Indeed there were many reasons ofr high TV viewership, but it was the highest ever – the complete opposite of what you would expect if the medium was actually in decline.

- Greg

There are many reasons for some of the arbitrary increases in TV viewership in 2008, not least of which was one of the most important and historic presidential elections in this country, the fall of the economy and markets… etc., etc. The news was not good, affecting many people, who then turned to the tube for the latest in the ongoing disasters, polling results and daily dose of heartbreak. It made great fodder (think: soap operas) for the TV industry and they used it deftly.

Wayne

It’s a good point. I’m sure that newspapers will survive in some form, but the classified income is never coming back.

- Greg

But a thought on newspapers (that I for one still like). I remember how people said in the 70s that cinemas were dead. Why then do I have to queue now to get in?

You are preaching to choir on this one. My partner and I started Brochures On CD (www.brochuresoncd.com) to replace traditional print media as a means of educating and converting prospects without the high costs traditionally associated with marketing and advertising. These are the high costs that most mom and pop and small businesses just can’t afford to compete on.

Our feeling is that the average prospect is looking toward digital media as an answer to the “how can I find out more” question and the business owner is looking to digital media to answer the question of “how can I provide more, more easily, for less money”.

Our experience and instincts tell us that in the coming years the industry of digital media will continue to grow and innovate until it becomes so entrenched with john q. publics daily life that he literally cannot experience life without touching some form of Rich Digital Media.

Do you agree?

Thanks for your comment.

It’s an interesting point, but I’m not sure it’s valid to my argument. I never read Wonderful life, but obviously organisms got more diverse since the beginning of life, although there’s no reason that the process needs to be continuous. Most probably, it’s actually reversed with so many species dying off.

However, I wasn’t making the argument that media has to get more diverse due to some cosmic linkage with biological evolution. I was simply making an analogy that what can look like a directional trend might actually be an increase in diversity.

Sorry, if that wasn’t clear.

- Greg

Gould wrote Full House in conjunction with a work on evolutionary progress called Wonder Life and his intention in Full House was to challenge the common perception that humans are some kind of crowning accomplishment to evolutionary processes. To accomplish this he delves far too deeply into the effects of nature’s variation but effectively lays out its almost haphazard character.

In Wonderful Life he deals purely with the overall trend in evolution. Gould argues the opposite of what you are attributing to him. His work on the Burgess Shale showed him that life began with far more diversity of basic life forms than we see today. Page 40 “The data of the Burgess Shale falsify this central view of arthropod evolution as a continuos process of increasing diversification.” He saw amazing diversity develop within specific life types but ultimately fewer types survived. Their members diversified to fill increasingly more specialized environmental niches then died out when those niches disappeared or another form overpowered them.

So I don’t believe he is saying the same thing you are in the rest of your article. I look forward to more of your thoughts on content quality at some point.

I was wondering who coined that term!

I think it will take on greater significance in the future. As TV continues to fragment and web sites get better, the more the lines will continue to blur.

The effect can be seen best in the US. where magazines have been outrageously profitable because it’s the only country in the world where they function as a high coverage medium nationally. Editorial teams in the US are bigger than in the rest of the world by several multiples. The combination of high incomes and a huge population combine to make niche content add up to big numbers.

Just to take one statistic, in the US, publishers heavily subsidize subscriptions and only about 15% of circulation gets sold on the newsstand (compared to over 50% for almost every other country). They are making so much on advertising, copy sales are meaningless financially!

It’s the same story with cable and thematic channels. Yet, there still is, and most likely always will be, a demand for content that can reach a mass audience. That’s what network math is all about. The long tail depends on the short head, you can’t really have one without the other.

One last point about newspapers. Their problem isn’t so much that people don’t want to read them. Circulations have been dropping, but not drastically enough to explain the problems. The real issue is that their business was based on classified advertising and that’s where the internet has killed them.

The one thing that could bend the curve is that internet players seem to be starting to understand the value of display advertising (Google especially). The truth is that the traditional media model hasn’t really been under attack. “New Media” types have been focused on direct response and haven’t really understood how brands are built. It seems that is starting to change (albeit very slowly).

In any case, whatever happens it’s sure to be exciting. The media business is full of creative and innovative people. The same ones who have captivated us for decades.

I love the media business!

- Greg

Another key point that most observers/analyst have overlooked is that the Total Time of Use for various media is NOT fixed due to 2 factors—more free/transit time and overlapping/multitasking time. Most of the younger generations can’t imagine sitting down to listen to music or watching a TV program…they do it on the go, whilst tweeting, texting, playing, chatting, doing homework, etc. (One the posters above says “tech changes, people don’t”…maybe he doesn’t know anyone under 25. I’m 51 & I’ve even seen 70-year olds who are on SI.com while watching NFL on CBS, iChatting & reading e-mails like my teen age sons!)

A final point is that the death of Broadcast TV has been greatly exaggerated for decades! While it has shrunk, it still commands the highest shares and biggest ad $s. The Big 4 Networks crappiest shows outpull the best-performing cable shows on a regular basis.

Lastly, you are dead-on about newspapers. The business consolidators there viewed them as advertising vehicles with AP feeds and syndication rather than journalism & investigative reporting & analysis.