somewhere gathering dust. Will it accomplish anything? In addition,there is a link below from BigThink.com which further elaborates on the report. TAKE THIS JOB AND LOVE IT
FOOLS RUSH IN WHERE WISE MEN FEAR TO TREAD
COCKTAIL CHATTER – OVERSEAS EDITION TAKE THIS JOB AND LOVE IT. That’s why most people blog,because it gives them personal satisfaction,but for one out of seven bloggers,it is actually a source of income,according to the annual State of the Blogosphere report by Technorati. Surprised? Me,too. Unfortunately I’m not one of them,and if you want to be one of them,you’re going to have put in the work – 21 hours a week or more visiting social media sites,for example;and you’re going to have to crank up the volume – the top 100 bloggers generate 36 times more content than the average every day hobbyist blogger. Even then,if you’re thinking Ariana Huffington level moola,think again. The average salary,according to the survey,is $24,086. Here’s the funny part – well,to me at least. The report says,“Most blog related revenue is generated through giving speeches on blogging and advertising.” It’s sort of like the stories you’ve probably heard that the people who struck it rich during the gold rush days weren’t the miners but the people selling the tools and supplies to the miners. Not surprisingly,the report says fewer bloggers reported making a living through their blogs this year than last. But there are perks. The report says that four out of ten bloggers reported being approached to do a product review. The most prolific bloggers get approached upwards of 200 times a week,but the average is about eight times a week. (And,no,I have not been approached.) After being given a product,only a little more than half (58%) disclosed that they had been given the product to review and almost as many (53%) kept the product. On top of that,the report says,“most (86%) – but not all – bloggers “ who took part in what are called “sponsored posts” let people know the post was sponsored or paid for. Two years ago,the Federal Trade Commission issued rules requiring bloggers to disclose any endorsement. Less than half (45%) of the bloggers were aware of that. You would probably think it would be self evident that bloggers would be most influenced in their choice of topics by other bloggers,and it’s true,but the report says there was a “huge jump” in that influence this year from last. The primary information source,and the most trusted information source,though remains friends and family. Meanwhile,half (51%) say they trust “traditional media” less than they did five years ago. If it makes my traditional media readers feel any better,a small minority (15%) say they actually trust traditional media more than they did five years ago. Interestingly,a third of those bloggers have worked for traditional media with magazines making up most (41%) of those bloggers. A side note –a little more than a third (36%) of the bloggers surveyed have been quoted in the traditional media for something they posted on their blog. The report breaks out the bloggers into five categories – hobbyists (60%),professional part time (13%),professional full time (5%),corporate ((8%) and entrepreneurs,as in people who own or run their own business (like me) (13%). Regardless of the category,one message that does come through is that for those of you who continue to think of blogging as “so 90’s,” the report indicates that it is still an important part of the new media world.
(Note to Website Visitors —You can link to the second half of Part 3 of the Technorati report,using the link at the top of the article below. It will give you some interesting insights.)
FOOLS RUSH IN WHERE WISE MEN FEAR TO TREAD. With that as an introductory headline,let me join in the conversation regarding Jim Romenesko’s blog and Poynter Director Julie Moos’ complaint about his “pattern of incomplete attribution.” It seems to me particularly appropriate considering some of the issues raised in the state of the blogosphere report cited above. For those of you unaware of the situation,Romensko has published a blog for years on the Poynter site which aggregates news about the media. It turns out that some of the material he used was directly from the source and used “without… quotation marks” although the source was clearly identified. Moos wrote a lengthy ‘centerpiece’ outlining her concerns and changes to be instituted in how Romenesko’s work was to be handled. Romenesko,who had already announced he was going to retire at the end of the year,resigned. As someone who does the same thing as Romenesko (although,believe me,I know I am not even in his league),I understand the problem. I wrestle with it every week. My over-riding guiding principle is to make sure I do not deceive. I put in quotes any wording that I consider special,unique or which indicates opinion. At the same time I have found that phrasing I have used on parts that are pedantic recitation of facts is remarkably similar to phrasing used in the original piece. So,yes,I have a shared penchant with other people for pedestrian writing. I suspect Romenesko is guilty of the same ‘crime.’ I also suspect that Julie Moos has had her own “Vivian Schiller moment.” Like the former NPR director who fired contributor Juan Williams,it appears to be a case of the right decision handled in the wrong way. COCKTAIL CHATTER – OVERSEAS EDITION. A new online program compares how many times a word (any word you choose) appears in the Koran or the Bible and what percentage of verses the word appears in. For example,according to an article in Utne magazine,the word “love” appears in 0.98% of the verses in the Koran but nearly twice as often (1.8%) in the Bible. But before you jump to any conclusions,the word “hate” appears in 0.34% of the verses in the Koran but twice as often (0.67%) in Biblical verses. I should note here that when I went to the site,bibleQuran,as well as its parent company,Pitch Interactive,my Google browser flagged it as a dangerous site because of reports of malware. YouTube streamed the Mecca pilgrimage known as Hajj live after making a deal with Saudi Arabia where the two major Muslim religious sites (Mecca and Medina) are located. Indicative of the growth of YouTube,it has added two more African languages to its offerings – IsiZulu and Afrikaans. And indicative of the fact that it is a business just like any other media business,Al Jazeera has announced that it is launching a satellite channel dedicated just to sports news. From the Wharton School of Business comes this tidbit about globalization. China credit rating company,Dagong Global,has announced that it plans to launch a so-called “super-sovereign credit rating firm” to compete with the U.S. ratings agencies (Moody’s,Standard &Poor’s and Fitch) which now dominate the world’s credit markets. The Chinese say it is because the U.S. firms are too closely tied to Wall Street. Blogger Esra’a Al-Shafei of Bahrain has won the Monaco Media Prize for her work in reporting on the so-called Arab Spring. Al-Shafei,who earlier won Harvard University’s Berkman Award “for outstanding contributions to the Internet and its impact on society,” founded Mideast Youth and helped found Crowd Voice,two news sites influential in the movement. But it tells you something that when interviewed by Beet-TV,she asked to be interviewed in silhouette so she could not be identified. SUBSCRIPTIONS:We encourage people to pass on copies of Message from Michael. But if you would like to get your own copy,you can subscribe by sending an e-mail to Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “subscribe-MM” in the subject line. If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter,e-mail Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “unsubscribe-MM” in the subject line. Also,back issues of MfM are available at the website,media-consultant.blogspot.com. You can reach me directly at Michael@MediaConsultant.tv. State of the Blogosphere 2011:Part 3 –Page 2 –Technorati Blogging. Some people who like to believe they’re on the cutting edge of new media developments tend to dismiss blogging as “so 90′s.” But Technorati’s annual report on the blogosphere shows it is still a significant force,and an important voice,in the media world. Read the full report to get some inspiration on how to turn your blog into a more powerful part of your media offerings. It’s especially useful for Entrepreneurs who want to build their brand identity and image. If you don’t think you have time for the full report,at least click on this link and find the top blogging topics,the fastest rising blog sites and how much you can expect to earn. Okay,I will give it away. The average blogger who gets money (and only one out of seven does) gets about $24K. Nobody needs to tell you about the huge growth in online video. It seems that every other article in every trade journal is another report on somebody adding video to their offerings or creating a partnership to add video. The three major online measurement firms – Nielsen,comScore,Hubspot – are repeatedly documenting the increase. The latest Nielsen report for September shows “an even bigger appetite for TV on the Web in the U.S.” with 164.4 Million unique visitors watching nearly 18 Billion videos each month for an average of five hours. What may surprise you though is the extent to which video dominates the Internet. According to Cisco,which provides the backbone for much of the Internet,half (51%) of all Internet bandwidth worldwide is video. Even more stunning,the company says that in three years time,90% of all Internet traffic worldwide will be video. As Inspector Gadget would say,“wowser.” But get ready for another ‘wowser.’ In our part of the world (aka North America) one firm accounts for most of that Internet traffic,and no,it’s not YouTube or Facebook. It’s Netflix. According to broadband management company Sandvine,Netflix is responsible for a quarter (27.6%) of all DAILY downstream traffic and a third (32.7%) of all PEAK downstream traffic in North America. It may seem counterintuitive that YouTube would not be the prime culprit. It is true that YouTube has more users by far than Netflix,or anybody else for that matter. The Sandvine report titled Global Internet Phenomena Report says that YouTube accounts for a third (34.5%) of all video streams compared to Netflix’s mere five percent. You’ve already probably guessed the reason why. As the report,and an excellent summary article by Emma Bazillian in AdWeek point out,Netflix viewers watch for longer than YouTube viewers. The median viewing time on YouTube is 3 minutes while the median viewing time on Netflix is 42 minutes. For anybody who has examined diaries and ratings,the analogy is that of older viewers who are watching five nights out of the week compared to younger viewers who are only watching one or two nights a week. As a side note to the Netflix-YouTube analysis,it is interesting to note that Hulu only gets the merest footnote mention in the entire 23-page Sandvine report. That’s especially interesting since nearly two thirds (60%) of that peak period traffic is taken up by what the analysts call “real time entertainment.” And that figure has doubled in only two years,from 30% in 2009. Part of the reason Hulu doesn’t show up so much may be because of the variety of services available worldwide. For example,have you heard of Ares? It is a P2P sharing service like Gnutella and BitTorrent. Remember BitTorrent. It’s still out there and going strong. The Sandvine report says it accounts for ten percent of all downstream traffic,but accounts for nearly half of all upstream traffic. For those of you wondering what effect the recent Netflix controversy has had,the Sandvine report says that usage may have peaked in the U.S. but the service is growing by leaps and bounds worldwide. The Sandvine report has a number of important distinctions,such as daily traffic versus peak traffic,regional differences versus worldwide usage,downstream versus upstream use and,of course,mean versus median use. It also contains any number of not-so-trivial trivia,such as the fact most ‘real-time entertainment’ through the Internet (55%) is coming through smart TV’s,tablets,and especially game consoles,rather than PC’s and laptops. Despite its growing popularity,social networking only accounts for 2.1% of Peak Internet traffic but 20% of Peak Mobile Internet traffic. The mean (aka average) monthly general Internet usage is 22.7 gigabytes which is down from six months ago (when it was 23 GB). The median (aka middle) monthly use also dropped from 7 GB six months ago to 5.8 GB in the latest report. Only one percent of upstream users account for nearly half (47%) of all upstream volume. And here’s one I find fascinating,although I am not sure why – the PEAK period in which usage is highest has dropped from 2.5 hours to 2 hours. The drop in usage and the more concentrated time of use begs the question – why and what does that mean. No report on online video would be complete without mentioning YouTube’s recent announcement that it is adding more original video content channels to its service,obviously hoping to increase its viewing time from the meager 3 minutes cited earlier. Several production houses have jumped on this,including Clevver Media which provides entertainment news and lifestyle information for Spanish-speaking women;My Damn Channel which provides satirical comedy;The Digital Broadcast Channel which provides home and design information;and Take Part which is described as a “digital social action network (for) socially-conscious people.” Even more critical though are the number of Magazine groups,including Hearst and Conde Nast which are jumping in to add video to their text offerings. And,of course,no report would be complete without also mentioning the recent revamping of Google TV’s offerings which it is billing as a “supplement” rather than a “replacement” for traditional TV. Ditto,by the way,goes for Apple which also is making increasing forays into the online video business. In any case the point is – as Cisco’s VP for marketing,video and emerging technology put it in an interview with Beet.tv – video has “invaded all aspects of our lives… and… use of video pervades everything we do,whether it’s work,live,learn or play.” For us in the news business,his most telling comment is that video is not just for entertainment,although that is a large part of it. No,it’s more than that,he says. It is for communication in general and even more than that. Citing an example of doctors who are adding video to their services to help educate patients,he adds – and here’s the important quote – it is for “getting critical content.” Can I hear another “wowser?” BETWEEN THE MOON AND NEW YORK CITY CONTENT REMOVAL REQUESTS YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST COCKTAIL CHATTER – HUBBLE AND LOLLIPOP BETWEEN THE MOON AND NEW YORK CITY. Half of all Internet traffic (51%) is video and in three years time,90% of all Internet traffic worldwide will be video. So says a vice president with Cisco,which provides much of the world’s backbone,in an interview with Beet.tv. And,says Brian Hsieh,whose title includes marketing,video and emerging technology,it’s not just for entertainment,but for communication in general and for “getting critical content.” That’s not to dismiss the impact of entertainment by any means. In fact,according to broadband management company Sandvine,nearly two-thirds (60%) of “peak period downstream traffic” was taken up by ‘real-time entertainment.” That is double what it was (30%) just two years ago in 2009. And one company alone accounted for a third of ALL Internet bandwidth in North America. No,not YouTube,and not Facebook either. Any other guesses?………………Okay,it’s Netflix. The Sandvine analysis,which carries the catchy title “global Internet phenomena report”,says Netflix accounts for a third (32.7%) of PEAK downstream traffic and a quarter (27.6%) of DAILY downstream traffic in North America. And,yes,as you would suspect,YouTube has more users by far than Netflix,accounting for a third (34.5%) of all video streams compared to Netflix’s five percent. The difference,as pointed out in the report and in an excellent summary article by Emma Bazillian in AdWeek,is that the median viewing time on YouTube is 3 minutes while on Netflix,it’s 42 minutes. Interestingly,(to me at least),the Hulu service only gets one minor footnote mention in the entire 23 page Sandvine report. Equally interesting (again,to me at least) is the number of services cited by the report,with its worldwide emphasis,which I’ve never heard of. Like Oovoo,a Skype competitor. Or Ares which is a P2P sharing service like Gnutella and BitTorrent which,BTW,accounts for ten percent of all downstream traffic but nearly half of all upstream traffic. The report notes that with the controversy surrounding Netflix’s new business model,usage may have peaked in the U.S.,but is continuing to grow worldwide. The Sandvine report has a number of important distinctions,such as daily traffic versus peak traffic,regional differences versus worldwide usage,downstream versus upstream use and,of course,mean versus median use. It also contains any number of not-so-trivial trivia,such as the fact most ‘real-time entertainment’ through the Internet is coming through smart TV’s,tablets and especially game consoles (55% of all traffic) rather than PC’s and laptops. Despite its growing popularity,social networking only accounts for 2.1% of Peak Internet traffic but 20% of Peak Mobile Internet traffic. The mean (aka average) monthly usage is 22.7 gigabytes which is down from six months ago (when it was 23 GB). The median monthly use also dropped from 7 GB six months ago to 5.8 GB in the latest report. Only one percent of upstream (one of those important distinctions) users account for nearly half (47%) of all upstream volume. And here’s one I find fascinating,although I am not sure why – the PEAK period in which usage is highest has dropped from 2.5 hours to 2 hours. The drop in usage and the more concentrated time of use begs the question – why and what does that mean. As Cisco’s Hsieh puts it,video has “invaded all aspects of our lives” and “use of video pervades everything we do,whether it’s work,live,learn or play.” Further validation of that comes from the latest Nielsen online video figures which show that 164.4 Million unique visitors watched nearly 18 Billion videos for an average of five hours. And further proof still of all that is in the other articles I came across in my weekly review,citing increased video usage. Most obvious is YouTube’s announcement that it is adding more original video content channels,obviously to increase its viewing time from the meager 3 minutes cited above. Several production houses have jumped on this,including Clevver Media which provides entertainment news and lifestyle information for Spanish-speaking women,My Damn Channel which provides satirical comedy,The Digital Broadcast Channel which provides home and design information,and Take Part which is described as a “digital social action network (for) socially-conscious people.” Even more critical though are the number of Magazine groups,including Hearst and Conde Nast which are jumping in to add video to their text offerings. BTW,in case you’re wondering,the headline comes from the song Arthur’s Theme from the movie of the same name,and why I used it,I don’t know. It just seemed appropriate. CONTENT REMOVAL REQUESTS. One of the more fascinating “food for thought” sites is Google’s biannual transparency report which documents requests from various governments to remove content from its search. The site reports a 70% increase in requests in just the past six month period and a 29% increase in user data requests. In the U.S.,it turned down two requests,both from local law enforcement agencies. One was video of alleged policy brutality and the other was one “defaming” law enforcement officials. There were three requests from China,two of which Google complied with partially,because it supposedly violated its AdWords policy. What is particularly interesting about the Chinese request is that Google says “we have reason to believe that the Chinese government has prohibited us from full disclosure.” Doesn’t that make you say,“HUH?” The report says it had a series of requests from India,but did not say how many. The requests ranged from YouTube videos showing protests against local officials and ones using “offensive language” in reference to local religious leaders. The report says they declined the majority of those requests,but then adds the odd wording,“only locally restricted videos that appeared to violate local laws prohibiting speech that could incite enmity between communities.” YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST. Okay,maybe not,but as long as there is no one to contradict me,I’ll make the claim. Cloud Computing is gaining more and more converts who believe that it is the future of IT,the future of data management. MIT’s Technology Review has published a series of articles on the growth of cloud computing,one profiling Edward Tian who says it brings power of supercomputer to China,another profiling Safaricom which is fueling an “IT boom” in Kenya,and one which profiles George Favalaro who may have coined the term when he was with Compaq in 1996. It noted that a search for the term generated 48 Million hits,making it one of the big buzzwords on the Internet. Information Week and a publication called Government Computer News cite the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s efforts to standardize procedures to allow more government agencies to move to the cloud. Meantime start-up Dropbox announced it will expand its cloud computing storage capacity. COCKTAIL CHATTER:Apropos of our lead article,from AdWeek comes this fascinating tidbit:the amount of data shared online in online one week tops the amount of data collected by the Hubble Space Telescope in its first 20 years in orbit. Vaguely related,the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA – and,yes,they’re the folks who brought you the original Internet) has posted a $50,000 prize for anyone who can put together five bunches of shredded documents and files so that they are again readable. It’s called the Shredder Challenge,and yes you can try it,at the website shredderchallenge.com. And,finally,for those of you wanting a scary look at the future of privacy,go to the website,takethislollipop.com. It’s going to ask you to give it temporary access to your Facebook file,and then it creates…. Well,let’s just say that Sahil Patel who pointed out the site on Cynopsis said (jokingly,I think) that he was curled up under his desk after looking at it. (I tried it,and I am assured it is safe,FYI.) SUBSCRIPTIONS:We encourage people to pass on copies of Message from Michael. But if you would like to get your own copy,you can subscribe by sending an e-mail to Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “subscribe-MM” in the subject line. If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter,e-mail Michael@MediaConsultant.tv with the word “unsubscribe-MM” in the subject line. Also,back issues of MfM are available at the website,media-consultant.blogspot.com. You can reach me directly at Michael@MediaConsultant.tv. | |
