Home > MEDIA, MOST POPULAR > How Can Big Media Get Back in the Game?
The Big Bang Business Model

How Can Big Media Get Back in the Game?
The Big Bang Business Model

bigbangI got this thing all figured out.

The universe, you know.

Once upon a time there was nothing. And then after a “Big Bang” there was something.

And as things started expanding there was a lot more of this something. And then the universal momentum waned and gravity took over. Things contracted. Once again there was nothing.

You’ll have to forgive me. I saw Star Trek this weekend.

So even if Jean-Luc Picard had never lost half his humanity and William Shatner had never traded the 1701-C for a hippie beater van, we still know the universe starts from nothing and ends with nothing. It’s a cycle. The universe expands and eventually contracts.

Now, more than a few scientists out there might want to debate my cosmological accuracy. Not everyone agrees in the closed universe. But that’s okay. We’re not here to analyze the space-time continuum or get published by the Scientific American. We’re here to talk about a business model. Scientists go back to the lab. Everyone else, thisaway.

So as we know, the universe is expanding. (Which for us humans is really the preferable thing.)

But let’s take a look at the media industry. It’s doing just the opposite. It’s contracting. And to provide some movie-worthy visuals let’s just say it’s about to reach the event horizon.

The point of no return.

End of movie.

After reading yesterday’s Mashable article by Stan Shroeder about News Corp’s plan to install the Great Paywall of China, and proclaiming it would be “rightfully high,” it looks like Big Media isn’t exactly caught up on their Sci-Fi (or SyFy). Because they’re on a collision course with a big sucking black hole. Haven’t they heard of Stephen Hawking? If you’ve made enough missteps to find yourself approaching the edge of a black hole, things are about to get a little discombobulated.

But wow. By thinking a paywall is the way out of this mess, Big Media is basically putzing around at impulse power. Hoping it’s a mirage. Assuming if things get that bad they can just dial up that fancy warp core so the lumbering mothership can continue on its merry way through the Milky Way galaxy.

Going where every man has gone before.

Ho hum.

Sorry, but it’s time for the Big Bang Business Model. Where outdated business models collapse, and new sparkly ones emerge from the primordial soup.

Yeah, there’s a chance Big Media can make a resurgence. Expanding out into the ethers with its long tentacles.

But it could also make like a Monty Python parrot and cease to be.

If Big Media wants to leverage getting sucked into a black hole, and hope that its particles cohesively reassemble during the Big Bang, it has to figure out that it isn’t in the information business. It really never was. What made Big Media ubiquitous and highly in demand was the human desire for personal power. No, not information. Not spreads with Annie Liebowitz photographs. Or articles written by Pulitzer Prize winners.

What readers really wanted was the personal power the information gave them.

I mean that’s why business executives read Time magazine or Newsweek or WSJ or Ad Age, right? To amass more knowledge that can be leveraged for power. The more information you possess, the higher-level conversations you can have. Your critical thinking skills might actually improve. Your value to your company increases. Your boss stops asking you to bring him coffee. People want to talk to you more. Listen more. Your mind expands. You revel in acquiring even more information because you like the result of having it. By absorbing and sharing information, you increase your personal power. Why do you think 14 year-old girls read Cosmo or Glamour? It’s about increasing their ability to have presence and popularity. Forget information. It’s just that thing you have to get through to attain personal power.

But somewhere Big Media got lost. The powers that be couldn’t stand to lose what they felt they owned, and chose to engage in an epic struggle to control what they think they offer of value: information. They ventured into the internet-planetary system but once they realized what Web 3.0 is all about, they reversed engines and started planning how to keep their “valuable” information away from users who expect it for free. They started strategizing ways to shield it from pesky blogging parasites.

The problem is that the internet is all about sharing, which is at direct odds with Big Media’s old business model. Big Media placed an arbitrary value on information because they erroneously thought information was their business. But now that the information has lost its monetary value, they’re apparently still not ready to accept that the singularity is near. They’re thinking that by installing paywalls, preaching about expenses, and calling their news “premier” they can miraculously grind the reverse Big Bang to a screeching halt. The problem is, “premier” information is losing its value.

Because free information can grant personal power, too.

Ouch.

To survive, Big Media has to realize that information is no longer scarce. The proprietary information that used to give readers an edge, give them more power, respect, and influence is now available for free. But there’s a way to capitalize on this. Want to solve Big Media’s business model dilemma? Use a little physics. The whole equal and opposite action thing:

When the amount of information increases, there’s something conversely decreasing.

And when the value of information is decreasing because there’s so much of it, there’s something else increasing in value because it’s harder to come by.

If Big Media would analyze their greatest offering, personal power, they’d realize that to attain personal power you need both the access to information and the time to go out and leverage it.

But with so much information out there, we’re experiencing an ever-increasing scarcity of time. More information, less time. And with millions of new web pages every day, it’s not going to get any better.

Anyone who’s lost five hours googling in one sitting, or has 1,700 unread RSS articles in their feeder knows what I’m talking about. The last thing anyone wants is to pay $2.99 for an a la carte article or subscribe to one more news feed. And a paid one? Forget it. Dream on. We’re already overloaded with great stuff. Great free stuff.

What we humanoids need is a way to synthesize information. We need a serious time-saver. We need access to the best information customized to our personal preferences. New stuff. Old stuff that’s relevant to our new stuff. “Trusted” stuff. And untrusted stuff. Articles and blogs and social media conversations that represent our favorite products and brands, complement our daily activities, reflect our personal goals. All mishmashed into an aggregated system that we’d swear was magic. Super value efficiently delivered so we can be on high receive, while still having spare time to act on it and share it.

There’s the value. That’s where the next business model is. Once Big Media crashes into the singularity, there will be an explosive opportunity to harness information.

Not paywall it.

What Big Media should be doing to save themselves is cornering the market on personal power. Developing a property that allows users to aggregate their own “personal power interface.” A truly ubiquitous aggregator. With Big Media populating what should be some of the best content, of course. But also populating from across the web. Being okay with having their stories aggrega
ted along with pesky bloggers or websites they don’t own or control. Drawing in the best articles, blogs, tweets, and updates on the issues and activities and people that shape a person’s world. An individual’s world.

Realize it’s no longer mass media. It’s individual media.

And instead of selling advertising onto a newsprint page or TV commercial, develop innovations to integrate relevant brands and companies into interfaces in a way that doesn’t feel like advertising’s unwanted guest. Take a serious look at the core of social media, maximize its strengths, and create interwoven sharing opportunities. Not just sharing news, but sharing brands. In a way that’s not already being done. In a way that advertisers will pee their pants over.

Seriously. If Big Media had been focusing on innovating instead of quarterly profits, they might have realized that the portfolio of media acquisitions they’d acquired during the 1990’s gives them an advantage to merge content through an interface that has real value for individual users. If Big Media wants to emerge from the Big Bang, it has to embrace its core value and realize what it’s offered all along: Personal power. And create something that maximizes it.

Hard to believe the trick is something as simple as a set of aggregation algorithms, huh? Who wouldn’t love something more relevant than a Google search. Something more focused than an RSS reader. More personal than Alltop. More customized than Twitter. Less asinine than Facebook. Imagine something that creates a powerful information efficiency, aggregating what matters to an individual. Creating a “life channel” that saves time and increases personal productivity. The perfect storm of personal power.

That’s the Big Bang Business Model: Monetizing the value of information, not the information itself. Making aggregation the focus of innovation. Placing importance on the benefit, not the product. Recognizing the emerging problem: too much information and lack of time to leverage it. And solving that problem, not adding to it.

A lot of companies are toeing the line of this hot, new mystery property. But none of them have yet to capture the magic. A few are getting close. But by creating an aggregator that’s truly revolutionary, one that seriously impacts the ability to gain knowledge and personal power, Big Media could get back into the game.

This is our new universe. The race is not going to be won on control of information. It will be won on the aggregation of it.

Aggregation turns information into personal power.

Information is cheap. Personal power is priceless.

And if Big Media can’t deal with that, not even Captain Kirk with the Enterprise (or William Shatner with his tricked-out van) will be able to mount a rescue from that big, black hole that’s quickly emerging.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
  • Anonymous
    I think all of the comments offer good ideas. If nothing else, the changes will force old media to return to its roots of community news.
    Here's something I often see missing from the posts of those pushing for monetizing through Facebook, Twitter, etc.: No one (advertisers, especially local ones) wants to pay for news on those vehicles. They're random and often not connected to the communities in which the local advertisers are based. They provide no value; local content does, and local content can be as simple as a promotion to how the council voted.
    And while certain metrics (traffic, membership, etc.,) may be high on Facebook and the like, unless there is a local tie behind the metrics there is no value to the local customer.
    That means, though, the national and regional advertisers/customers are up for grabs because they may want more of the high metrics than the local community ties.
  • Excellent call: "Big Media has to realize that information is no longer scarce."

    What used to be a regional news monopoly has become an international commodity. Yeah, that may take some getting used to.

    With ironic contrast, the Scripps' sponsoring of the National Spelling Bee an education system based on rote vs. kids creative problem solving programs which get lots of blog and web action but little airtime.

    Oh, the ponder!
  • EM
    Your article makes a lot of sense and it mirrors Kevin Kelly's
    "better than free" theory that states that there are things that cannot be duplicated have value.. and one of them is user experience.

    An example of this is Bloomberg, the financial news aggregator.
    Financial analysts happily pay for the service, which is unique.
  • Anonymous
    There is another dynamic going on as well. Consider the following:

    NEWS is still using Nineteen century news gathering and distribution formats in a twenty first century world. And like the melting of the polar ice cap due to global warming, the crisis in print news is just the tip of the iceberg.

    News reporting has undergone several revolutions over the decades. From carrier pigeons, to smoke signals; from the pony express to the telegraph; from the printed word to the telephone; from radio broadcasts to TV network broadcast; and from 24x7 cable news to internet news. Some of these changes have been enabled by technology advances.

    However, in all these various ways in which the news was found and published, there has never been a time, until now, where large numbers of people in geographically dispersed places, can get wind and share news before the official news media can report it.

    In all the many changes that have occurred in how the news is captured and reported, this sea change overtaking traditional news organizations with their need to fit into a traditional news broadcast format where collections of stories are grouped into programs/papers that are scheduled for airing/printing at specific times in specific media markets is fast beginning to breakdown.

    In the world of radio broadcasts, printed news papers, magazines, and network TV news shows, this approach worked relatively well. In today’s networked world, with access to social networking media, news is become know, heard and shared by ordinary non-media people who simply tell one another what’s up via Twitter, Face Book, YouTube, often before the news organization are aware. Some are hung up on what is Journalism but it isn’t about Journalism….It’s about person-to-person news ....personal media as opposed to mass media.

    The problem with continuing this dated approach is that we are now living in an age where news is becoming known faster and in more places than all the resources of all the news networks and papers put together can discover and report on in these fixed news formats/papers and shows.

    Are we witnessing a revolution in how we communicate?

    The technologies enabling this sea change is the convergence of digital media, mobile and internet communications technologies, and photographic technologies to name a few.

    However, it will be a mistake to view this as a technology revolution. In fact what indeed seems to be happening is nothing short of a revolution in the way we communicate.

    And, as you correctly noted this information is now mostly free and one can also add,can be and will be shared without anchors, news desks, TV or networks cable, or print media.

    One might call it 'Open Source News' as in open Source software.

    And it is this revolution that is leaving traditional approaches to news capture and sharing in its wake while simultaneously opening opportunities for entrepreneurs who can spot and leverage this trend.

    In other words, the true source of news reporting is fast becoming the very people these news organizations are deeming to be their consumers.

    There is simply more people going about their business toting digital cameras, and mega-pixelled cell phones willing to click and share than news organization reporters and camera crews.

    How to leverage this trend is in part what it is all about.

    However, if history is any guide to what happens to establish firms in an industry in the midst of a sea change, it probably won't be Big Media riding the trend.

    Hin't Hin't I know of at least one startup that's already on it.
  • On Twitter, @headcrash made a statement that bears mentioning here. He said he feels Google is a better prepared entity than Big Media to implement the aggregation concept.

    I have to agree. I think it goes without saying that Google is almost there... and already positioned to create the "magic aggregator." The combination of iGoogle, AdSense, AdWords, Gmail, Google Search, Google Profile, etc. are the right pieces. In a lot of ways, my post is geared toward lighting a fire under Big Media to do something about it.

    The beauty for Big Media is that based on their multi-media acquisitions over the last 10+ years they're poised to leverage the digital pipe. It's been almost 7 years (2003?) since I wrote a white paper about the development of a "Super Channel" that integrates a user's entire "lifeweb" into a digital interface accessed on a television. The "magic aggregator" is pretty much the same thing, but with more social media content and news.

    Back then, social media didn't have the vibrant activity it has now. And blogging hadn't taken hold yet, meaning there was a lot less original news content to aggregate. At the time, I was envisioning more along the lines of managing your life via the interface (pay insurance, keep track of medical, shop, access education, and on and on. From your couch vs. hunched over a computer). A lot has changed since then but the reality is getting clearer: Aggregation is the future and whoever can provide the most value in that arena runs the circus.
  • Thanks for all the thoughtful comments! Some really powerful ideas are coming out. Dan's observation that journalists won't become extinct but will become more entrepreneurial is interesting. And Mike's (mip) assertion that the aggregation should feature an "on-the-fly" ability to reassess the news stream based on conversations and topics the user is currently engaged in is a game changer. Brilliant! I wish I had included that in the post because it's a concept that would provide incredible power to an aggregation product.

    Kudos have to go to Ron for Business Week Business Exchange. I just discovered the site a couple of weeks ago (Thanks, Alex Chambers!) and it's now one of my favorite places to discover a wide range of business content. This is definitely a very open venture for a big media company. The fact that content is aggregated and promoted, even though it's not Business Week's is so forward-thinking. I love it.

    Just to be clear, even though I take big media to task a lot in my blog, I'm actually a long-time supporter of print media and hope it can find a way to survive. A lot of my criticism is tough love. When I worked for a Scripps newspaper back in the 90's I learned the value of print media from the inside out, and even when moving into the advertising agency world I always had a soft spot for print media because I believed in its value. I would love to be a part of the solution. Hopefully there are more executives out there like Ron who see the future and are working to not only adapt to it, but also shape it.
  • Ron
    If I may take this opportunity to mention our (BusinessWeek's) social media/aggregation platform Business Exchange (http://bx.businessweek.com) as an example of what you are describing.

    There's lots to say about what we are doing but I will not burden you with the details here Please feel free to contact me directly for more information at ron_casalotti (at) businessweek (dot) com
  • mip
    Wow, what a great post this is. I think as well, on top of aggregation, that Big Media needs to leverage the idea of "context aggregation", for instance, pickup on items I'm Twittering about, or Facebooking, or blogging and customize my content dynamically. Pass me info that changes on-the-fly based on what I'm thinking, doing, talking about at the moment. Big Media needs to embrace what Web 3.0 is going to be; the "real-time" web.

    As always, a thought provoking piece. Thoroughly enjoyed it.
    Ciao
    mip
  • Michelle, this is a great post ! I'm entirely with you in your thinking. I believe the strength of the concept lies in a number of forces that are with the Big Media - to stay in your Star Trek analogy ;-)
    They're sitting on a huge amount of information that can be mashed into something that puts each new item into a contextual perspective. By doing so they can leverage the long tail principle : masses of people can find content & context for their very specific needs.
    We need our media to help us 'understand' - not no so much anymore to 'know'.
  • Great article Michelle and I can see your broader point.
    However, what I think Murdock is talking about is monetizing the access to politicians and other newsmakers that being a member of a recognized news organization gives his reporters. Remember the fall out when UPI was rumored to be selling to Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network? It was the ACCESS that was objected to. That and the perceived slant on the news that CBN would project. (snicker)
    W/o that access even the best independent reporter is pretty helpless, especially on a big breaking story. Even those who chose independence have a background (read connections) to lend them legitimacy/gravitas in order for them to continue reporting on close to the same level as previous to their new independence.
    For example, the White House press conference. Limited space available, even more limited questions answered.
    David Letterman isn't going to answer questions from me, he's going to give a full interview to Oprah's O, however.
    I'm a bystander in all this: a fan of bloggers, a MSM critic/skeptic but also a lover of real information, which requires that those I listen to/watch/read have access to news makers or a source to access them second hand at the very least.
  • "The new source of power is not money in the hands of a few, but information in the hands of many."
    -- John Naisbitt
  • "Aggregation the focus of innovation" is something all news-gathering operations should understand intimately ... it's called having a great editor. I can see a time when big media organizations have no staff writers at all, instead focusing on great editorial teams that scour the web for the best content developers and aggregating that content into individualized streams tailored to individual readers' particular interests.

    And before anyone starts crying for the late departed staff writer, imagine all good writers selling their work to these big aggregators (or working together to create their own aggregating organizations), approaching their vocation as more of an entrepreneurial venture and less as a job.

    We're already seeing journalists doing this. Kevin Roderick has been doing it at www.LAObserved.com for years. Personally, I think it's much more exciting as a career opportunity than getting stuck in a beat you have no interest in at a paper where your job security is nil.
blog comments powered by Disqus