I am frankly surprised to see such insight from a member of the "traditional" media sector (even if he is the WaPo's guy for bringing them into the digital age).
He hits the nail on the head about how so much more can be done to target ads effectively (thus the golden age is yet to come). This would make them less annoying and answer many of the concerns from those above who think that it will mean more of the same display advertising.
He is also right on by saying that scrolling is a poor way to consume news. Despite the sarcastic response from Hank, he's not comparing web to print... he's comparing the average scrolling website to targeted, consumable, app-driven, contextual digital news. Read some @xarkin on Twitter and you'll learn what semantic technologies are coming down the tube that will make "scrolling" and even traditional "browsing" a thing of the past.
Bill Maher apologized and said The Onion "owned" Placenta... then tweeted the following: "Just found out Placenta joke done on Real Time 7-31-09 preceding Onion's 8-27-09 so I must reclaim first dibs! Still love Onion"
Very bizarre, these attempts to own something that people clearly think of independently. I am sure if you scour the Interwebs, these very words will have been written before by someone. I apologize in advance for inadvertently stealing them and promise I will return the words as soon as I am finished using them.
I am not sure if people would be more pissed off at having their cell phones and cameras killed in a specific theater while and only while a movie is running than they are at people who hold up a camera, text, or talk on a cell during a movie. This may be one situation where, if properly implemented, customers would be happy that rude and arrogant technology users are shut down for a short time.
Of course, patenting it and actually implementing it properly without overreaching are two very different things.
It can't just be the money, because most ideas don't generate a lifetime of income.
The Disney corporation is notorious for stretching the expression of an idea into an endless revenue stream. Merchandising is one thing, but more critical to stretching it out over more than a lifetime is re-releasing the same material in various formats every ten years or so. I can't remember how many times Disney has told me "This is the last chance you'll have to own a classic." Yet that chance seems to come up each decade: film, VHS, DVD, Blu-Ray, special editions, anniversary editions, collector's editions.
This comment says so much, so succinctly. It is what I was thinking: don't even sign up for a social networking site like Facebook if what you really want is Geni or some other site featuring a subset of your overall connections.
un·due/ˌənˈd(y)o͞o/
Adjective: Unwarranted or inappropriate because excessive or disproportionate: "$375,000 fine to an individual for sharing 30 songs is UNDUE punishment".
According to the teacher, violating copyright law is wrong. Period. I think we can then take that point and turn it around: Copyright law is wrong because the big media companies have lobbied to make the punishments UNDUE.
I actually didn't mean to nitpick, but I thought it was kind of neat how you covered two aspects of the problem with public perception of copyright law in one sentence (even if you did it unintentionally).
Several people have made the point that newspapers should be monetizing the traffic that Google sends them. This should absolutely be true.
However, the dead tree side of the business is still in charge at most newspapers. They dictate the nature and quality of the digital presentation of the news. And they get it wrong more often than not. So all this traffic is arriving at a site that is underwhelming at best. The concept of engaging the conversation is lost. Building a community is lost. The value of a loyal and committed readership is lost.
It's a good guess that if AP or Reuters had jumped on digital aggregation in the first place, there might have been less of a role for Silicon Valley based aggregators. But even now, the content destinations are sorely lacking... no matter who's doing the aggregating or driving the traffic.
Thank you for this comment. You outlined both the problem and suggestions for solving it.
"Burst" or peak capacity planning is a science and I have seen some service companies fail miserably at it. I think the problem the telcos face in public perception is that (here in Canada at least) they essentially charge almost a thousand times the cost per Gigabyte (transferred over and above their caps). So any argument related to data consumption profiles can be countered with: "But don't your data plans have the cost recovery for this kind of burst capacity built into them across the board?"
The suggestion for tiered pricing that takes into account sustained usage is interesting -- and it may or may not be a tougher sell than caps and overage charges.
Yes, the selection of content here in Canada was so thin, I chose not to subscribe. It would have been a good deal if there was even a little more content.
The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More by Chris Anderson showed these phenomena in action: the idea of infinite shelf-space and a natural recommendation engine were two of his key points. He also mentioned that very specific and non-mass market tastes could be catered to. The idea that what is crap to one person is gold to another is not new. The Internet just makes it easier to find gold.
I find it frustrating to read comments that say "so-and-so clearly says... whatever interpretation the commenter wants." The only thing that's clearly stated is what's ACTUALLY stated. But of course the even the words that are actually there can be interpreted differently.
In this case, I think the problem is with the interpretation of the word "worse". Mike (and most of the readers here) interpret "worse" to mean "more inaccurate" -- in other words they are worse when someone games the system to rise to the top. You seem to interpret "worse" to mean exclusively "lower in the rankings".
Sharkey had a solo career too after The Undertones. "A Good Heart" is a great song.
But great creative types don't always realize that the creative process involves (at least in part) building upon the shoulders of those who went before. If nothing else, fair use includes the ability to discover and discuss other creative works. Surely up-and-coming artists benefit from that?
Once you're a "music industry executive" you apparently have no need for learning and honing your craft. (Although one wonders how the business folks can discuss music from a wide variety of sources without hearing snippets in a fair use manner.)
I think WEAM may see Thomas as a trouble-maker and crafted their lawsuit accordingly. On the flipside, Thomas has a great deal of experience with these kinds of institutions so he should be well-prepared for this fight.
ctv.ca has full episodes of many shows and I will watch the whole commercial at the beginning of each segment (because it is just one short and usually entertaining diversion). I never do that with shows I record on my PVR. It sounds like I am not unique, so this is another case of the networks shooting themselves in the foot.
Just not trifling ones like the U.S. Constitution.
(I think someone said about that the Constitution is intended to protect citizen rights. I am not a U.S. Citizen so I am not talking about me... but I would think that the rights of citizens SHOULD be of highest priority. You mentioned the "reasonableness" was the litmus test in the courts. Unreasonable could be defined as "utterly useless and without any hope of actually stopping data flowing across the borders". I see the reasonableness of finding out: is this laptop really a bomb? I do not see the reasonableness of capturing a hard drive's contents and picking through it at the government's leisure to find ANYTHING and EVERYTHING you have ever stored electronically (even a bunch of stuff you deleted)... especially when that same data has probably crossed the border hundreds of times via the Interpipes.)
Actually in large international airports (Toronto's Pearson, to name one) U.S. border facilities are NOT on U.S. soil. Regardless, you'd think there would be some thought to protecting citizen rights ESPECIALLY when they're not on U.S. soil.
Re: Finally Google is showing its NEW colors or is that TRUE colors?
It is amusing to read about the laying out of a vast and well-thought out conspiracy like this. The reality is that Google was founded and is now being run by people. Equate a company to the people behind it. People can change their minds. Beloved people can screw-up and annoy you. Trusted people can betray you. More importantly, the actual people pulling the strings behind a company can change. It is not a case of the corporate entity meticulously planning out a way to do this from the very beginning, carefully luring us all in with the intention of burning us.
In Canada, Rogers has this scary line in their T's and C's:
"We have the right, but not the obligation, to monitor or investigate any content that is transmitted using the Services (other than voice Services) or the Equipment. We may also access or preserve content or information to comply with legal process in Canada or foreign jurisdictions, operate the Services, ensure compliance with the Service Agreement or any Policies, or protect ourselves, our customers or the public. We may move, remove or refuse to post any content, information or materials, in whole or in part, that we decide are unacceptable, undesirable or in violation of the Service Agreement."
On the post: Washington Post Managing Editor Explains Why Focusing On Direct Revenue From Consumers Is Short-Sighted
Sub-Optimal Experiences
He hits the nail on the head about how so much more can be done to target ads effectively (thus the golden age is yet to come). This would make them less annoying and answer many of the concerns from those above who think that it will mean more of the same display advertising.
He is also right on by saying that scrolling is a poor way to consume news. Despite the sarcastic response from Hank, he's not comparing web to print... he's comparing the average scrolling website to targeted, consumable, app-driven, contextual digital news. Read some @xarkin on Twitter and you'll learn what semantic technologies are coming down the tube that will make "scrolling" and even traditional "browsing" a thing of the past.
On the post: Yes, Multiple People Come Up With The Same Joke; It's Not 'Stealing' And Not Even Copying
Very bizarre, these attempts to own something that people clearly think of independently. I am sure if you scour the Interwebs, these very words will have been written before by someone. I apologize in advance for inadvertently stealing them and promise I will return the words as soon as I am finished using them.
On the post: Apple Tries To Patent A 'Solution' To The 'Analog Hole': Transmitters That Block Your Camera From Working
Cell phones killed in theaters
Of course, patenting it and actually implementing it properly without overreaching are two very different things.
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
It *is* about the money
The Disney corporation is notorious for stretching the expression of an idea into an endless revenue stream. Merchandising is one thing, but more critical to stretching it out over more than a lifetime is re-releasing the same material in various formats every ten years or so. I can't remember how many times Disney has told me "This is the last chance you'll have to own a classic." Yet that chance seems to come up each decade: film, VHS, DVD, Blu-Ray, special editions, anniversary editions, collector's editions.
On the post: California Politicians Want To Force All Social Networks To Be Private By Default
Submit or Die
On the post: If You Thought YouTube's Copyright Lesson Was Bad...
Undue Punishment
Adjective: Unwarranted or inappropriate because excessive or disproportionate: "$375,000 fine to an individual for sharing 30 songs is UNDUE punishment".
According to the teacher, violating copyright law is wrong. Period. I think we can then take that point and turn it around: Copyright law is wrong because the big media companies have lobbied to make the punishments UNDUE.
I actually didn't mean to nitpick, but I thought it was kind of neat how you covered two aspects of the problem with public perception of copyright law in one sentence (even if you did it unintentionally).
On the post: Journalists Are Aggregators Too (And That's A Good Thing)
Aggregation and Driving Traffic
However, the dead tree side of the business is still in charge at most newspapers. They dictate the nature and quality of the digital presentation of the news. And they get it wrong more often than not. So all this traffic is arriving at a site that is underwhelming at best. The concept of engaging the conversation is lost. Building a community is lost. The value of a loyal and committed readership is lost.
It's a good guess that if AP or Reuters had jumped on digital aggregation in the first place, there might have been less of a role for Silicon Valley based aggregators. But even now, the content destinations are sorely lacking... no matter who's doing the aggregating or driving the traffic.
On the post: Is Tethering Stealing Bandwidth?
Re: Shortcuts in terminology
"Burst" or peak capacity planning is a science and I have seen some service companies fail miserably at it. I think the problem the telcos face in public perception is that (here in Canada at least) they essentially charge almost a thousand times the cost per Gigabyte (transferred over and above their caps). So any argument related to data consumption profiles can be countered with: "But don't your data plans have the cost recovery for this kind of burst capacity built into them across the board?"
The suggestion for tiered pricing that takes into account sustained usage is interesting -- and it may or may not be a tougher sell than caps and overage charges.
On the post: Hollywood Continues Its Plan To Kill Netflix
Re:
On the post: Is The Internet Enabling Bad Content... Or Killing Bad Content?
Infinite Shelf-space
On the post: JC Penney Feels The Wrath Of Google For Using Spammy Techniques To Get To The Top
Re: Re: Re: Re:
In this case, I think the problem is with the interpretation of the word "worse". Mike (and most of the readers here) interpret "worse" to mean "more inaccurate" -- in other words they are worse when someone games the system to rise to the top. You seem to interpret "worse" to mean exclusively "lower in the rankings".
On the post: UK Music Lobbyist Says Rethinking Fair Use Is 'Intellectual Masturbation'
Re: Teenage Kicks
But great creative types don't always realize that the creative process involves (at least in part) building upon the shoulders of those who went before. If nothing else, fair use includes the ability to discover and discuss other creative works. Surely up-and-coming artists benefit from that?
Once you're a "music industry executive" you apparently have no need for learning and honing your craft. (Although one wonders how the business folks can discuss music from a wide variety of sources without hearing snippets in a fair use manner.)
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week
Vote: Yes
On the post: Erotic Art Museum Comes Up With Bizarre Justification For Suing Photographer For $2 Million
Memory
I think WEAM may see Thomas as a trouble-maker and crafted their lawsuit accordingly. On the flipside, Thomas has a great deal of experience with these kinds of institutions so he should be well-prepared for this fight.
On the post: Odd That TV Networks Would Block Their Own Ads From Being Shown To Users Who Want To Watch
Streaming video
On the post: ACLU Suing Homeland Security Over Laptop Searches... Even Though Other Cases Have All Failed
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ummm...
On the post: ACLU Suing Homeland Security Over Laptop Searches... Even Though Other Cases Have All Failed
Re: Re: Re: Ummm...
(I think someone said about that the Constitution is intended to protect citizen rights. I am not a U.S. Citizen so I am not talking about me... but I would think that the rights of citizens SHOULD be of highest priority. You mentioned the "reasonableness" was the litmus test in the courts. Unreasonable could be defined as "utterly useless and without any hope of actually stopping data flowing across the borders". I see the reasonableness of finding out: is this laptop really a bomb? I do not see the reasonableness of capturing a hard drive's contents and picking through it at the government's leisure to find ANYTHING and EVERYTHING you have ever stored electronically (even a bunch of stuff you deleted)... especially when that same data has probably crossed the border hundreds of times via the Interpipes.)
On the post: ACLU Suing Homeland Security Over Laptop Searches... Even Though Other Cases Have All Failed
Re: Ummm...
On the post: Google vs. Google On Wireless Net Neutrality
Re: Finally Google is showing its NEW colors or is that TRUE colors?
On the post: Which ISPs Hand Private Surfing Info Over To Secretive Private Group Who Monitors It For The Feds?
Rogers
"We have the right, but not the obligation, to monitor or investigate any content that is transmitted using the Services (other than voice Services) or the Equipment. We may also access or preserve content or information to comply with legal process in Canada or foreign jurisdictions, operate the Services, ensure compliance with the Service Agreement or any Policies, or protect ourselves, our customers or the public. We may move, remove or refuse to post any content, information or materials, in whole or in part, that we decide are unacceptable, undesirable or in violation of the Service Agreement."
Next >>