Thursday, 15 October 2015
BUILD THE WALL ANALYSIS
SECTION 1 - This first section talks about the 2 newspaper executives that can save high end journalism, newspapers cutting down prices on newspapers that do not sell and that advertisers think of newspaper advertising to be valueless.
SECTION 2 - two newspaper publishers Arthur Sulzberger jr and Katherine Weymouth can find peace for the newspaper industry in the digitalised revolution however have failed to do so, also mentions people/ newspaper organisations closing down.
SECTION 3 - smart people in the newspaper could have won by considering the internets implications.
SECTION 4 - a paid subscription should have been implemented a long time age and that it would not attract readers for some newspapers that are doing this now.
THE FUTURE OF NEWSPAPERS
Who killed the newspaper? (Article)
This article discusses the different issues that many that the newspaper industry faces. Also highlight possible reasons as to why the newspaper industry has declined as it has. The most obvious and main reason was the internet. This is because the article mentioned the fact that anyone with an internet connection and a keyboard and create things such as blogs. Also the fact that the internet has made it much more easier to access news around the world due to googles search engines. People no longer has to search through paper to find the information they are looking for. The damage the internet was also spoken about where the article mentioned that Britain's newspapers Guardian had half as many more readers in America than in Britain. This shows the type of damage internet has done. If people are no longer reading newspaper most advertising do not want to use newspaper advertising as a way to advertise and instead use websites where there is more viewers such as Craigslist. Another topic discuses is what newspaper companies have done to make sure they survive. This part of the article suggested that many newspapers are now offered for free and the fact that many newspapers have changed the type of news they are covering. The type of news has changed to entertainment and lifestyle to try and engage with the younger audience. Also the fact that formal news about politics is something that many readers do not want to read. It was also said that in the year 2043 there will be the last reader of newspapers. This means that as circulation in America is massively decreasing, it will stop in the year 2043. One more point that was mentioned is that if there are no newspapers then who would favour politicians.
Do you agree with its view that it is ‘a cause for concern, but not for panic’?
I agree that the decline in the newspaper industry a cause for concern as there are people who are losing their jobs and aspiring journalists who are about to go into the newspaper industry would have a hard time trying to find a job however its not a panic as newspapers should have learned to adapt with the technical advances with the internet.
This article discusses the different issues that many that the newspaper industry faces. Also highlight possible reasons as to why the newspaper industry has declined as it has. The most obvious and main reason was the internet. This is because the article mentioned the fact that anyone with an internet connection and a keyboard and create things such as blogs. Also the fact that the internet has made it much more easier to access news around the world due to googles search engines. People no longer has to search through paper to find the information they are looking for. The damage the internet was also spoken about where the article mentioned that Britain's newspapers Guardian had half as many more readers in America than in Britain. This shows the type of damage internet has done. If people are no longer reading newspaper most advertising do not want to use newspaper advertising as a way to advertise and instead use websites where there is more viewers such as Craigslist. Another topic discuses is what newspaper companies have done to make sure they survive. This part of the article suggested that many newspapers are now offered for free and the fact that many newspapers have changed the type of news they are covering. The type of news has changed to entertainment and lifestyle to try and engage with the younger audience. Also the fact that formal news about politics is something that many readers do not want to read. It was also said that in the year 2043 there will be the last reader of newspapers. This means that as circulation in America is massively decreasing, it will stop in the year 2043. One more point that was mentioned is that if there are no newspapers then who would favour politicians.
Do you agree with its view that it is ‘a cause for concern, but not for panic’?
I agree that the decline in the newspaper industry a cause for concern as there are people who are losing their jobs and aspiring journalists who are about to go into the newspaper industry would have a hard time trying to find a job however its not a panic as newspapers should have learned to adapt with the technical advances with the internet.
Friday, 2 October 2015
2 new/digital news stories
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/digital-media/11881158/Music-streaming-just-became-a-billion-dollar-industry.html
MUSIC STREAMING BECAME A BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRY
- Revenues from streaming songs on the internet has passed $1bn for the first time, new figures have shown.
- Digital downloads of songs continued to fall out of favour in the first half of the year, while free and paid music-streaming revenue kept growing, even
- The rise of digital streaming has helped the industry maintain annual revenues of around $7bn since 2010,
- Certain rates for Internet radio are set by government bodies.
Personally I think that the music industry is booming for streaming, Also the convenience for streaming makes more popular for users.This is because there are streaming apps that are available to download on smart phones in which a lot of people have.
MUSIC STREAMING BECAME A BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRY
- Revenues from streaming songs on the internet has passed $1bn for the first time, new figures have shown.
- Digital downloads of songs continued to fall out of favour in the first half of the year, while free and paid music-streaming revenue kept growing, even
- The rise of digital streaming has helped the industry maintain annual revenues of around $7bn since 2010,
- Certain rates for Internet radio are set by government bodies.
Personally I think that the music industry is booming for streaming, Also the convenience for streaming makes more popular for users.This is because there are streaming apps that are available to download on smart phones in which a lot of people have.
Facebook working a dislike button
- 1.5bn users will soon be able to vent their anger in a new way after the social network revealed its working on dislike button
- 4.5 billion likes are generated everyday from pop sensation shakira
- She is also the most popular on the social media website
- dislike button has been rumoured for a long time
- current like button is criticised as they use it to collect data
- Facebook are planning to remove pages with fake likes.
In my opinion Facebook shouldn't ass a dislike button as many people might be discouraged and might think about insecurities which will increase cyber bullying and other things that can be very bad for society.
Wednesday, 30 September 2015
AUDIENCE AND INSTITUTION
Remember our key question from the lesson: How has news changed in the last 20 years?
Now consider that question specifically in relation to audience andinstitutions.
What are the benefits for audiences and institutions from the changes new and digital media have had on the news industry?
What are the downsides for audiences and institutions as a result of new and digital media in news?
Blog task: Audience and Institution
1) Read this extract from the Ofcom 2014 report on the consumption of news in the UK. What
Blog task: Audience and Institution
1) Read this extract from the Ofcom 2014 report on the consumption of news in the UK. What
are the key statistics relating to the influence of new and digital media?
News Stats -
- 95% of Adults say they follow the news
- 75% say TV is the main source (decrease of 3% from 2013)
- 41% use internet apps for news in 2014 (32% in 2013)
- Use of internet apps for news in the 16-34 age group has increased from 44% in 2013 to 60% in 2014
- 28% said BBC 1 is the most important news outlet in 2014 (decrease from 34% the previous year)
- Almost half (45%) of 16-24s say their most important news source is a website/app, up by 15% since 2013 (30%).
TV News Comsumption -
-
- Average adult watched 115hrs of news on TV in 2013, same as year before 64% was on BBC One or BBC Two and a further 12% on the BBC News channel.
- 16-24yr old only watched 27hrs in the same period
- 196hrs for 55+yr olds in the same period
2) Come up with an example of an institution that has benefited from the changes new and digital media has brought to the news industry. Explain how new technology has helped the institution and try to find statistics or financial figures that support your point.
Evening standard is benefiting from new and digital media as they are giving their newspapers for free however other newspapers are charging for newspapers in which people do not want to buy those newspapers as they can get if for free on their phone.Also the fact that people all have smart phones and can access it more easily.
3) Find an example of an institution that has suffered as a result of the changes new and digital media has brought to the news industry. In what way has it had a negative impact? Again, try and find actual statistics or financial figures to explain your point.
The sun made a loss on the new and digital media as they are still charging £1 for newspapers in which consumers can get that information on their phones as everyone has smart phones.
4) Answer the following question in a mini-essay on your blog:
Who has benefited most from the changes new and digital media have had on the news industry - audiences or institutions?
Use this set of points for a very similar question - although not specifically about news - to help you come up with some additional points. (Username: greenford; Password: greenfordedu)
Use this set of points for a very similar question - although not specifically about news - to help you come up with some additional points. (Username: greenford; Password: greenfordedu)
Friday, 25 September 2015
2 new/digital media stories
1) Facebook is making more and more money from you, should be paid for it?
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/25/facebook-money-advertising-revenue-should-you-be-paid
- 20% increase in amount of advertising revenue made by average facebook user
- made company 20% more money than in 2014
- Average user generates 12.76 dollars in advertising every year
- up from 10.03 dollars from last year
- expected to rise to 17.50 in 2017
- twitter makes 7.75 dollars up from 5.48 last year
- average user is expected to double the revenue from advertising in 2017
- one user outside the us makes 7.71
- one american will earn a whoping 48.76
I feel that Facebook should not pay any users of the revenue from the advertising.This is because users have got the platform to communicate with friends and family anywhere in the world with an internet connection so I do not feel as if Facebook owes the user anything.
2) PewDiePie and KSI take their youtube fame to the mobile app stores,
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/24/youtube-pewdiepie-ksi-mobile-apps
- pewdiepie has an audience of 39 million subscribers by playing games
- releasing a mobile app - Legend of the brofist
- app is released on android and ios
- game stars a pixelated version of pewdiepie
- the game is one of many free to play mobile games that make their money by selling virtual items and currency
- Pewdiepies game cost an upfront cost of £3.99 and no in app purchases
- This is a part of expansion beyond youtube and is also releasing a book
- he earned 7 million dollars in 2014
- This app from pewdiepie was released in same week as another app from KSI
-
I think that digital media is a massive platform which can be worth a lot of money.In todays generation people can make a decent living by making websites, youtube videos etc.If there was no new/digital median then these areas to make a living would not be around. However more people use the internet more than they watch TV so it is the largest medium.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/25/facebook-money-advertising-revenue-should-you-be-paid
- 20% increase in amount of advertising revenue made by average facebook user
- made company 20% more money than in 2014
- Average user generates 12.76 dollars in advertising every year
- up from 10.03 dollars from last year
- expected to rise to 17.50 in 2017
- twitter makes 7.75 dollars up from 5.48 last year
- average user is expected to double the revenue from advertising in 2017
- one user outside the us makes 7.71
- one american will earn a whoping 48.76
I feel that Facebook should not pay any users of the revenue from the advertising.This is because users have got the platform to communicate with friends and family anywhere in the world with an internet connection so I do not feel as if Facebook owes the user anything.
2) PewDiePie and KSI take their youtube fame to the mobile app stores,
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/24/youtube-pewdiepie-ksi-mobile-apps
- pewdiepie has an audience of 39 million subscribers by playing games
- releasing a mobile app - Legend of the brofist
- app is released on android and ios
- game stars a pixelated version of pewdiepie
- the game is one of many free to play mobile games that make their money by selling virtual items and currency
- Pewdiepies game cost an upfront cost of £3.99 and no in app purchases
- This is a part of expansion beyond youtube and is also releasing a book
- he earned 7 million dollars in 2014
- This app from pewdiepie was released in same week as another app from KSI
-
I think that digital media is a massive platform which can be worth a lot of money.In todays generation people can make a decent living by making websites, youtube videos etc.If there was no new/digital median then these areas to make a living would not be around. However more people use the internet more than they watch TV so it is the largest medium.
Tuesday, 22 September 2015
digital media stories
1) HOW LIVE VIDEO ON PERISCOPE HELPED 'GET INSIDE' THE SYRIAN REFUGEE STORY.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/sep/13/periscope-app-syrian-refugees-bild
- A reporter named Paul Ronzheimer travelled across Europe to get live streamed interviews.
- The reporter travelled with refugees from the greek island of kos across europe to germany
- Throughout this journey , he was live streaming through twitter's live streaming app 'Periscope'
- At the beginning the reporter had 1500 followers on the app but after he reacher 33000 followers
- One of the videos was played and replayed more than 90000 times.
- The live broadcasts were unedited which is something that made people see it how it is.
- Broadcasts were focussed on individual refugees and about their experience.
- Easier to get inside the story and would have been harder with camera crew.
- One downside is that videos only stay up for 24 hours on periscope
I think that this was a very well thought idea of how to capture the refugees and the videos could show how it is for a refugee to keep migrating and the journey to Germany.Also I would say that in todays age everyone has a smartphone which means that you can capture moments and now even live stream at the click of a finger.The live streams by Paul really did make it look more real as it was unedited.
2) FACEBOOK ETIQUETTE - SIMPLE GUIDELINES
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/sep/20/facebook-etiquette-dislike-button-guidlines
- Mark Zuckerberg annouced Facebook is working on a dislike button
- Users have been requesting it for years
- enable users to express empathy about bad news
-
IMPACT OF GOOGLE
1) Why has Google led to the decline of the newspaper industry?
Google has led to the decline of the newspaper industry as the ad revenue from newspaper is going down as people want to know invest in advertising through Google.
2) Do you personally think Google is to blame for newspapers closing and journalists losing their jobs? Why?
I do not think that Google is to blame for newspapers closing and journalists losing their jobs because I feel that the founders of Google made something that is more efficient and more easily accessible which have attracted more people to the search engine.Also the newspaper companies should adapt to presenting news as over time you need to adapt to stay in touch with the new technologies.
3) Read the comments below the article. Pick one comment you agree with and one you disagree with and justify your opinions in detail.
"You can’t single out Google just because it’s the largest digital company. Patch, for example, invested hundreds of millions into journalism in the US and continues to search for the model that will work going forward. There are many who are investing in the future of journalism."
I agree with this comment as it talks about investing in the future of journalism which links with the whole part of adapting.I also agree with the comment because it says just because Google are the largest digital company, media journalists have to attack them.
The vast majority of Google’s revenue comes from searches with commercial intent I.e. “cheapest coffeemaker” or “Miami hotels”. They don't earn very much from news related searches like “benghazi interviews”. I would argue they make their money on the backs of commercial enterprise, not journalists. Sergey and Larry owe the news industry nothing.
I also agree with this comment because it talks about how Google earn much less from the news industry than enterprise advertising for example hotel adverts.Another thing I agree with is that Google do not owe anything to the news industry.
Google has led to the decline of the newspaper industry as the ad revenue from newspaper is going down as people want to know invest in advertising through Google.
2) Do you personally think Google is to blame for newspapers closing and journalists losing their jobs? Why?
I do not think that Google is to blame for newspapers closing and journalists losing their jobs because I feel that the founders of Google made something that is more efficient and more easily accessible which have attracted more people to the search engine.Also the newspaper companies should adapt to presenting news as over time you need to adapt to stay in touch with the new technologies.
3) Read the comments below the article. Pick one comment you agree with and one you disagree with and justify your opinions in detail.
"You can’t single out Google just because it’s the largest digital company. Patch, for example, invested hundreds of millions into journalism in the US and continues to search for the model that will work going forward. There are many who are investing in the future of journalism."
I agree with this comment as it talks about investing in the future of journalism which links with the whole part of adapting.I also agree with the comment because it says just because Google are the largest digital company, media journalists have to attack them.
The vast majority of Google’s revenue comes from searches with commercial intent I.e. “cheapest coffeemaker” or “Miami hotels”. They don't earn very much from news related searches like “benghazi interviews”. I would argue they make their money on the backs of commercial enterprise, not journalists. Sergey and Larry owe the news industry nothing.
I also agree with this comment because it talks about how Google earn much less from the news industry than enterprise advertising for example hotel adverts.Another thing I agree with is that Google do not owe anything to the news industry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)