Karl, Greg and Deborah all weighed in on what has become a hot topic: Dumb Moves Made by Traditional Media, now featuring Satchi in the leading role, titled: the brilliance of one word ownership. All three have raised great points around the the future of interactivity and the stupidity of one word marketing, particularly as it relates to ownership. For those who have missed their posts, I highly encourage that you check them out.
I would like to posit however, that the entire premise of the need for their One Word initiative is flawed. Traditional media isn't dead and it's not going away any time in the next 20+ years. It will change, it will evolve but it will not die. Even the most avid tech user still uses analog channels and will always access some form of traditional media. For the foreseeable future our TV (the largest ad medium in pure dollar spend) is still going to be broadcasted, not bobcasted. Print is suffering, but it is not dieing. Radio is struggling, but is still a multibillion dollar industry. New efficiency models will be built and digital long tail production capabilities will continue to challenge the model on which old media has been built. Traditional media may be shifting, they may be struggling to cope with a new media dynamic, but ultimately, they will make the shift - and we will continue to consume their product.
Channel Vs. Content
The fundamental issue challenging traditional media is channel distribution - supporting advertising will follow. Traditional media distribution was always extremely channel centric. ABC owned a slice of the radio spectrum and the NY Times owned print distribution and a broad subscriber base. The media was in control, the only options open to the consumer was whether or not to opt in; and with a dearth of available options, we chose from that which was available.
The future of media is not in channel ownership, but content delivery. In a digital world you own your content and possibly the wrapper in which you syndicate your content into consumer controlled channels and readers. Monetization of content through advertising requires creative, short, dynamic, unobtrusive, relevant and engaging interactions that live within the content offering. End of story
Traditional media is still stuck in an analog, channel centric world. The massive amounts of money, manpower and existent infrastructure behind these operations have significantly slowed their transition into a content centric model. As our worlds become increasingly digital, our choices will multiply beyond even our current over-saturated offerings.
But even in a world of YouTube and UGC, Joox, Joost and Veoh are set to take off. As much as we enjoy home videos, we still crave quality professional content. To date, traditional production and aggregation houses (media outlets) have been the most consistent producers of content we actually want to consume. This isn't going away anytime soon. The content will stay the same, all that changes is the channel. Satchi can "innovate" through word ownership, but if I were them I'd rather make money doing what I do best, working with traditional media.
Hey Satchi, word of advice: Don't sign yourselves up for a job rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic when you already do a pretty good job building boats.
