New (New) Medianomics
This is the clash of civilizations - they are again raising the issue of paid access. Rupert throws lightning bolts to the Internet , and the subtext here is not weak. Will the media survive near the www?
This is the wrong question. Correct: how have they survived without him until now?
Let's look at the media industry in terms of economics. There are 2 products in it: wine and soda. Soda - communication of poor quality: a little sense, low-quality content, sometimes just misinformation. Wine is a high quality communication: analytics, debate and knowledge.
What was the big media economy yesterday?
It was good. For example, serious clumps like Fareed Zakaria . But wine is rare. Often diluted with tons of soda. And often just as a by-product in its production.
And now look at the open industry. Here are a million (or more) blogs, understandable, predictable, underground - soda. But even after the bottle was shaken, it turned out that soda from blogs was just old soda with a new flavor. Soda, which now in the open industry can pour everyone, not much worse than the one that has long been selling large companies.
But look! The wine got better. What has changed in open conditions is the quality of the wine, not the soda. Yes, of course, there are ten thousand bloggers who have Glenn Beck on repeat. But I now have access to Alex Tabarrok and Tyler Cowen , Robert Reich and Paul Romer . I can talk in person with Barry Ritholtz , Fred Wilson and Rick Bookstaber .
')
Yes, in the conditions of open medianomics, the mass of deadly soda, but before me opens the world of wonderful wines. In a closed medianomike I was not lucky - I swallow mostly soda.
This is a net effect. The bad is not so bad. And good is at times better. So on average, media quality is significantly better than in closed medianomics.
Just do not be misled. The current medianomics is far from ideal. The battle for the next generation business model has just begun. But from an economic point of view, their efficiency and productivity promises to be incredible. In this lies the misfortune of yesterday’s monopolists - they did not care at all about the truly original value. On the contrary, they tried to sell as much as possible of poor quality media at the expense of turnover in the market. Hence the increase in advertising, false news, chernukha, etc.
You can imagine a different picture. Media companies are now facing problems because they were all the time engaged in the production of soda, not paying attention to selected wines. And people will pay for soda (if at all) a little.
Media is like a canary in a mine. In the next ten years, every industry will pass through this gauntlet, from a closed economy to an open one. So the question to you, regardless of what industry you work in: do you pour soda or carefully maintain wine in your basements?
This is the wrong question. Correct: how have they survived without him until now?
Let's look at the media industry in terms of economics. There are 2 products in it: wine and soda. Soda - communication of poor quality: a little sense, low-quality content, sometimes just misinformation. Wine is a high quality communication: analytics, debate and knowledge.
What was the big media economy yesterday?
- DJs and 30 seconds of advertising every minute
- Scandals, intrigues, investigations
- 5-8 hours of hidden advertising (infomercials) and 15-30% of information advertising (advertorials)
- Whole channels, scored low-quality or negative information, such as Fox News and CNBC
It was good. For example, serious clumps like Fareed Zakaria . But wine is rare. Often diluted with tons of soda. And often just as a by-product in its production.
And now look at the open industry. Here are a million (or more) blogs, understandable, predictable, underground - soda. But even after the bottle was shaken, it turned out that soda from blogs was just old soda with a new flavor. Soda, which now in the open industry can pour everyone, not much worse than the one that has long been selling large companies.
But look! The wine got better. What has changed in open conditions is the quality of the wine, not the soda. Yes, of course, there are ten thousand bloggers who have Glenn Beck on repeat. But I now have access to Alex Tabarrok and Tyler Cowen , Robert Reich and Paul Romer . I can talk in person with Barry Ritholtz , Fred Wilson and Rick Bookstaber .
')
Yes, in the conditions of open medianomics, the mass of deadly soda, but before me opens the world of wonderful wines. In a closed medianomike I was not lucky - I swallow mostly soda.
This is a net effect. The bad is not so bad. And good is at times better. So on average, media quality is significantly better than in closed medianomics.
Just do not be misled. The current medianomics is far from ideal. The battle for the next generation business model has just begun. But from an economic point of view, their efficiency and productivity promises to be incredible. In this lies the misfortune of yesterday’s monopolists - they did not care at all about the truly original value. On the contrary, they tried to sell as much as possible of poor quality media at the expense of turnover in the market. Hence the increase in advertising, false news, chernukha, etc.
You can imagine a different picture. Media companies are now facing problems because they were all the time engaged in the production of soda, not paying attention to selected wines. And people will pay for soda (if at all) a little.
Media is like a canary in a mine. In the next ten years, every industry will pass through this gauntlet, from a closed economy to an open one. So the question to you, regardless of what industry you work in: do you pour soda or carefully maintain wine in your basements?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/287622/
All Articles