Without doubt the information age has brought with the idea of ‘real’ dialogical communication, in which the global extent of networked society has blossomed.  A quick history lesson in from the classrooms of public relations adequately plots the transition from the hypodermic method of communication aimed at a centralised model of society, through to the two-step flow approach focussed on a decentralised society and finally into the contemporary networked communication process of a distributed system.

Hypodermic to networked models

Amongst the vast majority of communication practitioners, and beyond, this shift is explained and celebrated by new/now/digital/social media.  So far so good – nothing earthshattering and novel yet.  But does modern day ‘messaging’ cater for this environment?

The very idea of a message – something transmitted to an audience, the very fact one ’sends’ messages infers indeed a one-way transaction.  But as we’re constantly informed by the social media gurus the new world is all about the ‘conversation’, dialogue, two-way communication, the community etc.  The notion of a message, purveyed hypodermically, is anathema to the new protocols and ethos of the information environment.   It grates against the sensitivities of the community involved.

Getting into a conversation not just getting a message out

One example is thst conducted by the Obama campaign forged around a slogan of ‘Yes, we can!’.  Throughout Obama’s campaign, in every media interview he gave, he embodied a sense that his ideas, his objectives, his desires, via the words and phrases he used were those of a larger community, not of a single man or entity, such as a future administration.  Less of the message, more of the idea.  His engagements with traditional media translated very well into the cyber domain, took place as part of a conversation and the techniques used, subtle as they were, allowed traditional media to converge with the needs of new, social media.

Does traditional media training cater for this change in the environment?

The output of a modern media interview is now one that is part of a wider conversation, one that is placed on the web immediately, directly or indirectly, inviting immediate comment and, if required, a response.  It’s not a one-off maneouvre.  But much media training relies on the interview being such a singularity – get your message out, full stop.

Much would be gained by interviewees being aware and being trained to treat their interviews as not just a transmission mechanism for their message but as part of a conversation.  This requires knowledge and understanding of that conversation, what it is centred around, how it is conducted, its tone and style.  Once again basic presentation is important – hands out of pockets, body language, dress code etc – but the timbre, wording, structure and emphasis are subtly altered, to align with the nature of contemporary information exchange and the format of the medium.

The media interviews of old for TV, radio or print are still relevant and require specific techniques.  But more frequently these interviews form part of a wider format of communication, relying less on the message and more on the conversation.

A recent study, by TLG Communications, presents sobering reading for all those social/digtal/new (or even ‘now’) media  gurus out there.

A poll of 1,000 opinion leaders found radio had more influence than any other media on corporate reputation. Television came second and print third, while online languished in fourth place.

IPlayer - Digital convergence keeping traditional forms alive and thriving.

It’s a timely reminder that even in the technology-saturated West the older, more traditional forms of communication still have considerable sway and relevance.  In fact, if anything, new technology, such as iPlayer, have given radio and mainstream television an added boost.  TLG founder Malcolm Gooderham said:

“This year, for the first time, we have surveyed the influence of different med­ia on brand reputation. Given the prevalence of new media companies being nominated as thought leaders, it may be surprising that the overwhelming winner in the med­ia category is old ­media, and almost 100 years old at that.”

Digital convergence is still the main factor in the transformation of the communication environment but it’s worthwhile remembering that this convergence is of new and old media, not the birth of a totally unique phenomena at the expense of what has gone before.

As Clay Shirky adeptly explained at a TED Talk earlier this year:

“The media that is good at creating conversations is no good at creating groups. And that’s good at creating groups is no good at creating conversations. … The Internet is the first medium in history that has native support for groups and conversation at the same time. Where as the phone gave us the one to one pattern. And television, radio, magazines, books, gave us the one to many pattern. The Internet gives us the many to many pattern. For the first time media is natively good at supporting these kinds of conversations.”

The good old wireless ... a bit smaller now and less like a Dalek, but popular nevertheless.

Just so, but we humans are still tuned into the big message coming from the central hub.  The way we source our information, and thereby create our ‘worldviews’ and form our opinions, is changing rapidly.  The online communities still tend to form their conversations around what has been despatched via a traditional system, excepting the occasional on-line viral successes.  As long as power structure still feature a degree of centrality, regardless of the shift of power, the traditional forms of communication, aided and abetted by digital technology, will remain a focus and the likes of BBC News at Ten and Channel 4 News will still play a major role in the structure of society.

Long live new media, but may old media never die.

Moving away from the shadow of Satyam scam, software exporter Mahindra Satyam today said the company would be repositioned as a complete Information and Communications Technology (ICT) firm from just an IT outsourcing player.

Tech Mahindra bought Satyam in April and encouraged by the addition of 35 new clients is focusing on expanding service horizons by investing in building new technologies.

“We plan to position Mahindra Satyam as an ICT firm. The focus is on converting an IT company to ICT company,” Mahindra Satyam CEO CP Gurnani told PTI.

The company is focusing on new areas like digital convergence, as it continues to strengthen its five verticals — manufacturing, financial, health care, retail and consumer product, he said.

“We are looking at overall growth in digital convergence. That is a focus area. We will also be focusing on mobile applications,” Gurnani said, adding “I am taking advantage of our presence in connected solutions, in enterprise solution, in mobility and coming up with new paradigm shift.”

On new business additions, he said the company is seeing an uptake in demand and has added 35 new clients from May this year.

“The worst is behind us and we are back on the path to recovery… Mahindra satyam is getting traction in the market and getting new clients. We have added 35 new clients since May this year… We are seeing good demand from clients. The overall IT market is also improving.”

Yesterday I watched Triumph of the Nerds (1996), an edutaining documentary by the technology journalist Robert X. Cringely, which tells the story of how personal computers took over the world. This is some of my reflections after having watched the film:

The film was originally made for British television, and is divided into three parts. The first two episodes describes the period from 1975 when Ed Roberts invented the first personal computer, the Altair 8800, to 1984 when Apple launched the first user-friendly PC, the Macintosh. But, how fascinating and interesting this crash course in computer history may be, it is not until episode three I get truly excited, because here we enter the era of digital convergence and the Internet. Although the documentary is almost 15 years old, it still makes some intriguing points. Hearing Larry Ellison, co-founder and CEO of Oracle Corporation, talk about how much he loves the Internet is nothing but inspiring. It also reminds us of the fact that we are living in an extremely exciting period right now; a period where we have a constant flow of information, where old and new media are coexisting side by side and we are starting to learn the meaning of social media (see video below). All these things have changed the way we live, work and communicate, and it makes me happy to be a part of this period of time.

(You should probably watch this video with a grain of salt at hand, but admit that social media is exciting?)

Summary:  The Tribune Company just launched Tribune 365 (www.trb365.com) that claims to provide integrated marketing campaigns—that is, ads across multiple platforms available within the Tribune media—newspapers (e.g., The Chicago Tribune and The Los Angeles Times), other print outlets and television stations.  In fact—and probably more important—it represents integrated ad sales:  one team to sell ad inventory across all of their platforms (and, with hope, others, as well).  We think this is a brilliant step—and long, long overdue.

The Details.

It is pretty straightforward—and both astonishing and understandable (OK, OK, so it’s a contradiction:  Call it a paradox)—that a major, and heavily indebted, media company has finally figured out one of their biggest assets:  multiple platforms.  The Tribune Company’s initiative is called Tribune 365 (www.trb365.com).

Selling ads across these platforms to an advertiser in what the ad industry calls “integrated ad campaigns” becomes a lot more attractive.  More to the point, they overcame one of the biggest obstacles, which is the silo-like ad sales structures of newspaper ad teams selling their ads, TV station ad sales teams selling their inventory, and so on.  Media reports point to a recent campaign for Target, with ads in newspapers, on Tribune TV stations and Tribune websites.

So What?

“Integrated ad campaigns” are not that new but what is new is that they are now available where they count:  where the inventory resides.  This makes it likely that we will see them with more frequency.  Moreover, think about it for a bit:  What the Tribune is doing is a classic case of the model that like very much, which is “audience integration.”  That’s what diversified media companies do best.  They bring audiences to advertisers.  The more diversified they are then the more audiences they can aggregate.

Aggregation recognizes that audiences get their content from multiple sources.  While there may be some overlap (someone who reads “The Trib” and watches a Tribune TV station), there are many people who use one medium and not another.  If those media happen to be owned by one media company, why not place ads across all of them?  That’s audience aggregation.

It’s not always so simple.  We have often seen civil war break out in media companies among the ad sales teams.  The sales team responsible for TV ad sales rebels when the website sales team for the TV station calls on the same clients for their inventory.  It can get ugly.

And it is understandable, because you are dealing with the livelihood of salespeople.  Someone who has cultivated the ad agency (or internal ad buyer) of a large advertiser for years relies upon the sales commission to pay the mortgage .  Why should he or she let a competitor—even someone in the same corporate family—put the saleperson in financial jeopardy?

And (we hope) that’s what the Tribune Company has figured out.  We hope that the integrated sales team means that commissions are not limited to one medium because that is the only way that you can (and should) change the ad sales culture.  After all, ad revenues amount to the lifeblood of most media companies.  And selling ad inventory makes that lifeblood pump.  And earning those commissions is what enables the sale of that inventory.

Since the early 90’s I have been engaged in businesses and casual discussions about television, “digital convergence,” “new media,” “virtual reality,” “augmented reality,” mobile computing,” “pervasive computing,” and many other buzz-topics that connote how deeply computational and communication systems affect the pattern of daily life and business impact in both developed and less developed nations and economies.  One sore spot from those discussions has been “television.”  I could see its nature changing by the late nineties.  I observed changing patterns of viewing behavior with friends, families and colleagues.  I remember multiple “hype-cycles” at NAB (national Association of Broadcasters) meetings every April and buzz  talk at tedious “digital Hollywood” style conferences in LA (and Europe, for that matter).

Being an empiricist at heart, I began just thinking about the behaviors around mediums and tacitly concluded that television was not television any more after about 1995.

For over 180 days, I have lived and worked Monday through Friday without watching “television” at all.  I have called this my “World Without Television” (WWTV) experiement.  I have still seen and heard what I needed, but not through the conventional television experience.  Instead,  I use podcasts, Hulu, subscription streams (like CNBC), etc. I like it.  I feel more mobile and less limited and like I have more “choice” in my experience of media.  Have any other readers experienced this?

Now, I think it’s time to come up with a name for this new baby that will stick; and, which will relegate television to its proper place in the history of technologies.  I need your help.

I have thought of naming it “Pervasive Multimedia Systems,” but I didn’t think “PMS” would catch on.  I tossed around names like “Communication Video,” but I didn’t think CV would work either. I mused about names like “Personal Multimedia Two Way Communication Systems,” but PMTWC was just a tongue-twister with no panache.

So, I am inviting any reader of this note to respond in the comments with your ideas and perspectives.

I think we need to call the New Television experience something different; but not “New TV”; NTV doesn’t work, either.  Get rid of the word “television” and maybe some old the old media magnates will start getting rid of their failed business models faster.

What do you think? Make a comment.

The PlayStation 3 is available in France since March 23, 2007. After the PS One and PS2, Sony has every intention to win once again a leader in game consoles worldwide. But for the XXI century mode, it is mandatory for a manufacturer like Sony converging digital entertainment and computer technology. This digital convergence is successful mission by the PS3!

The PS3 has thus new digital technology and able to crack all video gamers and movie fans the most demanding at the same time.

In terms of information, the PS3 has a Cell processor, very powerful, developed by Sony, Toshiba and IBM. His abilities allow him to manage the games most powerful in terms of graphics. The PS3 includes a hard disk 60 GB which applications are obvious: storage of data, Internet downloading and improved load times for games.

Regarding digital entertainment, the PS3 can play HD DVDs with a DVD player Blu-ray. The Blu-ray is an optical disc that can hold 250 GB of storage (cons 4.7 GB for DVD Classic), and provides access to high definition. The PS3 can also connect to the Internet through its embedded web browser.

The game console PlayStation 3 now has a novella joystick. In fact it is simply an evolution of the Dualshock called Sixaxis. Level design, no change. For cons the Sixaxis controller features Bluetooth technology, which allows its owners happy to play wirelessly. Why Sixaxis? Because it uses technology to detect movements of 6 axes, from left to right, top to bottom and front to rear. The L2 and R2 buttons are larger and analog to give a different reaction depending on the pressure exerted by the user. A new button has been added: the PS button that allows you to turn on or off the game console without moving and also reset the PS3. Finally, simply connect the Sixaxis controller to the USB port of the console to recharge.

The PlayStation 3 is the subject of the moment to buy because it meets all the digital entertainment and for the whole family.

Summary:        Now we have a new form of convergence:  social networking and (cable) TV.  Not a bad move.  Verizon announced two new “products” in its “social TV” initiative.  One is a set of widgets that enable viewers to connect with other viewers through various social networks—while watching TV.  The second enables viewers to watch user-generated content from certain websites.  One more step in convergence.  Of course, it is a bit like the Zeno’s Paradox of digital convergence.  You could also say:  It’s about time. (Full disclosure:  We also posted this at globalstrategic.wordpress.com)

Through its FIOS TV service Verizon is taking a few bold steps towards digital convergence.  First, Verizon will create an application store with widgets developed together with some notable social networks—Twitter, Facebook, Veoh and a few others.  So, a FIOS subscriber can follow tweets they select from a list—including the programming they are watching.  They can log into Facebook (but not yet Twitter) to update their profile as to what they are watching at that moment.  An SDK will be launched soon.

The second new product permits a subset of subscribers to start searching and viewing UGC from certain video sites, including Veoh and Blip.TV.

So What?

Well, it is another step closer to digital convergence.  Using TV programs to tweet is an obvious stimulus to that convergence, when you consider how often TV shows are the subject of tweets.  Tweeting about these programs is of course nothing new and these widgets do not (yet) enable tweeting through the TV.  What it doespermit is to enable a viewer to see whose twitting what and when.

So that’s why it’s like Zeno’s Paradox.  Remember:  Walk halfway across the room, the half the remaining distance, then half the remaining distance—and so forth.  This is a little like that:  closer, closer, closer, but not quite there.

But the move is just the first and we can expect more.  The application store will propel developers to pay attention to crossing the chasm between the TV, the PC and the mobile phone.  Think about it:  Twitter is (largely) phone-based and Facebook is (largely) PC-based-platform.  This appeals to the developers.  FIOS competitors will figure out their own way to merge social networks with TV programming.

OK, now the gears are churning.  Think of characters using Twitter in the programs—and they are matched by Twitters available to FIOS users.  And so forth.

Stay tuned.

Summary:        Now we have a new form of convergence:  social networking and (cable) TV.  Not a bad move.  Verizon announced two new “products” in its “social TV” initiative.  One is a set of widgets that enable viewers to connect with other viewers through various social networks—while watching TV.  The second enables viewers to watch user-generated content from certain websites.  One more step in convergence.  Of course, it is a bit like the Zeno’s Paradox of digital convergence.  You could also say:  It’s about time.

Through its FIOS TV service Verizon is taking a few bold steps towards digital convergence.  First, Verizon will create an application store with widgets developed together with some notable social networks—Twitter, Facebook, Veoh and a few others.  So, a FIOS subscriber can follow tweets they select from a list—including the programming they are watching.  They can log into Facebook (but not yet Twitter) to update their profile as to what they are watching at that moment.  An SDK will be launched soon.

The second new product permits a subset of subscribers to start searching and viewing UGC from certain video sites, including Veoh and Blip.TV.

So What?

Well, it is another step closer to digital convergence.  Using TV programs to tweet is an obvious stimulus to that convergence, when you consider how often TV shows are the subject of tweets.  Tweeting about these programs is of course nothing new and these widgets do not (yet) enable tweeting through the TV.  What it does permit is to enable a viewer to see whose twitting what and when.

So that’s why it’s like Zeno’s Paradox.  Remember:  Walk halfway across the room, the half the remaining distance, then half the remaining distance—and so forth.  This is a little like that:  closer, closer, closer, but not quite there.

But the move is just the first and we can expect more.  The application store will propel developers to pay attention to crossing the chasm between the TV, the PC and the mobile phone.  Think about it:  Twitter is (largely) phone-based and Facebook is (largely) PC-based-platform.  This appeals to the developers.  FIOS competitors will figure out their own way to merge social networks with TV programming.

OK, now the gears are churning.  Think of characters using Twitter in the programs—and they are matched by Twitters available to FIOS users.  And so forth.

Stay tuned.

Fifty years since the famous “Kitchen Debate” between then Vice President Richard Nixon and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, U.S. public diplomacy has significantly changed to include new media tactics such as Facebook and Twitter. A conference hosted by The George Washington University’s Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communications, “Face-off to Facebook: From the Nixon-Khrushchev Kitchen Debate to Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century,” will mark the 50th anniversary of the debate and examine new opportunities for U.S. global outreach in a Web 2.0 world.

Public diplomacy has come a long way from here ...

The all-day conference will be held Thursday, July 23, 2009, at GW’s Jack Morton Auditorium. The morning session will explore the historical perspectives of U.S.-Soviet relations in the summer of 1959, the height of the Cold War. The Sokolniki Park Exhibition, made famous by Nixon and Khrushchev’s impromptu verbal sparring match, will also be celebrated. The afternoon session will focus on the emergence of new media and social networking in public diplomacy. The entire event will be moderated by Emmy-award winning journalist Frank Sesno, GW professor and incoming director of GW’s Columbian College of Arts and Sciences School of Media and Public Affairs; Marvin Kalb, James Clark Welling Presidential Fellow; and Blair Ruble, director of the Kennan Institute.

Panelists will examine the significance of the Kitchen Debate; what it represented in the dynamic of active Cold War ideological competition between the two superpowers; how it resonated with both the Americans and the Soviets; and what impact it had on the political fortunes of Nixon and Khrushchev. Taking part in the discussion will be historian Sergei Khrushchev (Nikita Khrushchev’s son), United Nations Association President and former U.S. Ambassador to Czechoslovakia and Venezuela William H. Leurs, New York Times columnist and former Richard Nixon speech writer William Safire, and numerous scholars and eyewitnesses to the Kitchen Debate.

In addition, a panel comprised of former exhibit guides and staff will discuss the landmark Sokolniki Exhibition, which brought a slice of American life — along with dozens of Russian-speaking American guides and exhibit staff — directly to the Soviet Union. The 1959 exhibition is credited with giving a human face and voice to America for a Soviet audience that had virtually no previous contact with the United States. During lunch, William Burns, under secretary of state for political affairs and former U.S. Ambassador to the Russian Federation, will deliver remarks.

The afternoon session will kick off with a presentation by New York University professor Clay Shirky, author of the acclaimed book Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations. In addition, panelists from business, government and the scholarly community will examine how today’s world of instant global communications affords the same opportunities to be innovative as the Moscow 1959 Exhibition. New School professor Nina Khruscheva and Adam Conner of Facebook, among others, will explore how to establish connections between the United States and the rest of the world through new media networks and will examine the role of digital technology and social networking in public diplomacy initiatives.

The conference will also feature the premiere of a short documentary film about the Kitchen Debate and the Sokolniki Exhibition, produced by Emmy award-winning director Nina Gilden Seavey, a GW professor and director of the University’s Documentary Center. In addition, a concept for a new multi-player online game about collaboration and diplomacy will be introduced. The game was created specially for the conference by a Duke University team led by Timothy Lenoir, a leading scholar and leader in bio-informatics and game-making.

GW’s Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communications is part of the University’s Columbian College of Arts and Sciences School of Media and Public Affairs and the Elliott School of International Affairs. The conference was made possible through partnerships with the Carnegie Corporation, the Walter Roberts Endowment, the Kennan Institute and the Blavatnik Family Foundation.

For more information about the conference and a complete list of speakers, visit www.gwu.edu/~smpa/events/faceoff/conference.htm .

For more information about GW’s School of Media and Public Affairs, visit www.smpa.gwu.edu .

For more information about GW’s Columbian College of Arts and Sciences, visit www.columbian.gwu.edu .

For more information about GW’s Elliott School of International Affairs, visit www.gwu.edu/~elliott .

For more news about The George Washington University, visit www.gwnewscenter.org .

I have been working through a great deal of archived material of late. I have managed to save most of my on-line work since 1991 and have stored it in a variety of locations. At some point I am keen to return to a decade of rugby union performance data that I have on file!

Amidst a lot of other material I have found a copy of a presentation I made at the Sports Coach 1998 Conference in Melbourne, Australia. I have posted the presentation (Working to Enhance Performance) on SlideShare. Discovering the presentation in the archive reminded me that I had asked permission from a local company in Wales to take with me one of the first commercially available digital cameras.

I had the opportunity to try out the camera in advance and used it with my coaching group at Symonds Yat before I flew to Melbourne for the conference. I used the camera in Melbourne too to illustrate my talk. I thought that was quite an innovative thing to do at the time.

This is the presentation:

By coincidence I met again last week one of the coaches who attended my talk in Melbourne. We had an opportunity to talk about developments in professional sport coaching and the convergence of technologies that seemed such a prospect in 1998 but is now part of our taken-for-grantedness of everyday life. Our meeting reminded me too about the biographical part of knowledge sharing and that innovation and early adoption of ideas are an important dynamic in the pursuit of excellence.

Summary:  CW will launch an ad campaign that encourages viewers to communicate with each other through social networking—texting, Twitter, Facebook and the like. 

Among the more interesting approaches to respond to advertisers’ demands on networks, CW will launch an ad campaign that acknowledges and embraces the viewers’ use of other platforms.  Called “TV to talk about,” the tagline will change with each ad to things like “TV to text about,” “blog about,” “chat about” and “tweet about.”  The New York Times published an interesting article on this point at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/business/media/21adco.html?emc=eta1

CW is probably better positioned than other networks because its programming attracts younger audiences who already interact across digital programs.  What was interesting (according to the NYT article) was that CW had to send researchers to the homes of viewers to find out that viewers do this.  Now that’s funny.  What are they reading?

So here’s an idea:  Let viewers opt in to a scroller that shows the most popular Tweets (or other feeds of comments of other viewers) during the show.  Of course, the scroller will be sponsored by an advertiser. . . .

Summary:  CW will launch an ad campaign that encourages viewers to communicate with each other through social networking—texting, Twitter, Facebook and the like.  Now, at least someone recognizes the value of multiple platforms.

Among the more interesting approaches to respond to advertisers’ demands on networks, CW will launch an ad campaign that acknowledges and embraces the viewers’ use of other platforms.  Called “TV to talk about,” the tagline will change with each ad to things like “TV to text about,” “blog about,” “chat about” and “tweet about.”  The New York Times published an interesting article on this point at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/business/media/21adco.html?emc=eta1

CW is probably better positioned than other networks because its programming attracts younger audiences who already interact across digital programs.  What was interesting (according to the NYT article) was that CW had to send researchers to the homes of viewers to find out that viewers do this.  Now that’s funny.  What are they reading?

So here’s an idea:  Let viewers opt in to a scroller that shows the most popular Tweets (or other feeds of comments of other viewers) during the show.  Of course, the scroller will be sponsored by an advertiser. . . .

Terrestrial Broadcast Radio: The end of an era?

If you are a regular reader of this blog it should be no secret – I have an Apple iPod Touch and I am diggin’ it.  Before you spend several hundred dollars on a Wi-Fi radio you might want to see what the Apple iPod Touch – or some of your existing technology - can offer you.

What is Wi-Fi Radio?

“Imagine listening to more than 5,000 radio stations from all over the world in a radio in your home, office or hotel.

Internet radio stations offer an endless audio entertainment. Some of it is a simultaneous broadcast from NPR, ESPN, the BBC and so on. Others are Internet-only stations that serve both mainstream and niche tastes. The variety is staggering, all of it is free, and it is largely uncluttered by ads.

You tune into radio shows just like you have for decades, but the antennas of the radios are internal Wi-Fi that connect to a wireless home network. The reception is excellent: the wi-fi radio can pull in thousands of Internet radio stations from all over the world, without a single pop of static. It can also play podcasts, a copious source of free, generally ad-free prerecorded audio programs. The radio comes with several Internet stations already listed in the menus, sorted either by genre (Comedy, Kids, Latin, Hip-hop and so on) or by geographical location. At the service platform – wifi-radio.biz- you can easily add new stations of your choosing.”

What’s at the Apple Application Store for Wi-Fi Radio?

There are an amazing number of free applications in the App Store for the iPhone and the iPod Touch that can get you linked into Wi-Fi Radio.  Of course, for the Touch, you need to have a home wireless network.  If you are going to use the Touch as a Wi-Fi Radio appliance surrogate then get a docking station.  My 50 Watt iPod Docking station was $50 – a good buy.

These are just a few of the Application that can link you into WiFi Radio

• Shoutcast
• Stitcher
• iHeartRadio
• FlyCast
• NPR Mobile

All of these applications are free to download and use.  These applications provide you the capability to listen to literally thousands of radio stations.  The challenge of all of these applications is how to organize and present thousands of radio stations and internet streams in a usable form for search and selection.

Some of the applications organize the stations by genre; some by city then genre; some apps organize by categories (sports, technology, world news); one application is focused on public radio broadcasts and archives of those broadcasts.  Some applications will tell you how many people are listening to the stream.

A clever feature in iHeartRadio is the “Shake It” city and genre selector.  You “Shake it” and two lists roll – and where she stops – nobody knows.  You can choose to listen to that city and that genre of try your luck again.

The benefit of the iPod Touch – small size and portability

No matter what audio stream you choose, the real advantage of the Apple iPod Touch is the small size and portability.  Choose your favorite station and listen via the built-in speaker or use the ear buds.  In either case, you can carry the Touch in your pocket or place it on the table where ever you are.  The device is small and portable.  You can’t do that with the Wi-Fi radio pictured at the top of this posting.

No Apple iPod Touch?  Then use your PC or Mac

If you don’t have a small portable device on which you can listen to Wi-Fi radio then the next best thing is to use your PC or Mac desktop or laptop.  Again, no use to buy the $159 Wi-Fi radio appliance.

The big boys

The grand daddy web site of streaming radio/audio stations is Reciva.

You can get to Reciva via this link – https://www.reciva.com/

Registration is free.  You can listen without registering.  If you register you can build a list of favorite stations and listen with one click rather than searching for the station each time you go to the site.

How many audio streams are on Reciva?

Listen to any station, anywhere in the World  Reciva brings the world of Internet radio into your home. We provide access to an extremely diverse range of Internet radio stations from around the world, with broadcasts from nearly every country on the planet. We provide both live and on-demand (“listen again”) content and we support Real Audio, Windows and MP3 streams.”

Site Information: Our directory contains 16747 stations (and 21242 on-demand streams) in 280 locations and 67 genres.  86,145 registered users.

Reciva by Genre’s

|60s |70s |80s |90s |Adult |Adult Contemporary |Alternative |Ambient |Bluegrass |Blues |Bollywood |Christian |Christian Contemporary |Classic Rock |Classical |College |Comedy |Contemporary |Country |Dance |Discussion |Drum & Bass |Easy |Electronica |Experimental |Folk |Gospel |Greek |Hip Hop |Indian |Indie |Indie Rock |Jazz |Jungle |Kids |Latin Hits |New Age |News |News Talk |News Updates |Oldies |Pop |Public |Punk |R&B |Rap |Reggae |Religious |Rock |Soft Rock |Spanish |Sports |Talk |Top 40 |Unknown |Varied |World |World Africa |World Asia |World Caribbean |World Europe |World Mediterranean |World Middle East |World Tropical

Reciva By Location – Shortwave listeners, please take note

|Afghanistan |Albania |Algeria |American Samoa |Andorra |Angola |Anguilla |Antigua and Barbuda |Argentina |Armenia |Aruba |Australia |Austria |Azerbaijan |Bahamas |Bahrain |Bangladesh |Barbados |Belarus |Belgium |Belize |Benin |Bermuda |Bhutan |Bolivia |Bosnia and Herzegovina |Brazil |British Virgin Islands |Brunei |Bulgaria |Burkina Faso |Burma |Burundi |Cambodia |Cameroon |Canada |Cape Verde |Cayman Islands |Chad |Chile |China |Colombia |Comoros |Cook Islands |Costa Rica |Cote d’Ivoire |Croatia |Cuba |Cyprus |Czech Republic |Democratic Republic of the Congo |Denmark |Dominica |Dominican Republic |Ecuador |Egypt |El Salvador |Eritrea |Estonia |Ethiopia |Europe |Falkland Islands |Faroe Islands |Federated States of Micronesia |Fiji |Finland |France |French Guiana |French Polynesia |Gabon |Gaza Strip |Georgia |Germany |Ghana |Gibraltar |Greece |Grenada |Guadeloupe |Guam |Guatemala |Guernsey |Guinea |Guinea-Bissau |Guyana |Haiti |Holy See (Vatican City) |Honduras |Hong Kong |Hungary |Iceland |India |Indonesia |Internet Only |Iran |Iraq |Ireland |Isle of Man |Israel |Italy |Jamaica |Japan |Jersey |Jordan |Kazakhstan |Kenya |Kiribati |Korea |Kuwait |Kyrgyzstan |Laos |Latvia |Lebanon |Liechtenstein |Lithuania |Luxembourg |Macau |Macedonia |Madagascar |Malawi |Malaysia |Maldives |Mali |Malta |Martinique |Mauritania |Mauritius |Mayotte |Mexico |Middle East |Moldova |Monaco |Mongolia |Montserrat |Morocco |Mozambique |Namibia |Nepal |Netherlands |Netherlands Antilles |New Caledonia |New Zealand |Nicaragua |Nigeria |Norfolk Island |Northern Mariana Islands |Norway |Oman |Pakistan |Palau |Panama |Paraguay |Peru |Philippines |Poland |Portugal |Puerto Rico |Qatar |Republic of Korea |Republic of the Congo |Reunion |Romania |Russia |Rwanda |Saint Helena |Saint Kitts and Nevis |Saint Lucia |Saint Pierre and Miquelon |Saint Vincent and the Grenadines |Samoa |San Marino |Saudi Arabia |Senegal |Serbia and Montenegro |Seychelles |Sierra Leone |Singapore |Slovakia |Slovenia |Solomon Islands |South Africa |South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands |Spain |Sri Lanka |Sudan |Suriname |Swaziland |Sweden |Switzerland |Syria |Taiwan |Tajikistan |Tanzania |Thailand |Togo |Trinidad and Tobago |Tromelin Island |Tunisia |Turkey |Turks and Caicos Islands |Uganda |UK |Ukraine |United Arab Emirates |Uruguay |USA |Uzbekistan |Vanuatu |Venezuela |Vietnam |Virgin Islands |Wallis and Futuna |West Bank |Yemen |Zambia |Zimbabwe

What is the future of Terrestrial Broadcast radio?

So all of this begs the question – What is the future of Terrestrial Radio?

This blog is being written near Chicago, Illinois.  The 50,000 Watt blow torch AM radio station in the area is WLS.  On a business trip to Detroit Michigan I could not hear WLS on a radio near or in Detroit.  Fifty thousand watts and all the infrastructure to produce 50,000 Watts of RF energy could not make the trip 300 miles from Chicago.

But, in the hotel room with wireless internet I was able to listen to WLS in crystal clarity on my laptop – via Reciva.

The New Paradigm

Way back in 1997 Clayton Christensen of Harvard Business School wrote a book: “The Innovator’s Dilemma When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail”.

From the work of Christensen came a number of new terms.  Among these were “Disruptive Technology” and “Disruptive Innovation”.

… a disruptive innovation is a technology, process, or business model that brings to a market a much more affordable product or service that is much simpler to use. It enables more consumers in that market to afford and/or have the skill to use the product or service. The change caused by such an innovation is so big that it eventually replaces, or disrupts, the established approach to providing that product or service.

Of course the disruptive technology is the Internet.  And what it disrupts, in this case, is the traditional delivery/distribution mechanism of “Radio”.  The term Radio is now in quotes as the disruptive technology put’s the term into question.  What is radio?

What do we mean by “Radio”?

It is important to make a distinction between the medium and the message.  Traditionally, these have been conflated.  Ten or twenty years ago when one heard the term “Radio” it generally denoted a delivery mechanism and an appliance that was designed specifically to receive that delivery.  What was delivered was a variety of audio content based on the market served.

So, “radio” mostly signified a form of delivery.  Shortwave Radio was also about delivery and also denoted a special type of content or programming.  You can read the sidebar’s for the special focus on Shortwave Radio.

So what happens when you radically separate content from delivery mechanism?  What happens when you free the content from the constraint of a particular delivery mechanism?

Disruption

The game changer is all about the opportunity of radical change in distribution and the radical reduction of cost of distribution.  Prior to the public Internet, radio RF was the only viable global delivery mechanism.  Distribution of content by RF can be expensive.  There are huge capital and infrastructure maintenance costs in RF distribution of any content targeted to a global audience.

When I posted the information on the radio station WLW - a 500,000 blow torch -  I found an article with an anecdotal comment that the street lights dimmed with this station went to full power.  That gives you some idea of the power required to run a one-half million watt radio station – the cost of distribution of the stations audio content.

Cost of distribution

With the Internet, what is the cost of distribution?  If WLW wanted to distribute it’s audio content via the internet what would be the ratio of costs of Internet distribution vs distribution via 500,000 Watts of RF?  The difference in cost is staggering.

What happens when the cost of distribution is reduced by many orders of magnitude and all distribution is worldwide by default?

It disrupts markets.  For example, WLS programs to the local Chicago area market within a competitive space of other local radio stations.  But what happens when it is as easy for a listener in Chicago to use an Internet Radio to listen to any radio station in any city in the United States or any city in the World?  The competitive landscape for WLS programming has now changed radically.  Geographic boundaries are erased.  WLS competitors are no longer limited to local radio stations.

The same disruption of distribution is now well known to newspapers and magazines.  Traditional newspapers and magazines are now affectionately known as the “dead tree edition”.  No longer do local newspapers compete only on a local basis only.  A person with a internet connection can view newspapers from a thousand different cities.

Who wants to wait for a magazine to be published on paper and delivered to your door step or the local news stand?  Again, its about distribution – cost and speed.  If I can get the information at the speed of light why would I prefer a delivery mechanism that only delays the information?

And the US Post Office?  The medium on which information rides is slow, cumbersome, and inefficient.  Again, I can send e-mail at the speed of light at nearly zero cost.  The US Post Office will charge me 40+ cents and take days to deliver my message.  What is the future for this business model and service?

New Vision; New Mission; New Goals; New Strategy

Let’s get back to radio.  If the playing field has been leveled on distribution so that no radio station has an advantage on distribution and geographic boundaries are erased then what remains?  Content.

Traditional shortwave radio stations will most likely be at a greater disadvantage than local stations.  The unique programming of traditional shortwave stations could be seen as irrelevant post Cold War. The advent of ubiquitous global communications over the past decade made possible by the internet has made the mystery of other cultures evaporate.  What is the reason for the existence  of shortwave radio?

“Radio” minus its unique distribution mechanism (RF) will collapse into the aggregate category of “content provider”.  These “radio stations” will enter a new competitive landscape along with “television”.  Like “radio” traditional “television” stations separated from their unique mechanism of distribution will also collapse into the aggregate category of “content provider”.  The same for traditional newspaper and magazine publishing – they are all (merely) “content provider’s” when stripped of their unique delivery and distribution mechanisms.

Digital Convergence of all content providers

Once distribution and delivery from all content providers converge in the digital internet pipe there is nothing to distinguish between “radio”, “television”, “newspaper”, “magazine” or anything else that was once distinguished by the method of delivery and specialized appliances for reception.

This creates a new competitive space for all content providers where there was none before.  This will cause all content providers to re/think and re/invent themselves.  At least it will present to them this opportunity.

What business are you in?

For these content/programming providers to redefine themselves might be the key to their survival.  How an organization or company defines itself limits them or positions them for new opportunities.  For example, at the turn of the 20′th century what business were Railroads in?  If Railroads had the idea that they were in the Transportation business as opposed to the Railroad business (=tracks and engines) then how much better would they be positioned at the dawn of aviation.

What about the Oil companies?  Are Oil companies in the oil business or are they in the “Energy business”?  If Oil companies understand themselves as fundamentally in the Energy business then they are well positioned for the future beyond the nations dependence on oil.

The same analogy can be applied to traditional radio stations.  For a radio station – what business is it in?

New Competitors

There will be some surprises.  A classic book on corporate competitive strategy is Michael Porters “Competitive Strategy”.  In that book Porter lays out five competitive forces that determine the intensity of competition of a particular market or industry.  One of those 5 forces is the threat of new entrants.  Some of the barriers to entry of new competitors are: high capital requirements and proprietary technology.

Decades ago the barriers to entry of new competitors into broadcast radio included huge capital requirements.  How much does it cost to build out the infrastructure for a new 50,000 Watt radio station?  Today in 2009, anyone with the technical knowledge of a high school student can set up a audio stream on Shout Cast and make the stream available globally.  Capital cost is negligible and technology is simple and free.  The barriers to entry in this area are nearly erased.

So the surprise might be new competitors that incumbents have never considered.  The same surprise was experienced by traditional brick and mortar bookstores when Jeff Bezos and Amazon.com bust onto the scene in 1995.  The business model of selling books at a discount on-line (enabled by the disruptive technology of the Internet) caught traditional booksellers off guard.  It took them many years to catch up to a competitor who entered the market from outside the traditional bookseller industry.

Ding – What do we do now?

One of my favorite quotes from Apple CEO Steve Jobs is: “I want to put a ding in the Universe”

Well, someone did, and it’s called the Internet.  Probably the most disruptive technology of the 20′th century.

Conclusion

So forget all this.  Let the corporate strategists figure it all out.
Let’s just have some fun listening to the “radio” – or whatever it is now.

If you have an Apple iPhone or iPod Touch – iHeartRadio, ShoutCast, FlyCast, or Stitcher in the App Store – free.
If you have a PC or Mac desktop or laptop -https://www.reciva.com/ is the hottest game in town.

References

The sidebar is from this article from a decade ago in Monitoring Times (January 1999) -  To their credit International Broadcasters were thinking about disruptive technologies and re/evaluating what business they were in against a changing and uncertain environment.
A Tuning Point for International Broadcasting: what does the future hold for shortwave.

Clayton Christensen’s web site -http://www.claytonchristensen.com/

A (old)  classic book on Corporate Competitive Strategy -
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors (Hardcover) -  Michael E. Porter

One of the best books I have read on how to deal with strategic uncertainty.
The Strategy Paradox: Why committing to success leads to failure (and what to do about it)  by Michael E. Raynor

More on WLW the 500,000 Watt blow torch of  Cincinnati
http://www.oldradio.com/archives/stations/cinc/wlwpix.htm

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.

Summary–Newspapers Innovate:  An innovative approach to newspapers is being launched in the Czech Republic:  A (very) well-funded group will open cafes linked to the newsrooms of hyperlocal papers (to be published by the group).  Many Europeans like their espresso with their newspaper (and vice versa) so why not?

Yes, we have promised that this blog is not about newspapers, but we cannot help but look for innovations while all around us people are singing dirges.  The New York Times reported that a new venture has launched in the Czech Republic to publish hyperlocal newspapers in four cities and to open associated cafes.  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/technology/internet/11iht-papers.html?8ad&emc=seiab1

PPF Group will soon publish multiple local newspapers on a weekly basis, in addition to multiple websites (can you say “repurpose?”), plus they will open cafes that will be next to—we mean right next to—the newsrooms for these papers.  Literally, the door will be open to the newsroom of each paper.

In addition, visitors will get help on such matters as building their social network profiles or other training on Internet skills.  The entire project will be branded “Nasa Adresa” or “Our Address.”  They may try to scale the model to elsewhere across Europe.

Oh yes, a couple of minor bits of information:  PPF Group has about a gejillion dollars (though they are putting about $13.4m into it).  And, oh yeah, I knew we forgot something:  Google is a major participant, providing the training and, of course, the advertising.  It just so happens that Google is not first in search in the Czech Republic.

So What?

So, it might be a good model.  The cross-platform approach adds the “real world” to demand for news plus Internet access.  It is a recognition that a “Café Society” is an optimal place to create an intersection of social practices.

Then again, its “goodness” as a model may depend largely upon the unusual circumstances there, to wit:

1. Czech is not spoken by a large number of people, so there is not a lot of space for competition, especially from major players who need large scale;  only those who take localization seriously—e.g., Google—would have a chance.
2. The Czechs have a kind of “Cafe Society,” which in this case means that they like to sit at the cafe while sipping their latte and reading.  It is like Paris.  However, other European countries are not quite the same:  The Italians named their coffee espresso for a reason.  Most coffeehouses there do not even have chairs (only in the restaurant part of the place).
   
3. People in European countries tend to like their newspapers, very much.  The hyperlocal approach, though novel, could be appealing, especially in new democracies, where the local politics are a hot topic.  Think of the broadsheets and pamphlets of London over the centuries.

OK, file this one under “convergence in the home.”

At NAB, Adobe announced that they were working with partners to get Flash into home TV sets, with sales of such units to start later this year.

Snore, you say?

Well, it is quite a movement forward.

1.  Flash drives about 98% of all video on the Web (e.g., YouTube).

2.   It is a lot easier to make content in Flash than it is in most other authoring tools.  Hollywood likes that.

3.  True multi-platform migration (create once, distribute over many platforms) becomes possible.

We often under-estimate the importance of tools;  this one brings us closer to the mantra:

Any content any time anywhere any platform.

Repeat that twenty times as you go to sleep.

And get out those “Flash for Dummies” books now and polish your skills.  Hollywood will find a shortage.

Conflict Prevention in the Multimedia Age
3-5 June, Bonn/Germany
Deutsche Welle Global Media Forum

The conference secretariat is busily finalising content and organisational matters – as you can  see in the attached programme overview we have about 45 panels and workshops lined up so far. In terms of content the number of events has nearly tripled compared to last year. A topical overview is online available here

Javier Solana, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union will open the conference (tbc), Ramtane Lamamra, Commissioner for Peace and Security of the African Union has also agreed to join. Moreover we have lined up a number of German politicians and we are still waiting for a decision of the German Chancellor Angela Merkel. We also have asked the Jordanian queen and some other international political VIPs  who have not yet confirmed.

In terms of content experts and speakers it looks better and better nearly on a daily basis. Just two colleagues who have agreed to join recently are Howard Rheingold, the Internet visionary and Brian Storm, multimedia guru from New York . Ahmed Salim, CEO A24 Media has also agreed to come. We have started publishing all those names on our website.

An attractive evening programme will give you a chance to enjoy the scenery of the Rhine river and the hospitability typical for this German region.

Partners include (in no special order): German Armed Forces, Stanford University, Reuters, University of Saarbrücken, University of Melbourne, Eyes and Ears of Europe, Intermedia, FoeBud, Chaos Computer Club, Radio Nederland, Media21, Konrad Adenauer Foundation, Committee for the Protection of Journalists, InWEnt, Commonwealth Broadcasting Organisation, FiFF, Interdisc. Fora RWTH, GPACC, SIGNIS, Friedrich  Ebert Foundation , DART Centre, n-ost, Thomson Reuters, Oxford University, OECD, UNHCR, Nokia Siemens Networks, IPI, Asia-Pacific Broadcasting Union, EBU, Zurich University of Applied Sciences

The conference is generously supported by the German Foreign Office, the Foundation for International Dialogue of the savings bank in Bonn , the State Government of North-Rhine Westphalia, the City of Bonn and DHL

Contact / Conference Secretariat:
DW – MEDIA SERVICES GmbH
Kurt-Schumacher-Str. 3
53113 Bonn , Germany
P +49.228.429-2142 (Press inquiries: +49.228.429-2148)

F +49.228.429-2140
mailto:gmf@dw-world.de

Summary:  European newspapers are figuring out how to survive–even using an old concept.

We have posted quite a few blogs on newspapers (see others at digitaldumonde.wordpress.com where a different version of this entry is posted).  No, Chicken Little, the sky is not falling in the newspaper world, though it does look a bit cloudy.  Look around you.  Try Europe, for starters.

Premium Services, Not Premium News Access.

One approach is to provide premium services.  In Norway, you can pay a hefty price ($90) to join a weight-loss club that is part of a newspaper website.  Your profile on the site can be updated but only for another fee.

Now, paying to upgrade your profile may be a bit much (unless the weigh-loss membership has not been successful) because of the nearly ubiquitous networking sites, but the point is to offer other services for a fee.

US papers tried this approach but in a different manner:  They charged a premium for access to certain news.  (One site, about which we have written, www.globalpost.com, charges a premium for additional news AND access to the editorial meeting, of a sort, and access to the journalists themselves).  Think about other services.

The Old Horse of Repurposing Content

Axel Springer, a large player in the publishing space, revived an old concept, which makes perfect sense:  Write once, distribute many times.  Write the article and post it on multiple sites.  This is the old concept of “repurposing” content for different platforms and different audiences.

Data as a New Source of Revenue

Newspapers make money not be delivering news but by delivering audiences to advertisers.  Few things are better than granular data about audience interests.  The more platforms on which your news is available, the more granular those data.  Advertisers like that.  They will pay for that.

Perhaps losing weight through a club run by a newspapers does not sit well with your idea of reading weighty editorial pronouncements.  But something else might.  Newspapers thinking this way create what their advertisers want:  connections with their potential audiences.

And some of them may lose weight, too.

Oh, and if you want to think about the ramifications for licenses then go to globalgeneralcounsel.wordpress.com.

From MediaGuardian today:

Twitter switch for Guardian, after 188 years of print

The Guardian - It's all over for the print version (well, maybe not quite yet)

Consolidating its position at the cutting edge of new media technology, the Guardian today announces that it will become the first newspaper in the world to be published exclusively via Twitter, the sensationally popular social networking service that has transformed online communication. The move, described as “epochal” by media commentators, will see all Guardian content tailored to fit the format of Twitter’s brief text messages, known as “tweets”, which are limited to 140 characters each. Boosted by the involvement of celebrity “twitterers”, such as Madonna, Britney Spears and Stephen Fry, Twitter’s profile has surged in recent months, attracting more than 5m users who send, read and reply to tweets via the web or their mobile phones. As a Twitter-only publication, the Guardian will be able to harness the unprecedented newsgathering power of the service …

Okay so it is 1 April, but it makes you think…..

CB3 is working on a programme of training and advising for an Iraqi government Ministry.  The remit is to prepare the Ministry’s communications department to conduct a PR campaign through ‘conventional’ or ‘mass’ media.

However, this does raise the question; today, what exactly is conventional media?  In the good old days that meant the mainstream TV, radio and print outlets.  But today, even in a post-conflict and developing nation like Iraq, the influence of digital capabilities is changing exactly how one gets the message through to the audience, both via the conventional media and directly.

Even in Iraq, there are 400 channels with nothing much on ... but there 's also the internet.

Digital convergence means that the supply of information or copy to the conventional media no longer means relying upon the journalist, editor, camera and sound person of that media.  With very few resources, digital copy can be prepared for direct use by that media.  The distribution of a press release, followed by facilities, press conferences and/or interviews can now easily be supplemented by digital video packages, the video news release.  In-house capacity building can allow the production of useable video, to be placed directly on the websites of conventional print, TV or even radio outlets.  And given the pressures upon conventional media outlets, these moves will be welcome – the dietary requirements of conventional media are changing, fast.

Taking the UK as an example, in 2007, Tiscali noted that 63% of Uk adults would prefer to watch on-demand products on via the internet and MediaGuardian reported that 43% of UK internet users watch webTV – which takes into account much more than your traditional media providers such as BBC or SKY.  More peple are accessing their information via the internet and from an increasing number of sources.

Further, those digital packages, ultimately flexible, can be distributed via digitally networked media – YouTube, facebook, itunes etc, and incorporated into wider campaigns.  Yes, that’s using user-generated content sites.  Why? Because if you’re going digital on the web, it’s worthwhile remembering that, of the top 100 global websites the top 70% of websites are content-based, and of those,70% are user-generated (from Alexa).

Bottom line – In Europe and the US digital broadcasting is growing massively, and the trend is taking effect in other areas of the world.  With less than half a million landlines in Afghanistan but approaching 6 million cutting edge mobile phones, and with internet usage almost doubling in the last two years, this is already happening. A comprehensive 2008 report on Pakistan’s new media habits, from the MIT Media Lab, tends to cement this perspective.  There may be a degree of ‘digital divide’ but it is narrowing and the dietary requirements of the recipient audiences, the man on the street, are also changing rapidly.

The digital domain - it's not just a 'Western' thing

Those who are waking up to the digital broadcast reality are taking it one step further.  Instead of providing copy or spokespersons directly for the traditional media, they are producing their own content and hosting it themselves.  Produce good stuff, which can be seen as untainted with propagandistic rhetroric, and the conventional media (and user-generated sphere) will soon be feeding off organisations’ websites.  Why spend money and time on cameramen and journalists when the organisations who ‘get it’ are providing useable digital content anyway?  Of course, the critical capacity of journalism is still required, but extended provision of good copy, which can be further investigated, cannot be a bad thing

For the communications practitioner, almost anywhere in the world, this represents three approaches to dealing with conventional media – servicing the digital requirements of traditional media outlets, taking part in the external user-generated environment and providing one’s own digital outlet.

Basic conventional media techniques are no longer enough.  The information environment is now criss-crossed with intertwining networks, including the conventional media.  Dealing with the conventional media in isolation, through the once acceptable tunnel-visioned approach, just won’t cut it anymore – even in the less developed and post-conflict areas of the world.

Fujitsu’s e-reader is based on “FLEPia” technology from Fujitsu Frontera that incorporates the color screen with a wireless data management system. And that screen is about as large as the average magazine page–making it far more suitable for browsing magazine-style info or even e-newspapers. That’s certainly why Mainichi Newspapers Co. Ltd. is involved in the trial of the e-papers currently underway in a Tokyo restaurant to see how the public accepts it.

The Termina Kinshicho Fujiya restaurant has a dedicated “BB Mobile Point” wireless LAN installed to serve content to the e-readers–this includes diverse stuff from newspapers to adverts to train timetables and weather reports.

Hardware-wise the e-reader is pretty sleek–it’s got a narrow bezel. It also has a touch-sensitive screen. Inside there’s Wi-Fi and USB 2 for connectivity, an SD slot for memory expansion, stereo speakers, and the entire Windows CE5. The device can go for 50 hours use on a single charge.

The William Morris Agency just cut a deal with YouTube that will enable YT to display professionally-produced videos–presumably with the famous actors in the WM stables.  We like this idea:  In fact, it’s about time.  Here’s why:

1.  Low production quality is the standard on YT; it will be good to see something worth seeing.

2.  Almost paradoxically, that which is of good (production) quality is the copyrighted material from the studios–i.e., professionaly-produced.

3.  The problem with the material mentioned in #2 above is that most of it is pirated–or at least no one is getting paid for it.

4.  This (and their other deals with the studios) may actually make some money.

5.  Besides, YT is a good platform–now it can get better.

6.  Oh yes, I forgot:  YT now has credible competition in this space. Hulu.com.