'Build The Wall' - Analysis

The article: Build The Wall

1) Summarise each section in one sentence:

• Section 1 (To all of the bystanders reading this…)

Simon addresses his extreme certainty that news journalism should be appreciated, through the hard efforts that are put into it and this is must be highlighted through consumers paying for the high quality provided by the news institutions. In Simon's eyes: A pay wall is non-negotiable and all news institutes should join forces and abide by this.  

• Section 2 (Truth is, a halting movement toward...)

This section expresses the falling moment in which industry leaders, misused the internet as mere advertising scheme, instead of creating pay wall from the start, and how this is a dominant factor infringing upon how they can set up a pay wall now. Specifically, Simon outlines the fact that audiences may be unwilling to suddenly pay for something that was once free. Additionally, he establishes that in fact web sites have increased the monthly readership in both the 'Times' and 'The Post', in America, than ever before. He goes into sufficient detail into American economical changes through the outbreak in TV and how it became successful with a range of channels that audiences pay for. He then compares it to the newspaper industry and provides implications as to how to newspaper industry can too flourish and create high revenues without just advertising. 

• Section 3 (Beyond Mr. Sulzberger and Ms. Weymouth…)

Simon insights an audience towards the fact that the damage was caused before it was even recognised - newspaper's overall agenda to fill pages of articles and advertisement isn't coherent for a social climate that is constantly prone to change. A noteworthy point was his reference towards 'The Baltimore Sun's' who set a pay wall for both their print and digital newspaper, and this has proven to be worthwhile, in terms of revenues.

• Section 4 (For the industry, it is later than it should be…)

Simon evaluates the altering outcomes in which the 'Times' and 'The Post' will face if they take the plunge and the build the wall, which is what Simon desperately thinks will have long term benefits. The second scenario makes valid points in regards to how revenues can increase solely through the subscriptions added to news websites and how $10 monthly across an estimation of 300,000 people, will have a yearly outcome will reflect the efforts made by the institute. 

3) Read this response to the article by Dave Levy, criticising and disagreeing with David Simon's viewpoint.

What references to new and digital media can you find in Levy's response?

• He highlights that blogs and Twitter are the gateways of online news
• Paid subscription/Online Subscriptions may lead to no print newspapers being consumed

4) Finally, what is your own opinion? Do you agree that newspapers need to put online content behind a paywall in order for the journalism industry to survive? Would you be willing to pay for news online? Critical autonomy is the key skill in A2 Media - you need to be able form opinions on these issues.

In my opinion, I think that Simon makes exceptionally valid points in relation to the importance of professional journalists being credited for the work that they produce. I think that as the internet is becoming a new society in itself, with a plethora of accessibilities for audiences to access. Thus it is only right that we pay for the standard of information that we consume from newspapers. In regards to the film industry, 'Netflix' - an international film streaming site, primarily available for those who take up a yearly subscription which subsequently allows audiences to consume as many films as they wish. Likewise, 'Newspapers' should too, embody this same strategy, as audiences have proven to be able to adapt to 'buying/subscribing' on the net - from buying dvds, to subscribing to an online streamer.  Therefore, they audiences should have no issue with doing purchasing their news. In addition, creating a pay wall across the digital newspapers, this will be successful for the young and upcoming generation who are most familiar with the digital platform, than print. Specifically, it is ideal that newspapers put online content behind a pay wall so journalist's work are appreciated and the print platform's legacy lives on - paying for content that is high in quality, as oppose to free inaccurate links on social mediums, e.g. Twitter. To finalise, I would be willing to pay for news as I think it is essential that journalists, researchers and editors are all recognised and valued for their great impact into informing nations and I think that if they aren't, this could detrimentally effect the quality of news that we start to receive.

The future of newspapers

Summarise: The Economist - Who killed the newspapers? 

The article explains the fact that newspapers have lost the most to the internet and this is evident across the USA, western Europe, Australia and New Zealand. A noteworthy point is that this has been going on for decades, however, the decline has intensively hastened over the last few years. “The Vanishing Newspaper” by Philip Meyer estimates that by 2043 the newsprint will die in America as the last exhausted reader tosses aside the last crumpled edition. This sort of theory, is obscure to some, however more and more young people are getting their news online. Britons aged between 15 and 24 say they spend almost 30% less time reading national newspapers once they start using the web. Advertising is another element addressed within the article - how it has dominated the internet and is almost everywhere. Switzerland and the Netherlands newspaper's have lost half their classified advertising to the internet. The article proceeds to highlight that newspapers haven't yet completely shut down, but gradually small institutions are beginning to crumble, whereas popular conglomerates are trying their hardest to maintain their status as a print platform. Furthermore, the new force of “citizen” journalists and bloggers are introduced and the article explains how the web has opened the closed world of professional editors and reporters and is now available to anyone with a keyboard and an internet connection. Consequently, some professionals have suffered from this. The article finalises with their idea that in the future an elite group of serious newspapers will be available everywhere online, alongside, independent journalism backed by charities, thousands of bloggers and citizen journalists. 

• Do you agree with its view that it is ‘a cause for concern, but not for panic’?

In my opinion I don't agree with this statement, specifically the word 'concern', as I believe that as the times are changing it is only right for news institutions to expand towards a new platform and potentially halt others, to succeed. Through the coming age of new and digital media, alongside the phenomenon that the internet has unleashed in the 21st century, it is vital that conglomerates channel their news to fit the most efficient mean of communication for the mass public - online. Nevertheless, this doesn't mean that newspapers should become extinct - it means journalists and editors should build upon setting a modern illustration of a 'newspaper' through digital means;whilst maintaining niche attention towards newspapers and lowering the costs, to please their audiences incline towards the print platform. 

New and Digital Media Stories: Week 4

Article from The Guardian

The article summarises a new technological development within the social networking sites 'Twitter' which is the possible extension of character space for 'tweeters'. 

Quotes and Ideas include: 

• Twitter has struggled with growth and is still in the midst of a search for a new CEO
• Some people aren't fond of the proposition as they believe the limit is a good thing
• Twitter's most recent report is having 316 million monthly users - about one-fifth of Facebook's user count - and they are now looking for ways to increase that number, through advertising
• Brian Wieser of Pivotal Research said that the company are overperforming - "Show me another business growing at 70% year over year" ... "the problem is one of expectations, they're one of the top sellers of digital advertising on the planet"

In my opinion, I think that the word limit is in fact a good way to help regulate the posts in which people are tweeting. In particular, it forces individuals to think more wisely and carefully about what they are saying. Besides, the images and videos that have been added to tweets, provide users the opportunity to further enhance the point of each tweet. 

Article from The Guardian

The article introduces an audience to the podcast 'Reply All' which is a show about the internet and covers everything from conspiracy theories to heavy government assoicated debates. It is hosted by  PJ Vogt and Alex Goldman and has been around for less than a year, but has already become well known.

Key Quotes and Ideas: 

• Vogt and Goldman's intentions: "We were both fans of radio jounalism and internet culture and you didn't get to see radio talk about the internet at the level of familiarity that we liked"... "When it did cover a topic we were interested in it felt like there was  a lot of explaining it and not a lot of going into it. We thought there might actually be enough people as nerdy as us that could do it and it would work".
• They created 'Reply All' as a show aimed directly at "people as nerdy" as the hosts, featuring great stories and solid reporting.
• Their first story revealed the challenging reporting can be over the internet, where they had a problem with the formatting of the YouTube site.
• Reporting on the internet has certain challenges - occasional prank calls, some glitches.

In my opinion, I think that a podcast is a great way to communicate to an audience, like radio's once and still to some, do, in an efficient way. As most people have smart phones or internet access, audiences can select from a range of podcasts and listen to interesting debates and topics to learn new values and possibly global news. 

Newspapers: The effect of online technology

1) Do you agree with James Murdoch that the BBC should not be allowed to provide free news online? Why?

I think that James Murdoch addresses valid point, "It is essential for the future of independent digital journalism that a fair price can be charged for news to people who value it", as it is vital that journalists are credited for the work that they do. The BBC's independent act of attempting to be the dominant news source, essentially does leave other news institutions with a loss, jeopardising their overall revenues in consumption from audiences. BBC's act is especially threatening for the journalists that belong to other institutions as their stories may not be as appreciated or recognised. Alternatively, as a public service broadcaster, it is ideal for audiences to have a trusted brand, easily accessible source of news, such as 'The BBC', thereby, their act is arguably credible in enhancing their institution. 

2) Summarise 'Three Years on: Has the Times digital subscription project worked? 

• The Sunday Times and The Times have now amassed a total of 140,000 digital paying subscribers "mainly on tablet". 
• The figures show the consumption from audiences: 

3) Was Rupert Murdoch right to put his news content (The Times, The Sun) behind a paywall?

In my opinion, as Murdoch previously stated "The world is changing and newspapers have to adapt", thereby, through newspaper's becoming digitally accessible, it's only right that fees are set too. Murdoch's decision to put his news content behind a paywall, further confirms the validity of the news for audiences. This also maintains a sense of familiarity for consumers, as it is effectively the same as purchasing a print copy of the newspaper - now however, digitally, faster and more convenient. Alternatively, some may argue that as "times are changing", its only fair that news institutions start providing important news stories for free and possible put a paywall for specific sub genres within the news, e.g. 'Celebrity Gossip', appealing to set target audience groups. 

4) Choose two comments from below the Times paywall article - one that argues in favour of the paywall and one that argues against. Copy a quote from each and explain which YOU agree with and why.

Quote in favour: Frank • 2 years ago

"I'd put my money on The Times when it comes to UK-based newspapers.

Mail Online's audience is vast, especially for a UK-based title. Yet with all that scale, with the most advanced data strategy, and undoubtedly with cost help from the wider organisation, it still only makes a tiny profit. More sadly, is that the product is getting further and further away from news; their strategy is to create a deluge of rapidly-written disposable content then overlay it with audience data. It also works with lots of partners to develop their data - many of which will retract that partnership over the next 2-3 years as they seek to retain value for themselves.

The Times, more than any other paper, is more ready for a printless future, should it arise, as they just need to migrate users, in relatively low numbers. to the digital subscription. And it is having an almighty practice run to get it right. It doesn't need to create the vast volumes of (crap) content that the Mail does and it has a very strong brand argument to ad buyers.

What the management of MailOnline have done is show that the free model might just work ever so slightly, but probably not in a robust, profitable way. What News UK have shown is that they can move over paying customers, and keep a healthy ratio of decent content to preserve the brand equity.

nb: I do not work or have ever worked for News Corp / UK / International"

Quote that is against: pauljaymes • 2 years ago

"In any business, success depends on delivering one of three things to customers: lowest cost, differential quality, or a niche unavailable elsewhere. Newsprint is no exception, but the lowest cost product in the marketplace is set at zero.

Times isn't niche, that's the like of aviation monthly, so it has to deliver a product of sufficient quality for readers to be willing to pay the premium. Is it doing this? I would say not really, more work is needed, and it's hard to see how the quality can improve with costs being cut."

Out of the two quotes, there are elements that I agree with on both sides, for instance, 'Pauljaymes', makes noteworthy points regarding the importance of things that consumers look for "lower cost". Therefore, this holds thought towards the reality of whether audiences will want to pay for monthly subscriptions - how much will it cost? Specifically, what is "premium" about 'The Times' digital website that makes it more prestige than buying a regular copy and will this appeal to their audience group? However, in regards to comments made by 'Franky', I am in favour of his view that through the 'Mail Online's' free accessibility they aren't making as much money once subtracted the 'click bait' and advertisement revenues. Also, is the news quality extremely valid? Would both of these factors better both the institutions and audiences if they added a paywall too? I think they would.   

5) Summarise this article from the Media Briefing on the continuing decline of the newspaper industry. 

• The circulation for the UK's newspapers is at least half way down and recent figures suggest the number of people who report reading a newspaper in print is falling even faster.
• Readership for British national newspapers, as estimated by the National Readership Survey, has fallen 13 percent on average compared to the previous year.
• Particularly bad results for the Independent, Daily Mirror and Guardian. By comparison, the Audit Bureau of Circulation's circulation figures show a fall by an average of only 6 percent.

6) Why do you think the Evening Standard has bucked the trend and increased circulation and profit in the last two years?

The Evening Standard are primarily aimed at commuters for their 'no-wifi' travels, leaving them to idealistically purchase a newspaper to accompany them. Therefore, I believe that through the institution establishing the idea of increasing their daily copies from 700,000 copies to 900,000, this would assist the increase in circulation, which it consequently did. This is pure evidence that the institution looked at the strategy that would be most effective for their audience group, which is where their success is derived from. 

7) Is there any hope for the newspaper industry or will it eventually die out? Provide a detailed response to this question explaining and justifying your opinion.

There is most certainly hope for the newspaper industry as long as the institutions look specifically at what their audience groups want - which is the best platform for them to access their news on. Ideally, institutions should consider targeting newspapers primarily towards niche audience groups and upping the cost. Additionally, they should consider providing a mainstream news feed accessible with a slightly lower cost through the internet or new and digital applications. This will thereby result in audiences actively choosing which way they intend to consume their news. In particular, as the older generation (primary print platform consumers), in twenty-so years will be dying out and the dominant communication mean will become 'digital', thus most people will incline to subscribing to a paywall or simply buying a digital application. However, it is vital that the institutions apply the same amount of clarity and validity from professional journalists, to both print and digital platforms to ultimately please their audiences. 

NDM: Audience and Institution - how news consumption has changed

1) What are the key statistics relating to the influence of new and digital media?

News Consumption

• The majority of adults in the UK (95%) say they follow the news
• Television is by far the most-used platform for news with 75% of adults consuming
• Increase in internet or apps consumption for news, with over four in ten (41%) - dominantly 16-34 age group
• Almost half (45%) of 16-24's say their most important news source is a website/app

TV News Consumption

• BARB figures show that each adult watched an average of 115 hours of national and international news on TV (2013)
• Majority of this (64%) was on BBC One or BBC Two and a further 12% on the BBC News channel
• 16-24 year olds consumed only 27 hours of news on television
• 196 hours for those aged 55 and over

Attitudes towards different types of news

• When asked which topics they considered to be news, UK adults nominated crime (53%), worldwide current affairs (53%), UK-wide current affairs (51%) and UK-wide politics (49%)
• UK politics and current affairs, and worldwide current affairs,are seen to have societal importance by half (49%) of UK adults, crime by 48% and weather by 45%
• Younger and older age groups find different news topics personally interesting
• The 16-24's, specific news categories such as crime, sports, technology and science/environment fall into the top ten topics
• The over-55's are more likely to nominate, general world news and UK and regional current affairs

Reasons to follow the news

• Three in five (58%) UK adults say they follow the news to find out “what’s going on in the world”
• Next most-cited reason is to know “what’s going on across the UK” (56%)
• “What’s going on in my local area” (49%)
• “What’s going on in respective nations” (46%)
• “Because I feel it’s important to keep informed about certain issues” (42%).

2) Come up with an example of an institution that has benefited from the changes new and digital media has brought to the news industry. Explain how new technology has helped the institution and try to find statistics or financial figures that support your point.

The Guardian

The Guardian is a British national daily newspaper founded in 1821 and is accessible in both print and in recent years on-line, too. In August 2013, 'The Guardian' in paper, formed an average daily circulation of 189,000 copies and the newspaper's online edition was the fifth most widely read in the world as of October 2014, with over 42.6 million readers. In the UK, it's combined print and online editions reach nearly 9 million readers.

• The Guardian publishes online, with free access both to current news and an archive of three million stories. 
• The website offers G24 which is a free printable A4 format PDF 24-hour newspaper containing the top stories and a monthly subscription of the complete newspaper in PDF format.
• As of May 2013, it was the most popular UK newspaper website with 8.2m visitors per month, ahead of the Mail Online.
• The 'Comment is Free' section features columns by the paper's journalist and regular commentators as wellas articles from guest writers, with readers comments and responses below.
• Censorship is exercised by Moderators who can ban posts with no right of appeal, by those who they feel have overstepped the mark.
• The paper has also launched a dating website 'Soulmates', and is experimenting with new media, having previously offered a free twelve part weekly podcast series by Ricky Gervais - In January 2006 Gervais' show topped the iTunes podcast chart having been dowloaded by two million listeners world.

3) Find an example of an institution that has suffered as a result of the changes new and digital media has brought to the news industry. In what way has it had a negative impact? Again, try and find actual statistics or financial figures to explain your point.

 'Ealing Times' is a prime example as to a newspaper that has suffered as a result to changes in new and digital media, as they do not have an application for smart phones, which is the easiest way for individuals to consume information. However, the have kept up to date with the new technological developments through their website. In particular, a niche audience would directly go to the shops to buy the newspaper as the majority won't be interested. Thereby, the institution isn't getting high revenues that will ultimately help increase the quality of the journalism.

NDM Baseline assessment - learner response

"Developments in 'New/Digital' Media mean that audiences can now have access to a greater variety of views and values. To what extent are audiences empowered by these developments?" 

WWW:

• The best thing about this essay is the strong critical autonomy running through it - real passion and opinion on current media issues.

EBI:

• What you are lacking is clear focus on the question...you don't relate enough to the points back in the idea of audience empowerment (or dis-empowerment) 
• Using the film industry here was a good idea but Ill Manors worked far better for this question that 'A field in England'.
• I'd really like you to develop the idea of an illusion of empowerment while institutions continue to hold the real power... you hinted at this focus on Apple... more of this please. 

LR: 

• Go back to a couple of your paragraphs and type them up with this feedback, re-writing to focus more on the question. 

Feedback Response: 

Personal EBIs:

• When using an institution as an example, specify relevant info (founders, what it is etc.) 
• Audience groups associated with institutions
• Apply theories 
• Answer the question "audiences empowered".

New and Digital media has arguably revolutionised our social climate as it allows audiences to take charge and access a broader scale of information, whilst virally publicising their own thoughts too. However, does this mean that audiences embody a sense of empowerment as they are able to take on these roles? Or, is 'New and Digital' media a more savvy way for government bodies and conglomerates to keep tabs on what audiences are consuming and publicising. 

Apple Inc. is an American multinational technology company which has dominated the commercial sales during the rise of 'New and Digital' media. The brand is specifically aimed at the mainstreamer psychographic and A-C demographic of 15-45 year olds. The companies strategic method of "releasing a new apple every fall (autumn)", leads audiences awaiting for the new technological device that will "change their life". For instance, in 2010, 'Siri' - a personal assistant created by Apple as part of each device - tablet or iPhone to help the consumer with basic information. This is a perfect example of dis-empowerment amongst audiences as they are relying on a technological device to complete all research fast and quick at the click on a button. In addition to this, the development is almost highlighting how lazy audiences are as they are dependent on a technological assistant to inform and insight their needs. 

New and Digital Media Stories: Week 3

Article from BBC News

I came across this news story through watching BBC's 6:00 o'clock news and it outlined the change in teaching strategy through incorporation of smart phones and tablets being used in lesson times. Sources say that this has been more effective in students finding out information, quicker and more resourcefully. However, other schools, due to already having a strict 'no phone' policy, are against this and think that the traditional means of dictionaries and textbooks, are better. 

Facts/Quotes from the article: 

• First the head of Ofsted, Michael Wilshaw, said they should be banned from lessons.
• "With a smartphone we can cross-reference the textbooks - we can look at the Syrian crisis at the moment, the different population flows that are changing throughout Europe. We can't do that with a textbook."
• "Today phones offer so much: data capture - children measuring light or sound levels to improve classrooms; and communications with slow-mo video for sports training and walking geometric shapes on to a playing field."

In my opinion, I think that by schools utilising 'New and Digital' media technologies in classrooms, can improve learning and their content of information. However, I think that this could lead to students becoming excessively dependent on technology and not aware of how to find out information the "old fashioned way", which I personally, think is more effective. 

Article from 'The Guardian' 

The article outlines that 'Twitter' have created a 'poll' section as a feature to it's website. This accessible on both the mobile and desktop form that allows audiences to form a poll with additional users. Twitter has addressed that it is simply an experiment and may not continue. Specifically, the poll is said to have a lifespan of 24-hours and fellow tweeters will be informed of how long is left to participate in the poll.

Facts included:

• This isn't the first time 'Twitter' experimented with polls. In 2014, users were given the chance to vote on Oscars favourites via a poll provided by Poptip, but that function was only available on the mobile app.
• So far the reaction has been mainly positive and the poll has proved to show brand engagement and follower interaction with many people.
• The complaints about polls so far focus on the lack of third-party integration and the rather more pressing concern that in timelines and embedded tweets, polls only show up as a text question without the interactive element. 

In my opinion, I think it is interesting to see 'Twitter' embracing the chance for individuals to virally express thoughts and ideologies on the internet, whilst interacting with others and finding their opinions out. However, I do believe that people will abuse this power and consequently create insensitive and harmful content as an outcome.