A New York Times article that ran on March 30th announced that Microsoft was pulling the plug on Encarta. As a web designer I hold no feelings other than loathing towards Microsoft, thank you very much Internet Explorer, so it is pleasing to see that one of Microsoft's ventures has failed. As someone who likes learning, this kind of worries me. Wikipedia is the leading online encyclopedia, if you are unsure of what Wikipedia is, well, you haven't been on the Internet long. Regardless, it is a social encyclopedia in which anyone can contribute and often disputes over the accuracy of the article are solved by majority rules, not what experts say. It is a really cool concept to give the power to the masses, but the legitimacy of the information is a little unnerving. Then again that still hasn't stopped me from using it.
The Internet is changing not just the way we gather information, but by whom the information is given. Information can be the facts we need for our research and I will even include the entertainment we seek, that is a form of information I suppose. It is creating a world where the experts no longer dictate to the people what is true and what is false, a societal truth is what is important.
Many cable companies are beginning to question their free online streaming model. The free streams are creating bad habits "that will eventually lead to the 'Napsterization' of cable and destroy the economic model necessary to create such shows." Unlike broadcast stations, cable companies rely on both advertising and subscription revenue. By going to the web they are losing the subscription revenue and web advertising isn't promising enough to support their shows. The $60 billion a year generated by subscription costs greatly outnumbers online advertising hitting the record high of $23.4 billion in 2008.
Though this tactic is being implemented to help generate the income needed to produce the shows viewers see on cable, it might be too late, if it would have worked. People are going to look at the Internet like they look at cable, they are paying for a service, so they feel like they should get all that this service should offer. If they can't get these online streams for free, like they do now, then some may try to find alternatives, Independent sources, or worse yet for the cable company, some will try to pirate the shows. Now the channel has lost the potential for advertising.
Looking at the worst possible scenario for the cable stations, if this does indeed cause them to collapse, then where will people get their video entertainment? The only other sources I could see are the broadcasters, who aren't doing too well either, or from independent and/or amateur producers. The problem is there is money online, but it is much more spread out than on other media. This may very well lead to the lower budget productions from society over productions from Hollywood or NYC.
Last year 62% of online Journalists felt the business was going in the wrong directions. This year the number is down to 54%. Still, the greater majority of them fear for the future of Journalism. Why shouldn't they? There are currently talks debating if newspapers should be given non-profit status in order to keep them afloat, again, the broadcasters are suffering, and some still fear that online advertising revenues are not enough to support an editorial staff. If I were going to look at the worst case scenario, which I am, it would seem like blogs are going to be the wikipedia of the news world. The biggest problem behind this is lawsuits. When a journalist breaks a story about a company that was devastating to their image or industry, companies will often try to sue. Without the backing of another company's law team, how will the normal person be able to afford to defend themselves from such a lawsuit. For a great example of what I mean, watch The Insider.
To straighten things out, I don't believe either of the hypotheticals I stated will happen, the cases are too extreme. Big production companies will survive, even if many of them close their doors. Online news will not completely fall into the hands of citizen Journalism, and if so, I can guarantee that there will be some sort of federation of citizen journalists formed to not only protect these people from such lawsuits, but to also check into the legitimacy of the journalists.
The point I was trying to make is the power is leaving the hands of the few and being placed upon the shoulders of the many. It is kind of exciting. But, unfortunately, as the saying goes, "The masses are asses," the people will find away to screw up having this power and it will be dstributed back to some form of Oligopoly, kind like our current media industry.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment