Vertical Video - revisited

Can I just say TOLD YA.
Here to be precise.

YouTube for Android will play vertical videos in full screen

As much as we all might want to stop people from recording vertical videos, the Periscopes and Snapchats of this world have made these clips so prevalent that, sadly, they're just not going to go away. Giving in to the inevitable, YouTube's Android App is getting the ability to play vertical videos in full screen, ...

Publishing in the 21st Century

I always found that one of the core features or tasks of a publisher it to spend money made with best-selling artists on the newcomers. This applies both to publishers of music (a.k.a. labels) and literature.

Call it a cross-subsidy (and yell fire if you are too neo-liberal for this).

Over the last decades it appears that this is no longer the case.  

It seems that corporate financial controlling measures are being applied to each author or book of its own (or artist/album), and if it can not turn a profit, it will not be published. Profits from say Harry Potter [1] stay with the Harry Potter team and division and are not invested to find the next promising author.

That's because everyone hates cross-subsidies. Even within one company.

I especially find this is the case in music:

Take the recent rant of Taylor Swift against Apple. She complained (whether rightfully or not) about the fact Apple will not pay the artists during the 3 months trial period, because they, Apple, themselves don't receive any money.[2] Let's for a second ignore whether this is fair or not, let's turn to a separate aspect:

Taylor Swift claimed in her open letter to Apple that she's is not complaining for herself (as she gets enough money) but for the young / indie artists:

This is not about me. Thankfully I am on my fifth album and can support myself, my band, crew, and entire management team by playing live shows. This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success. ...

So is she asking Apple to take on the role of a publisher? She is asking them to help (i.e. finance) the young artists. Shouldn't the labels be doing this with the revenues they already make?

Interestingly she does not mention that this could be done out of the revenue streams from her music, only from the young artists themselves. That's odd.

So this is only a little less greedy than actually asking for herself - as she claims this is not doing.

Not so philanthropic after all.

Where are the publishers or labels in all of this? By taking themselves totally out of this equation, they will get by-passed in the future. Why would anyone need a publisher, when they don't even fulfill one of their core tasks? What's the value of a label/publisher to a young artist?

Instead of greedily clinging to their old business model, which is falling apart, they should think of creating new and relevant offerings to their customers, i.e. the artists.

--

[1] I admit I have done the research on this author/book/publisher, I just use it as an example. Correct me in the comments if I'm wrong.

[2] Apple of course changed this after her open letter.

Vertical Video

The other day I was browsing the Internet Trends 2015 presentation by Mary Meeker from this year's Code conference (and I urge you to do the same).

Out of all the excellent observations and predictions, one especially caught my attention: Something Funny Happened on the Way to the Small Screen ... Small Screen Vertical Viewing Became Big Deal. (Slides 22ff).

Video buffs and know-it-alls (like me, ahem) always frown upon iPhone/Smartphone users recording (and posting) portrait/vertical video. "Look at those stupid idiots", we yell, "they don't even know that video is supposed to be landscape. Don't they know anything?" Bruhaha.

Well, bruhaha ourselves.

Where does it say that video has to be landscape? Just because the cinematic/theatrical screen was horizontal, and (almost all) PC screen are? Soon the majority of viewing devices can now be either - horizontal or vertical, like tablets and smartphones. And the phone is even more likely to be held in portrait mode (the tablet less likely). See the data in the presentation.

If content producers and designers focus on this as a design element, this can be a competitive advantage.

Five Reading Tools

No worries, this is not one of those link bait "10 best..." posts... I simply want to introduce 5 tools for online reading that I'm using or trying right now (apart from RSS readers, etc etc)

So over the next couple of days, I'll be posting about

• Pocket (formerly: read it later)
• Evernote Clearly
• Beeline Reader
• Read Quick
• Reader in Safari

Stay tuned.

Thoughts on Second Screen

With the ongoing success of tablets, media companies and many social platforms get all exited about the "Second Screen".
Second Screen is short hand for getting additional content on your tablet while watching TV. Sometimes it refers to the device itself, sometimes to certain apps on this device.

The quest for the perfect second screen app reminds me of the race for killer app in the early 2000s for the mobile phones. Everyone is jumping in and wants to define the second screen experience.

TV stations, networks and content owners/producers rush to the race in creating very narrow and limited second screen apps for certain programs, TV series', ... Just because they noticed the success of Twitter (and probably Facebook as well).

My 0.02$:

Yes, there is a (very positive) second screen trend right now... but it is defined by the users, not be the content providers. I don't see a lot of sense in creating separate apps per TV program, because that's not like we users behave.

When I watch TV (or a DVD, or streaming, for that matter) I do have my iPad on my lap (or next to me), and I spend quite some time with it: e.g. in IMDB, or Twitter, or Facebook, or Google+ (or my email).
Point is, it is somewhat, but not 100% related to the program I'm watching. I'd never open one specific app e.g. the Breaking Bad app just because I'm watching Breaking Bad...

I don't want to engage in anything (and most probably not the things, the network wants me to), I want to look up actors; or find some background information; or see where Downton Abbey exteriors where shot (link) and find that on Google maps; or have the twitter stream for the election night run by while I watch as Ohio is being called.

But that's my personal second screen usage or experience, not a pre-defined one.

Quoting

Is it really ok to fully quote an article from someone else as your blog post and then just add a "Source: xyz.com" at the end? (In a much smaller font even)
I say no.

But if you do, then you have to cope with the criticism you receive, and you cannot just say "I'm only quoting xyz."

On podcasts - Not Print

Not only is a podcast not radio, it is also (not too surprisingly) NOT PRINT.

In a newspaper or journal you usually have the so called standfirst right after/below the headline summing the article to follow. Sort of an abstract, if you will.

This is quite convenient, because it allows you to learn what the article is about (not always that obvious from the headline alone), and maybe skip the article itself entirely.
Sometimes - if I know I am interested in the article - I will skip the standfirst... knowing that there is no additional information in it.

Either way, there are options to avoid the repetition.

Not so in a podcast.
In audio it is less easy to skip things.

If you provide a quick intro to a podcast, be very very brief. Only give the topic. Don't summarize the podcast. Especially not if the podcast is short (5-10 minutes). Do not repeat everything from the podcast in the abstract/standfirst.

Just don't.
It's annoying.

On podcasts: Not Radio!

Yesterday I had to explain "podcast" to my in-laws, who are neither very computer nor internet savvy.
We[1] used the radio analogy, since we both are actually listening to a couple of radio shows / podcasts from Ö1 (national radio in Austria) her parents know from the radio.

Now podcasts and radio share many rules like

• audio quality & leveling
• pace of speech
• structure and complexity of sentences.

Still a podcast is not a radio show.

So please:

1. Avoid references to dates like "this Sunday" or "Tomorrow you will hear..."
   because not everyone (I'd even say hardly anyone) listens to your podcast on the day it was published.
2. Also do not use the intro for the next episode as the outro of the one before.
   This might be OK on radio, but it is annoying when you listen to the episodes of one format in sequence.
3. And bear in mind that the level of expertise of your audience is probably better on a podcast than on radio, at least more homogeneous.
   So, know your audience and their knowledge. Don't talk to newbies if your audience are hackers & nerds.
4. Also remember: most (if not all) of your podcast listeners know the internet and how to use it.
   They already managed to subscribe to your podcast! So if you have additional material just mention the URL (or just the domain) where your show resides... This is where you should place all the show notes, episode list, additional presentations or documents or wikis. Your listeners will easily find it.
5. Then again: don't assume they know your show's homepage.
   They might have found your podcast on iTunes or through other aggregating sites/tools... So be sure to mention your home base once in a while.
6. Final one for today: There are no links in podcasts.
   So don't read out or spell long URLs. I can't write them down when listening to a podcast anyway. Consider a rather unique search term and an additional hint for finding said URL in the search results. And provide the link in the show notes.

Thanks for listening; next week on "on podcasts" you will... oops

--
[1] actually my wife did half of the explaing, since it all began by her telling how she is using her Galaxy S to listen to podcasts.

On podcasts - When, Where and How?

I'm starting a mini-series here where I jot down some ideas and observations on podcasts.
I'm not a podcast producer, but I do listen to some. I'd say 10+ hours a week.
So this will be entirely from a consumer/listener perspective... my consumer/listener perspective.

Here we go:

---

When, Where and How?
I listen to podcasts

• in the car
• sometimes on the train / subway
• on the treadmill in the gym

Interestingly, I don't listen to podcasts when on the stationary bike at home... (this is when I watch TV shows like Sopranos, etc etc).

My "listening span" is everything from 10 minutes to 4 hours in a row.

Recently I also found myself going back to reading on the train / subway instead of listening to podcasts. Or let's say the ratio reading / listening shifted back to 70/30 from (10/90).

One of the reasons is, that while listening to podcasts I start reading emails on my mobile or playing Bejeweled on the iPod...because I just cannot sit and only listen. Talk about ADHD :-)
Driving the car, or exercising is seemingly enough activity.

Also, going back from listening to reading is somehow odd: take the distractions on the train... just looking up when someone takes the seat next to you. Add to that the interruption when changing trains; all this does not really allow for a smooth reading experience, whereas they are no problem when listening to a podcast... Still, I seem to prefer reading.

So, lesson #1: As your podcast listener, you do not have my undivided attention, well not all 100%. But a fair share. Structure your contant and pace around that.

ORF vs BBC

BBC - the public broadcasting corporation - is widely regarded as the one broadcaster who managed to "get" new media [1] ... e.g. by opening up their archives, streaming their program (or should I say programme) , ...

Compare that to ORF - the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation, public as well, mainly funded by public license fee as well: not even close: hardly any streaming (except for FM4 alternative radio afaik) , some podcasts, no public archive...

One nice indicator of this difference is that on a BBC podcast like the Friday Night Comedy on Radio 4 they start with thanking you for downloading the podcast... whereas on ORF e.g. OE1 Digital Leben ("living digital") at the end of the podcast they tell you that "this show is also available as a podcast"... duh...

Just shows they don't even care to slightly change / cut a program in post-production for podcast... they just "copy" the radio show... instead of using the place/time on the podcast to refer to other podcasts or "real" radio program or in any other way directly address the podcast-only listeners (like myself).

Yet another chance missed.

[1] or rather "the 21st century" ;-)

Media mess up

Odd how "old" media drives behavious in/with new media.

1. when there is nothing on TV, I usually watch The Daily Show online - or The Colbert Report (same same).
   - or -
2. I get inspired by the TV program - like yesterday with P.T. Anderson's wonderful Boogie Nights - and watch exactly the same movie, just on DVD, because I get the original version then, not the crappy German translation.
   
   
3. I totally give up on movies and watch some TED talks on my iPod.

Either way, the TV is more and more becoming just the trigger, not the media itself.

Daily Show Full Episodes

Finally, the Daily Show with Jon Stewart publishes the full episodes (not just snippets) on the web.
This is most important for Europeans without satellite or cable TV... finally.

Thanks.
A bold move for traditional media, I thought.

NYT and the 'new media'

In today's article about Don Grantham leaving Sun for HP, the NYT writes:

Sun Global Sales Head Resigns, Bound for H.P. - NYTimes.com:

"In a blog post, Sun CEO Schwartz referred to Grantham's departure in seemingly jocular terms. [...]

Sun could not immediately be reached for comment."

Dear NYT, there is a blog post - you even quoted from it. This IS A COMMENT.
Please understand blogs... please.

New vs old media

Common (if not so recent) wisdom says, that the „old media“ (esp. newspapers) don't like the „new media“, esp. everything that brags about „ user generated content“.

Today, however, I noticed that my favorite newspaper, Der Standard, uses the Flickr Camera Statistic to pimp up an article about the new Canon dSLRs.

No that bad after all, the Web 2.0, right ?

2 great videos about the future of media

... and everything related to media.

First, check out EPIC -

In the year 2014, The New York Times has gone offline.
The Fourth Estate's fortunes have waned.
What happened to the news?
And what is EPIC ?

(If the above link does lead you to a video, try this here.

Then come back here ;-)

Then have a look at the recently created work by Casaleggio Associati with a view back from April 6th, 2051
(via and Read/Write Web):



I really like the Google-Microsoft meshup logo at almost exactly 3'00:

Now, I'm not subscribing to all the views, fears and hopes (?) expressed in both videos, but they really make you think about the current developments and what might happen if the trend continues at that pace.