Internet piracy is very appealing. It’s free and easy. The expansion of the internet has led to the opening of piracy and has hurt the entertainment industry in certain aspects. However, it is impossible for piracy to be adopted by everyone without a complete collapse of the industry occurring. There are also inconveniences to the piracy option. You must do the work of all the labeling of the downloads for the most part, there is no guarantee that your computer will be protected from risk, and there is a decent chance that you will download a corrupted or low quality file (extremely low in many cases). A paid online option allows for easy access to large amounts of media. The problem comes with the payment part. The young crowds tend to be the driving force of much of the entertainment business but we youngsters tend not to have the cash to back up the desire for endless entertainment. In the Wired.com article titled The Long Tail by Chris Anderson, he explains how the internet has affected the industry. The future of the business seems to be huge libraries of media with varying price ranges depending on the size of the target market. This will push the consumers down “the long tail” of markets. Buyers will also be introduced to a system wherein they will more easily find other media they may be interested in purchasing but would never have heard of before due to the limited shelf space in a physical store. These predictions go or music as well as movies and books.
The problem with the world of physical space-time is the distance. In our ever-expanding digital world of the web, space is no problem. In the physical world, stores have limited shelf space and limited customers due to travel issues. I agree with Anderson in his belief that the internet will help niche markets get their target audience. The problem with these niche markets is that the titles are typically not found in big stores due to a lack of popularity in the store's local market. When the constraint of space and shipping is dissolved, the entire target audience can access the website and drive the market or the product.
Anderson, in his article, provides the example of Rhapsody. They have over 735,000 songs in their library of music. Clearly, the top 40,000 are the most popular and have the biggest streaming audience. However, in a record store or a store like Wal-Mart, once you get below their top sellers they do not even have a need to carry the more obscure titles. On the web there is an audience for it. It is shown in the fact that Rhapsody’s top 100,000 are played at least once a month as well as the 200,000 and 300,000 and even 400,000. Another great example is Barnes and Nobles online bookstore. They make more money from the books below their top 130,000 than inside that top number. Anderson uses the analogy of a “Long Tail” to describe this effect. He believes (and I agree with him) that that the future of the entertainment business is in the ends of this tail. The sum total of the so-called niche markets may be a greater selling force than the most popular and fewer numbers of titles in any category including film, music and books.
If used correctly, this model can continue to spread as more and more new young generations become more and more internet savvy. The kids (not only of our age) but of the future will have virtually unlimited media at their hands. They will also be able to communicate through the net in ways we cannot imagine. Our hit-driven entertainment culture seems to be taking a back seat to the rise of The Long Tail. I can only hope that it leads to a more culturally diverse and well-rounded youth because the current state has led a lot of people into useless attachments to celebrities. Perhaps the age of the huge celebrity is coming to an end. Or perhaps it is not.
Source:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html?pg=5&topic=tail&topic_set=
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Blog #3 - Iran Elections and Social Media
For some time now, the world of social media has been thought of as mainly entertainment with a use for communicating with friends instantly. However, as displayed by the protests in Iran due to disputed election results, we can see that social media itself may be evolving into something even more. Iran held elections on June 12 with a turnout of over 46 million voters. The two heavy candidates, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (current president) and Mir Hossein Moussavi, had strong followings. A close race was expected. As the vote counting went under way, Moussavi claimed there were violations. The results came back claiming Ahmadinejad the winner with 63% of the vote. Protests began immediately. Iran banned all foreign media from covering the protests in a hope that it would blow over. This is where social media comes into play. The new popular site, Twitter, allowed for help in keeping the protests alive. Iranians have utilized the service to band together quickly and easily in an effort to keep up the protests and keep the world watching. Video services such as YouTube and picture websites like Flickr have also visually displayed the violence that has ensued. These events and their following on the web may be a catalyst for a new breed of news coverage and usage of the social media craze.
Twitter at first look seems like a way to simply post a comment (in 140 characters or less) so that anyone can see. With the use of link posting, trending topics and the hashtag and keyword feature, one can start to see the power of the service. This is clearly displayed with the case of the Iranian election. Iranian citizens have been accessing the website from right in the middle of the action to give live updates, comments and stories via a “tweet”. Adding a hashtag to the tweet allows people to more easily search for tweets on specific topics. The most popular tags and keywords have been #iranelection, Ahmadinejad, Moussavi and Tehran. The topic has been on the trending topics since the elections. The trending topics are listed right on the home page of Twitter to allow easy access to the most popular subjects being tweeted about. People have also been posting links (using tinyurl, etc.) to stories and other web sites that allow pictures and video to be displayed.
The tweeting is not the extent of the new-age coverage of the election fallout. Iranians have been taking pictures and video of the tragic violence taking place in areas of protest. The Iranian government had attempted to keep this quiet by banning foreign media but the internet is left open. Online video services such as YouTube have allowed people to upload videos of the protests which are easily accessible and have also been used by American news networks such as CNN in order to spread the word. These videos show riot police beating people and even shooting them in certain cases. A woman named Neda, who was tragically shot to death amidst a rally, has become one of the faces of the protests. Video of her have been shot surfaced and were shown on television in the U.S. and elsewhere. She has become a hero and inspiration for the rallies taking place. Photo-sharing website, Flickr, has also been a key factor in showing the events as they unfold. Many tweets contain links to photos from Flickr which show graphic but astounding snapshots. These pictures and videos have been posted faster than anyone could have imagined in the past and it may be leading to a new wave of media.
The internet has been slowly but surely taking over the news and entertainment markets. Newspapers are going out of business and more people have been turning to news sites and blogs for information on the state of current affairs. In Ben Parr’s blog post on the Iran elections and social media, he claims that blog’s have been updating and covering the events faster than major media. He says the use of Google Blog Search can help sift through the blogs to find the info you are seeking. Blogs can be written or started by anyone and updated at any time. People from all over can post stories and news about their thoughts and opinions on anything. This has been used well in the recent Iran fiasco. One can start to see how media and news is changing into a faster environment with an abundance of information and opinions.
The explosion of the internet has connected computers all across the world and allowed people to interact instantaneously. With the introduction of sites like Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr, information is becoming more and more available and clear. The Iranian elections have displayed this well and the brave people of Iran have utilized the services amazingly. The American government even told Twitter to keep their service up during scheduled downtime so that protesters could keep tweeting news. The world of social media seems to be morphing into a tool which can be used for inspiring masses and bringing people together for a common cause. The free reign of opinions is inspiring people to be more informed and start a revolution of information and news.
Twitter at first look seems like a way to simply post a comment (in 140 characters or less) so that anyone can see. With the use of link posting, trending topics and the hashtag and keyword feature, one can start to see the power of the service. This is clearly displayed with the case of the Iranian election. Iranian citizens have been accessing the website from right in the middle of the action to give live updates, comments and stories via a “tweet”. Adding a hashtag to the tweet allows people to more easily search for tweets on specific topics. The most popular tags and keywords have been #iranelection, Ahmadinejad, Moussavi and Tehran. The topic has been on the trending topics since the elections. The trending topics are listed right on the home page of Twitter to allow easy access to the most popular subjects being tweeted about. People have also been posting links (using tinyurl, etc.) to stories and other web sites that allow pictures and video to be displayed.
The tweeting is not the extent of the new-age coverage of the election fallout. Iranians have been taking pictures and video of the tragic violence taking place in areas of protest. The Iranian government had attempted to keep this quiet by banning foreign media but the internet is left open. Online video services such as YouTube have allowed people to upload videos of the protests which are easily accessible and have also been used by American news networks such as CNN in order to spread the word. These videos show riot police beating people and even shooting them in certain cases. A woman named Neda, who was tragically shot to death amidst a rally, has become one of the faces of the protests. Video of her have been shot surfaced and were shown on television in the U.S. and elsewhere. She has become a hero and inspiration for the rallies taking place. Photo-sharing website, Flickr, has also been a key factor in showing the events as they unfold. Many tweets contain links to photos from Flickr which show graphic but astounding snapshots. These pictures and videos have been posted faster than anyone could have imagined in the past and it may be leading to a new wave of media.
The internet has been slowly but surely taking over the news and entertainment markets. Newspapers are going out of business and more people have been turning to news sites and blogs for information on the state of current affairs. In Ben Parr’s blog post on the Iran elections and social media, he claims that blog’s have been updating and covering the events faster than major media. He says the use of Google Blog Search can help sift through the blogs to find the info you are seeking. Blogs can be written or started by anyone and updated at any time. People from all over can post stories and news about their thoughts and opinions on anything. This has been used well in the recent Iran fiasco. One can start to see how media and news is changing into a faster environment with an abundance of information and opinions.
The explosion of the internet has connected computers all across the world and allowed people to interact instantaneously. With the introduction of sites like Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr, information is becoming more and more available and clear. The Iranian elections have displayed this well and the brave people of Iran have utilized the services amazingly. The American government even told Twitter to keep their service up during scheduled downtime so that protesters could keep tweeting news. The world of social media seems to be morphing into a tool which can be used for inspiring masses and bringing people together for a common cause. The free reign of opinions is inspiring people to be more informed and start a revolution of information and news.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
The Other Side Of Piracy
Internet piracy is looked down upon by most but practiced by many. Many people (mostly internet-savvy students) are tight on money but have a strong desire for music. The option of free music, movies and even books or programs is very tempting. Also, it is widely understood in this community that getting caught is very rare (but the penalty is large). However, not everything about internet piracy is negative for the artist. Tim O’Reilly argues that “piracy is progressive taxation.” He says that having your work pirated is good for some artists, especially those who are not well known. I agree with this. In this age of technology artists can create from their own home with relatively inexpensive equipment. They can then post their work on the web for anyone to access. This creates a market where almost anyone can start to compete.
O’Reilly states that the people who are mainly hurt from this piracy are existing publishers. He claims that a middleman for distribution will always be necessary but the form changes. If a publisher cannot handle and adapt to the pressures of the market, then somebody else will capitalize on their loss. The market will always balance out. The question becomes, how is the artist affected? The artist will, in all likelihood, lose a certain percentage of sales (although O’Reilly claims that this has not even been proven). However, what they lose in sales they gain in reputation. This means the world to artists. To get your name out there and creating a fan base is the key for emerging artists. Also, in today’s music scene bands make more and more money from touring and less from album sales. The only way to get an audience is to be known. Piracy helps with this, especially in the key college student-age demographic who are less willing to spend money on albums.
O’Reilly calls piracy a progressive tax for artists. This is a good analogy because the artist loses in one area but gains significantly in another. Not only do they gain the following, but also fans are more likely to buy the album after having downloaded (pirated) a song they liked from it. They may then go and look for the album in a store and find a whole list of songs they may also be interested with the packet that customarily comes with CDs. They can get pictures of the artist/s, lyrics and other perks. Bonus songs and extra features for the computer can also be included exclusively with the album.
An important lesson learned from the history of “free” services is that it, as O’Reilly states, it “is eventually replaced by a higher-quality paid service.” The web used to be able to be accessed free of charge but now virtually everyone pays an ISP. Eventually, as we are starting to see, services will be available for online music and people will probably end up paying a monthly or yearly charge. An example from O’Reilly’s article is that Safari Books Online is growing at 30 percent per month and now has multi-million dollar revenue.
There’s no question that many artists (mostly the more popular ones) lose pretty significant sales from piracy. However, it would be wrong to say that there are no positive affects from it. Artists can more easily create a name for themselves. Eventually, a service industry will become popular and will allow for artists to earn more of what they are due in album/song sales.
Source:
http://www.openp2p.com/lpt/a/3015
O’Reilly states that the people who are mainly hurt from this piracy are existing publishers. He claims that a middleman for distribution will always be necessary but the form changes. If a publisher cannot handle and adapt to the pressures of the market, then somebody else will capitalize on their loss. The market will always balance out. The question becomes, how is the artist affected? The artist will, in all likelihood, lose a certain percentage of sales (although O’Reilly claims that this has not even been proven). However, what they lose in sales they gain in reputation. This means the world to artists. To get your name out there and creating a fan base is the key for emerging artists. Also, in today’s music scene bands make more and more money from touring and less from album sales. The only way to get an audience is to be known. Piracy helps with this, especially in the key college student-age demographic who are less willing to spend money on albums.
O’Reilly calls piracy a progressive tax for artists. This is a good analogy because the artist loses in one area but gains significantly in another. Not only do they gain the following, but also fans are more likely to buy the album after having downloaded (pirated) a song they liked from it. They may then go and look for the album in a store and find a whole list of songs they may also be interested with the packet that customarily comes with CDs. They can get pictures of the artist/s, lyrics and other perks. Bonus songs and extra features for the computer can also be included exclusively with the album.
An important lesson learned from the history of “free” services is that it, as O’Reilly states, it “is eventually replaced by a higher-quality paid service.” The web used to be able to be accessed free of charge but now virtually everyone pays an ISP. Eventually, as we are starting to see, services will be available for online music and people will probably end up paying a monthly or yearly charge. An example from O’Reilly’s article is that Safari Books Online is growing at 30 percent per month and now has multi-million dollar revenue.
There’s no question that many artists (mostly the more popular ones) lose pretty significant sales from piracy. However, it would be wrong to say that there are no positive affects from it. Artists can more easily create a name for themselves. Eventually, a service industry will become popular and will allow for artists to earn more of what they are due in album/song sales.
Source:
http://www.openp2p.com/lpt/a/3015
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Twitter and the media
The new big thing on the internet is the social media website Twitter. Twitter allows you to give a brief blurb of text. It provides the question simply, “What are you doing?” It allows you to type 140 characters and you can say anything you would like. You can post a link, give an opinion, direct message someone or actually say what you are doing at the moment. This is an obvious result of our society’s tendency to have a short attention span. Many people do not like to read long blogs or article (let alone books) so they opt for the short and sweet tweet. However, as simple as it sounds, I believe this can have some adverse side effects in our culture.
We live in a material possession seeking society which runs on consumers as the life-blood. Twitter clearly caters to this need for quick consumption and tossing aside and I believe it enhances it as well. There are definitely some promising possibilities with social media, though. They just need to be utilized correctly and responsibly. Major media has caught on the trend and you would be hard-pressed to find a newscaster, show or station that does not have its own Twitter profile (and Myspace, Facebook, etc.). On networks such as CNN, MSNBC and FoxNews they even dedicate a lot of time to showing people’s reaction to certain stories or subjects in the news. This can be a great thing if used correctly because, as we know, many opinions are not accurately or fully portrayed on certain issues. But the fight for ratings between these 24-hour news stations is so heavy that some stations are taking it a little overboard. CNN had a television in their studio just for showing tweets and Myspace responses to the issues with a person dedicated to presenting it. Many times the responses picked are incoherent, ignorant and uninformed. The obvious potential use for this is to start a discussion about social issues with a wide group of people and opinions. The problem comes on trying to find people who actually have well formulated opinions and arguments. Most of the time dedicated to Twitter on these news stations is a waste of air time that could be used for actual media coverage of more important topics. Also, it is hard to get a point across in 140 characters.
In an article by William Bradley at the www.huffingtonpost.com, he explains that Twitter is hurting an already weak media system which we have in the U.S. “Spend too much time watching American cable news, where you can literally see faddish and frequently groundless political views become a faux consensus in a matter of hours as folks rather hysterically talk themselves into a viewpoint that is totally at odds with political reality outside the echo chamber, and that's already clear….Then add something like Twitter, and the hysteria can reach a fever pitch, with commentators, conventional and unconventional alike, tweeting feverishly away into the ether, hoping their info-bleeps capture a moment's attention.” He goes on to explain that as people’s attention spans get lowered, people get more anxious and their brains are affected.
We have enough kid’s with attention deficit disorder in this country to indicate a problem with this sort of media. I believe that as our attention span lowers, the harder it is to learn and utilize our memory because we do not use it as often. We need to have an open discussion about the future of social media and how it can be used responsibly for changing the way we interact, especially with media. And the conversation needs to involve a bit more than 140 characters.
Source:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-bradley/the-trouble-with-twitter_b_172366.html
We live in a material possession seeking society which runs on consumers as the life-blood. Twitter clearly caters to this need for quick consumption and tossing aside and I believe it enhances it as well. There are definitely some promising possibilities with social media, though. They just need to be utilized correctly and responsibly. Major media has caught on the trend and you would be hard-pressed to find a newscaster, show or station that does not have its own Twitter profile (and Myspace, Facebook, etc.). On networks such as CNN, MSNBC and FoxNews they even dedicate a lot of time to showing people’s reaction to certain stories or subjects in the news. This can be a great thing if used correctly because, as we know, many opinions are not accurately or fully portrayed on certain issues. But the fight for ratings between these 24-hour news stations is so heavy that some stations are taking it a little overboard. CNN had a television in their studio just for showing tweets and Myspace responses to the issues with a person dedicated to presenting it. Many times the responses picked are incoherent, ignorant and uninformed. The obvious potential use for this is to start a discussion about social issues with a wide group of people and opinions. The problem comes on trying to find people who actually have well formulated opinions and arguments. Most of the time dedicated to Twitter on these news stations is a waste of air time that could be used for actual media coverage of more important topics. Also, it is hard to get a point across in 140 characters.
In an article by William Bradley at the www.huffingtonpost.com, he explains that Twitter is hurting an already weak media system which we have in the U.S. “Spend too much time watching American cable news, where you can literally see faddish and frequently groundless political views become a faux consensus in a matter of hours as folks rather hysterically talk themselves into a viewpoint that is totally at odds with political reality outside the echo chamber, and that's already clear….Then add something like Twitter, and the hysteria can reach a fever pitch, with commentators, conventional and unconventional alike, tweeting feverishly away into the ether, hoping their info-bleeps capture a moment's attention.” He goes on to explain that as people’s attention spans get lowered, people get more anxious and their brains are affected.
We have enough kid’s with attention deficit disorder in this country to indicate a problem with this sort of media. I believe that as our attention span lowers, the harder it is to learn and utilize our memory because we do not use it as often. We need to have an open discussion about the future of social media and how it can be used responsibly for changing the way we interact, especially with media. And the conversation needs to involve a bit more than 140 characters.
Source:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-bradley/the-trouble-with-twitter_b_172366.html
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)