Aaron Azpiazu's Business of Media Post

Last night at the New School CenCom held a panel that discussed the economic crisis and its effect primarily on journalism. Deputy Managing Editor of the Wall Street Journal, Alan Murray, was there in addition to Fox Business Network anchor Liz Claman and freelance finance expert Farnoosh Torabi. The night started with Mr. Murray saying that the economy is near rock bottom, but that the economic effects and political effects will last much longer than the immediate financial hardship. Ms. Claman added that we still need to be skeptical. She believe there are still things that can go sour in the market that we haven't thought of it. It was her primary theme of the night: Don't believe anything, don't become chummy with your sources, and don't get caught up in the world you are reporting on.

Later, the panel rejected the notion that the financial press was to blame for the economic downfall since the financial press had been reporting on the potentiality of such an event for months if not years beforehand (i.e. Freddie Mac and the possibility of bailout fury). It was the mainstream press, claimed Murray, that failed to sound the alarm. Claman agreed, also blaming the participants in the market, but said that sounding the alarm on anything like bad investments has the potential to stymie good investments, so there is a fine line to walk between breaking-edge financial journalism and market-stopping rumor milling. Murray attributed some failures in the press to Stockholm Syndrome, citing skepticism as something that may increase in the future, as it did after Watergate and the dot-com fiasco. A new kind of journalism will emerge from this recession the panel agreed.

This new journalism includes a spike in the number of journalists, according to Farnoosh. The problem lies in that there will be fewer paying professional gigs in the field. But on the subject of blogs and their inability to make money, Farnoosh said that they allow for people to make themselves into a brand, perhaps giving some a reputation and employability rather than immediate paychecks. And of course there will be a lot of garbage in online journalism, but quality news, she said, is still very very common and accessible. Farnoosh's advice on blogging: Diversify yourself as much as possible. The panel's collective advice on top of that: Find the niche audience that you can connect with and don't just speak to the world that's not listening to you.

Murray, older than the two women on the panel, kept talking about his enthusiasm for online journalism. For a middle-aged Wall Street Journal guy, he was more passionate than I thought. He loves the exposure and reach it offers, as well as the ability for readers to comment on articles. The problem is making money from it. An audience member asked why papers aren't charge very small fees for bits of content and Murray responded, "They will. Someone will try that." He suggested that that company should do so by charging for the content that makes them different, citing the New York Times as an example of what NOT to do. He was adamant about charging for the one thing that only you can do, and maybe providing more common material for free.

The panelists were journalists speaking about the economy in general and journalism in this particular economy. During the Q&A segment at the end, the idea that investigative journalism (CenCom event tonight on this topic at NYU) is going to be transferred to the Nonprofit field. On the flashiness of television news networks the panel said that "TV is a visual medium, and you have to get those eyes to stay on your channel." They were not fans of the idea that ridiculous graphics and sounds and dramatic openings were not necessary.

And, wrapping up the summary, some words of wisdom/hope from the evening...

Claman's father on finding a job: "There's always room for one more if it's you."

Panel's idea about the next economic bubble to burst: commercial real estate, commodities and possibly government loans (watch out!).

And Murray's rational about the Jim Kramer-Jon Stewart nightmare: "Well, I don't go to Jim Kramer for investment advice and I don't go to Jon Stewart for news." If only the world would follow...

Dell has begun offering Sonic Solutions Qflix DVD burners, an internal burner that allows movie downloads to be burned to disc. The Qflix is the only DVD burner on the market that can burn discs using CSS copyright protection technology (as on commercial DVDs). There is only one movie download site, however, that offers downloads that can be burned, which is CinemaNow, so don't rush out and get a new Dell.

Burnable DVD downloads though? Wild idea. But I'll save my money on the burner and stick with my Mac.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6653153.html

On April 17 it was reported that Youtube signed content deals with Sony, Lionsgate, the BBC, Starz, Discover and National Geographic. Smaller companies include Anime Network, Cinetic Rights Management, Current TV, Documentary Channel, First Look Studios and IndieFlix. Youtube will now be able to offer their full-length movies and TV shows for free on its website. The deal is meant to allow YouTube to compete with Hulu, which attracts more advertisers because of their premium content. They'll sell ad spots in the streamed TV shows and may eventually charge for such content.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6652409.html?industryid=47214

Blog posts will be a little late, probably by midnight. Included will be my summary of the CenComm event tonight going on at New School (the economic crisis and media seminar). Until then,

I have no idea why I'm on the New York Times website at 2am, but during my adventures I discovered that YouTube has signed deals with Sony, LionsGate, MGM and other Hollywood studios, allowing them to showcase thousands of television episodes and hundreds of movies. Google says that the site may offer for-pay service for some of this premium content in the future.

The partnership with studios comes from YouTube's need to have more professionally produced videos which can garner more ads and expand ad placement opportunities. The studios will benefit by receiving a cut of the ad revenue. The article is written primarily with concern to YouTube and it's not-good financial situation rather than the deal's impact on the film industry, but it seems like Hollywood has taken a step to avoid the Napster-Music Industry trap. The studios are working with existing competition to turn a shared profit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/business/media/17youtube.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Word on the street/in the halls of the NPD Group is that consumers plan to maintain or increase their entertainment spending this year. That's good news for us, since I might have to give up eating and/or live in my parent's basement if they don't... Anyway, according to a survey, 63% of respondents said they would spend more on DVD this year, 73% said they would spend the same or more at the movie theater, 65% may spend more on videogames, 60% expected more spending on CDs (hahahaha) and 75% imagined more of their money going to music downloads.

I want these respondents to adopt me, because they are either very positive people or they have a knack for picking lottery numbers. The only other explanation is that they are not seniors in college who have just realized they are poor, their friends are poor, that Capital One has reduced their credit limit, and that Far-east Bushwick is out of their price range.

I digress, I do believe that more people will go to the movies more often in 2009, and DVD/Blu-Ray sales might be okay too. Videogames and music? I see how one could say that. But by using my communications degree , I have deduced that the math between monies-in-pocket and wish-list items lists don't add up.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6651900.html

Netflix will spend $100 million in 2009 on digital delivery, increasing titles and platform options (currently Xbox 360, TiVo and Samsun and LG Blu-ray players can stream Netflix rentals). It is expected that operating costs will eventually decrease due to increased digital content and the subsequent decrease in DVD and shipping costs. Right now, it supposedly distributes between 12,000 and 15,000 titles digitally, and a digital-only subscription is rumored to be in the future.

Fun Fact: Netflix shares have surged 60% this year versus the 3.1% increase for the Nasdaq
Fun Idea: Rename the Nasdaq as The Netflix. They deserve it (and it couldn't hurt...).

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6651894.html

Blu-ray Disc sales are defying Newton's Law of Recessionary Spending, nearly doubling its 2009 year-to-date sales from the same time period last year. In numbers, about 9 million Blu-ray discs sold in Q1 of '09 (vs. 4.8 million in Q1-'08).

rhyming haiku summary:

Blu-ray and high-def
is it one of the most-def
things in this recesch?

I can't say "Yes" because it would be too many syllables.
And, I'm still not sold on Blu-ray success (whoa, rhyme).

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6651924.html

------

Sidenote: Indie companies are looking to price their Blu-ray Discs similar to DVD prices. This is a big difference from the studios who generally charge $35-$40 for the HD format. Should be interesting...

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6651352.html?industryid=47213

Walt Disney Studios chairman Dick Cook spoke at a congressional hearing, citing the X-Men Origins: Wolverine fiasco as an example of the pervasiveness of the piracy problem. Representative Howard Berman (D-Calif) referred to piracy in an more international sense, stating that the U.S. and its trading partners rely on intellectual property to drive their economies, but unfortunately the incentive to pirate is great while the risk is ultra-low. Steven Soderbergh testified, "Litigation is slow and the Internet is fast, so it doesn't make sense to ask the government to be our police. What we would like is to be deputized to solve our own problems, to be granted the kind of pull-down and inspection abilities being proposed in France..."

Quoi? What about France? Scroll down!

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118002178.html?categoryid=18&cs=1

The French government is considering a law that will create the first surveillance system for Internet piracy. The law would allow music and film industry associations to hire companies to explore particular IP address' activities, detect illegal downloads and report infringers to a new copyright protection agency. First strike, an e-mail warning. A second strike in three months warrants a letter. But three strikes in a year and no internet for you!

The "Création et Internet" proposal has supporters and opponents but is expected to pass into law. It could fail to stand after review by the French Constitutional Council, though it seems the Council would never say illegal downloading is okay. The passing of the law would require internet users to secure their personal networks to prevent others from downloading via their subscription. Also, the government would have to figure out how to police public wi-fi spots so random thieves aren't stealing copyrighted content while pretending to be picnickers or park enthusiasts.

I vote YES on the motion. And as for public wi-fi areas, I suggest snipers on the rooftops. I don't want pirates near me while I'm enjoying my baguette and bordeaux and contemplating everything and nothing. That is, unless I've already finished the bordeaux, at which point I would say to the pirates, "Arrrrrrrrrrrrgh" (but in French)(is that possible?).

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/business/global/09net.html?ref=media