Australian ABC Promises To Stay Free; Mocks Murdoch And Paywalls As 'Old Empire' Thinking

from the take-that,-rupert dept

One of the key points we've raised in the past about the futility of newspapers putting up paywalls is that doing so would only open up a huge opportunity for other, smarter journalism organizations to take their market share by remaining free. And, indeed, more and more organizations are starting to point out that's exactly what they would do. Reader Jamie writes in to let us know about a speech by the managing director of ABC in Australia (not the Disney owned ABC in America), Mark Scott, taking on the "old media" thinking around such things as paywalls:

Scott's most virulent words were saved for News Corporation (owner of The Australian) chairman Rupert Murdoch and CEO Europe and Asia, James Murdoch.

He called Rupert Murdoch's recent call for content providers to charge online distributors for content as "a classic play of old empire, of empire in decline. Believing that because you once controlled the world you can continue to do so."

"When you have been so powerful and dominant for so long, it is hard to believe that empire is slipping away," he said.

Scott argued traditional media companies had been out-thought by technology companies in strategy.

And... oh yeah, if Murdoch goes paywall, Scott promises to do the opposite:

He reiterated the ABC would continue to provide free online news content and said the ABC must remain audience-focused

Not just that, but he seems to be recognizing that the way people interact with news has changed, and they want to be much more involved:

... he noted the only media organisations to survive will be those that: know and accept that all the rules have changed; are endlessly inquisitive about the new; empower their audiences to contribute, to create and share media....

Nice to see some news business execs who seem to recognize what's happening.

13 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Who Says Content And Advertising Can't Mix?

from the yet-another-example dept

We've been talking about the fact that content is advertising and advertising is content for a while now, and one of our regular readers, Bill, sent in a neat example of this at work. It's the latest video from the Eepy Bird guys (if you're reading this in a feed reader, you may need to click through to see this):

The Eepy Bird guys are, of course, most famous for their Diet Coke + Mentos video which kicked off quite the international phenomenon. One of the less-well-documented aspects was what happened after the video became popular. For a while, neither Coca-Cola nor Mentos was particularly thrilled with the idea of associating themselves with the video. Coca-Cola specifically distanced itself from the phenomenon initially. Mentos took some time, but quickly embraced the phenomenon, agreeing to sponsor future Eepy Bird projects. And, with a little pushing, Coca Cola also came around.

So, now we've got this new video, and it's definitely entertaining. Using hundreds of thousands of Post-It Notes forming paper "slinkies," the video demonstrates that recognition of how advertising and content are becoming one. The video is certainly entertaining and fun to watch -- so it's likely to attract many viewers. However, there's also plenty of advertising built into it as well. First, most obviously, it continues to build up Eepy Bird's reputation for quirky fun video "experiments." But, the video also "debuted" on television on the ABC Family channel as a part of that station's TV show Samurai Girl. So, it was also an advertisement for that show as well as the ABC Family network. On top of that, the video was sponsored by Office Max (who sells Post-It Notes, obviously), but not in a particularly intrusive or annoying manner. And, while it was not overtly sponsored by 3M, you have to imagine that the maker of Post-Its can't be particularly disappointed by the additional publicity. And, oh yeah, the best part is that video also contains a note at the end (not sure if it's an "ad" per se) from... Coca Cola, the very company that had been so hesitant to embrace Eepy Bird.

So, here we have a very entertaining video that doesn't "trick" anyone, isn't intrusive and still helps "advertise" a whole variety of different things without being annoying about it.

34 Comments | Leave a Comment..

ABC/Disney Memo Shows That Ripping Off Other TV Programs Is Ok... For ABC/Disney

from the next-ride-at-disneyland:-the-double-standard dept

Of course, we all know that in the long history of Disney, the company has made much of its money by taking the content of others and repurposing it in cute animated stories. Yet, when it comes to anyone else doing things with Disney's stories or characters, its lawyers are rather vicious in response. In fact, it's Disney's heavy handed lobbying that has helped extend copyright to ever longer terms, just to avoid Mickey Mouse from entering the public domain. Thus, it probably shouldn't come as a surprise, that Disney continues with this double standard in other parts of its business. Reader Comboman sent in the news that a leaked memo from Disney subsidiary ABC suggests that producers look for TV ideas from foreign shows, where the idea can be used without having to pay a license:

"As I'm sure you're all aware, foreign formats have increased in popularity as the basis for US television development and production. What is often overlooked, or not fully appreciated, are the complexities associated with negotiating format deals, coupled with the fact that often-times what is appealing in the format may be nothing more than a general underlying premise, which, in and of itself, may be no reason to license the underlying property."

In other words, let's see what we can copy. And, yet, if anyone were to do that with a Disney/ABC property, you can bet that the lawyers would be all over it before you could get very far. But, of course, don't be surprised. It's simply the way Disney/ABC does business: abusing intellectual property laws is perfectly fine when done for its own purposes -- but is the destroyer of everything good when done to Disney/ABC.

23 Comments | Leave a Comment..

If You Carry A Blackberry And Are Paid Hourly, Do You Count Checking Your Email As Time Working?

from the does-checking-your-Blackberry-count-as-work dept

We've talked about the question of the work-life balance plenty of times, as people begin to recognize that "life" (such as personal surfing) is showing up in the office and "work" (such as checking your email) is showing up at home. However, that's leading to a few problems with some legacy systems. For example, what does it mean for workers who are paid on an hourly basis, with the potential for overtime? That problem recently came up when ABC News tried to make it clear to new staff writers that they couldn't count time checking their Blackberries as being work hours for overtime purposes. While the two sides settled this issue internally, it does raise plenty of questions for other hourly workers who are still expected to "check-in" from time to time outside of the office. This might not be a huge problem, as many jobs that require a Blackberry tend not to be paid hourly -- but these types of issues are likely to keep showing up as workplaces struggle to deal with changing work and lifestyles.

47 Comments | Leave a Comment..

ABC Still Excited About DVRs That Disable Fast Forward

from the bad,-bad-ideas dept

A few months ago, we wrote about how ABC was excitedly testing a new DVR technology that would prevent people from fast forwarding through commercials on their DVR. If this seems dumb and destined to fail, that's because it's dumb and destined to fail. You don't compete with things like a fully functional DVR that has features people want by creating a crappy DVR that doesn't have the features people want. That story got plenty of attention -- which should have made its way back to ABC. But, if it did, the company is ignoring it. As reader Joey writes in to let us know, at ABC's recent "upfronts" where it pitches its latest efforts to advertisers, it's still excitedly pushing the idea of the fast-forward-disabled DVR (in the update at 4:34). The NY Times reporter claimed it was "a fancy way to combat DVR use." Except, that it's not. It's a dumb way to combat DVR use because all it will do is anger a bunch of people and get them to go out and buy a DVR that doesn't do that sort of thing.

36 Comments | Leave a Comment..

ABC Tries To Limit How Other Networks Report On Debate; Networks Ignore ABC

from the ah,-copyright dept

About a year ago, there was a push by some to get both the Democrats and the Republicans, along with the various television networks showing any Presidential debates to agree to freely license the content of any debate afterwards for any kind of media coverage. While some agreed to this, others did not. In fact, with last week's Democratic candidate debate, it appears ABC tried to take the issue even further. It demanded that other networks show less than 30 seconds of debate clips the night after the debate. This is quite similar to the restrictions MLB and the NFL have been trying to put on reporters as well. ABC claimed that it needed to do this because it delayed the broadcast of the debate on the west coast until later in the evening. First, people on the west coast aren't stupid. They know the debate already happened. Pretending it didn't isn't going to change much. Second, it seems ridiculous that ABC time-delayed the debate in the first place. But, most importantly, restricting how others can report on a news event seems pretty pointless -- and, indeed, the other networks basically ignored ABC's demands and broadcasted as much as they wanted to of the debates.

18 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Dear ABC, You Don't Compete With TiVo By Making A Product Worse

from the just-a-suggestion dept

About a year and a half ago, an executive at Disney-owned ABC-TV talked about how the network was experimenting with ways to block people from fast forwarding through commercials. The exec in question even claimed that commercial-skipping wasn't even a very important feature for most DVR-owners. Despite the widespread criticism of this statement, it appears that ABC is now preparing to test that theory. In association with cable company Cox, it's testing a new video-on-demand feature that won't let viewers fast forward through commercials. We'll be the first to say it: this is dumb. While it may make a few more people watch commercials, it won't make them happy about it. And, given just how many other options there are these days, the end result might be that people just choose not to watch such ABC programming at all, let alone the commercials.

Yet various ABC executives seem to think that by offering this product, they can stop people from buying DVRs. Anne Sweeney, the president of the Disney-ABC television group, claims: "You don't need TiVo if you have fast-forward-disabled video on demand. It gives you the same opportunity to catch up to your favorite shows." Not quite. First of all, you're limited to shows on ABC. Second, who knows if the additional features are as useful. Finally, one of the nice things about TiVo (oh, right!) is that it lets you watch a 30-minute show in 22-minutes, since you can skip the commercials (whoops). So, yes, many people will still want a TiVo because ABC is forcing the fast forward option to be disabled.

Then there's Ray Cole, who owns some ABC affiliates. He says: "As network and affiliates, we both have an interest in slowing down the explosive growth of DVRs. This is about combating DVRs. As we developed this at every stage, there was an agreement that however we put this together, disabling the fast-forward function was key." I'm curious as to how Mr. Cole thinks offering a product that does much less and deliberately takes away a key feature will "slow down" the "explosive growth of DVRs." You don't compete by offering a worse product. You compete by offering a better product. Taking away one of the key selling points of a product is not exactly a major selling point.

82 Comments | Leave a Comment..