Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 18

Zell to L.A. Times: Drop Dead

Dear son

A free press is vital for democracies. At least that was the model in the 19th and 20th century. It was when communications  channels were limited and citizens needed somebody to capture information, edit it and then present it. 

But technology is blowing up the media model. Free press was only from the perspective of freedom of speech. But the Internet has made communications open and the economic model simply doesn't work. That's why old style newspapers are slowly but inexorably dying. 

But it's not just the technology which has blown up the newspapers. At end of the day, they are businesses as well. Just because they are doing news doesn't mean that they are immune from the laws of economics and good management. This article talks about a classic case of bad strategic management. In this case, the blame clearly lies with the board. 

By the time you grow up, not sure what the media foot print will be but I wouldn't invest in a newspaper or publication company. Just too unclear. 

Love 

Baba

LOS ANGELES REVIEW OF BOOKS | Zell to L.A. Times: Drop Dead
http://lareviewofbooks.org/post/12555828808/zell-to-l-a-times-drop-dead


image
James O’Shea
The Deal From Hell: How Moguls and Wall Street Plundered Great American Newspapers
Public Affairs Books, June 2011. 416 pp.
Since it seemed it couldn’t get much worse, Los Angeles Times editor-in-chief James O’Shea decided to look on the bright side. It was 2007, and the newspaper had a new owner. He was Sam Zell, an iconoclast, as they call rich older men who ride motorcycles and wear leather jackets, whether they look good in them or not. Maybe Zell would be iconoclastic in the right way, you know, odd but decent and smart, useful, so O’Shea phoned the Chicago businessman about giving the Times an in-person interview. Zell agreed. O’Shea then offered to pick up his new boss at the airport. Zell declined, informing O’Shea that his personal jet could easily deposit him near his beach house in Malibu. When Zell called back an hour later, the polite part of their relationship was already done. Zell informed O’Shea that he would, in fact, fly into LAX and make himself available to reporters at an office there. “I was going to invite all of you to come to my house in Malibu,” said Zell — for the second time indicating his address — “until you sent a fucking reporter up there and scared the shit out of my housekeeper.” Zell wanted it conveyed that he traveled in an entirely different social sphere than O’Shea. “Let me tell you something,” he continued in his distinctive rasp. “You want to talk to me, call me and I’ll talk. But you don’t fuck with my employees. Got that?” O’Shea immediately apologized, even though he wasn’t sure what for.
And so began the improbable last chapter in the fall of a major newspaper, as chronicled by O’Shea in The Deal from Hell: How Moguls and Wall Street Plundered Great American Newspapers. Among other things, the book is a reminder that whenever you think things can’t get worse, they can. They can get much, much worse. I was there, at the paper, working at the magazine, with a good critic’s seat, up close and on the aisle. As we were living it, we knew this tawdry drama signaled yet another sea change for newspapers, with potentially devastating consequences for our democracy. It was also, thanks to Zell and his cronies, more entertaining than it had any right to be. The end of the story is in the beginning. But where is the beginning? Orwell aside, let’s say it was 1984.
That year was a numerical high point for newspapers. Americans purchased 63.3 million of them a day. James O’Shea was happily employed at the Chicago Tribune’s Washington bureau. Sam Zell, having made hundreds of millions of dollars in real estate, was busy finding ingenious new ways to avoid taxes. He was at the right place at the right time: regulations were falling away like leaves in autumn. He began acquiring companies that had recently emerged from bankruptcy. Using an accounting loophole called “tax-loss carry-forward,” he could dodge taxes for years on these companies. (This was preferable to rigging real estate transactions through a bank in the Bahamas, a move that almost landed Zell in jail in 1977. He avoided prison by testifying against one of his lawyers, who also happened to be his brother-in-law, and who subsequently served two years for tax evasion.) By 1984, the economy had recovered from Paul Volcker’s stop-go recession, and President Reagan was busy cutting taxes and deregulating the savings and loans and other industries. The mood of the time was pleasure grabbing and hedonistic, not unusual for easy-money eras. On the coasts, people of means kept bowls filled with cocaine they would bring out for company. Finance was thriving. The Wall Street guys smelled of lime cologne, their suits crisper, their hair shinier, and their restaurants more theatrical than anything we had seen in a long time. They said we would all benefit from their windfall, and it seemed like maybe we all would, even if those of us working at our first, low-paying jobs had no idea how.

Saturday, February 12

How Al Jazeera Shapes Political Identities

Excellent coverage on how Al Jazeera is providing an identity to Arabs, something that socialism or even Nasserism couldn't. It all ended up in a sad mishmash of fundamentalist Islam, economic illiteracy and political despotism resulting in horrific unemployment, human right abuses and corruption. I quote:

a respondent who reports watching Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya every day is roughly 15-20 points more likely to identify as Muslim than a respondent who watches these networks between 0-2 days a week. The effects on Arab identification appear somewhat smaller.

In 2006, I wrote a column on this. I quote: (echoing that famous quote, I frequently quote myself, it adds spice to my conversation Smile with tongue out)

Then we have Al Jazeera, the TV channel which burst into view with the closest thing one can think of a nuclear explosion, in the global media environment. I have previously spoken about this channel (http://piquancy.blogspot.com/2003/04/agree-to-disagree.html or http://tinyurl.com/nmwed). But with its free speech, passionate panel discussions and open debates, independent views, wide ranging topics (frequently touching very taboo subjects such as religion, politics, terrorism, education, etc.), giving air time to dissidents, Israeli’s, and other people and groups who are normally censored out etc. In particular, it offers a voice for Al-Qaeda’s messages to the wider world in its non-censored full glory. For an Arab world starved of such open discussion, this channel and its participants are one of the most important opinion framers in this part of the world. In particular, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the regular presenters on this Qatar based channel, a graduate of Al Azhar, involved with the Muslim Brotherhood, is a very potent voice through this channel.

Saturday, January 15

No fleas on Rafael Correa!

Caught this typo on the front page of the FT.

Quite surprised that something like this can happen to an august newspaper as the Financial Times!

Saturday, May 3

BoJo might be a buffoon, but Polly Tonybee came across as a bitter jealous clown

I was watching BBC news yesterday after the London Mayoral elections were announced. Polly Tonybee came on board and started her usual vituperation against Boris (an example can be found here). Anyway, that's fine, I dont mind, its clear that she has an opinion about him and that's how she is, a polemicist.

But do not confuse her for being a journalist, at least a journalist who has any pretensions towards even handedness or being bias free. Why? Because she took off on the media. She is part of the media and complained that the media made Ken Livingstone lose the election.

She then took off on Andrew Gilligan, the reporter on the London Evening Standard. Said he was biased against the Labour government because of the history and all that. Then the BBC interviewer said, hold on, for all that complaining about Andrew Gilligan, he has been awarded a very prestigious prize. He has been named as the Journalist of the Year at the British Press Awards. She mumbled something and that was the end.

And then I got to thinking, this is a lady who has been voted as the most influential commentator for the second year running. And she is saying these things about a fellow media person. Now, the only conclusions I can draw is that she is a polemicist, biased, politically leaning, unable to judge fairly, and dare I say was coming across with very large amounts of jealous? I can understand her being bitter, but this? It was cringeworthy in the beginning but then it became clownish as time went on.

Fouling your own nest, Ms. Toynbee? I am not sure your colleagues in your various newspapers will really appreciate you taking off on your own colleagues.

Monday, April 28

They can do without having poll's like this

This kind of a poll is mischievious and creates problems. What's the point of asking these questions?

What should be the response of Muslim Ummah to the blasphemous caricatures published in Denmark?
  • Boycott Danish products and Services
  • Expel Danish ambassadors from Muslim countries
  • Kill the Cartoonist and the Editors who published it
  • Ignore this nonsense and keep preaching Islam with peace
    ( 902 Votes )
902 votes have been cast and who knows who voted? Idiots.

All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

Wednesday, April 23

And more on the BBC's neutrality

A great set of emails on the BBC's coverage of the Israeli Palestinian crisis. But that comment about naming victims reminded me of the joke about people saying, I want to kill a million people and a toad. Everybody asks, why a toad? The million people are irrelevant....

All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

Thursday, April 10

The BBC and its much vaunted neutrality

Jennifer Marohasy: The BBC Changes News to Accommodate Activist

this was the most amazing thing I have ever read. A journalist doing something like this? Do they not know that the BBC is used, for example by my son, to learn things? And this is what their knowledge is based upon? Is this related to being this? So you could be liberal but you are definitely stupid and biased.

Criminal. What has been done about this?

All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

Sunday, April 6

The world according to newspapers and bloggers

This was amazing! the graphic below is the world according to the blogosphere

Blogosphere

and here's the world according to the NYT

Nytimes

life is so much different between real life and blog life...

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Tuesday, March 25

What happens on the internet can impact your election results

I had a big argument many moons back with one of my editors, she said that the chatter on the internet has no impact on real life. I argued back saying that if I am willing to bash the keyboard on a political matter, then i am willing to vote differently. And if you as a political party are not engaged with me on this medium, why on earth would I know or talk to you?

But you ignore the internet at your peril, see here for what happened in Malaysia. I quote:

Malaysia's premier Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said Tuesday his "biggest mistake" in disastrous elections was to ignore cyber-campaigning on the Internet which was seized by the opposition.
The opposition, which was largely ignored by government-linked mainstream media, instead waged an enormously successful online campaign using blogs, news websites and SMS text messages. "We certainly lost the Internet war, the cyber-war," Abdullah said in a speech to an investment conference. "It was a serious misjudgement. We made the biggest mistake in thinking that it was not important," he said. "We thought that the newspapers, the print media, the television was supposed to be important, but the young people were looking at SMS and blogs." The comments are a major about-face for the government, which had vilified bloggers, calling them liars and threatening them with detention without trial under internal security laws.

All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

Wednesday, March 5

What is the financial valuation of blogs?

Very interesting article here which evaluates the value of a blog:I quote:

Take the Huffington Post. It attracts 1.7m unique users per month a nearly 200% increase over its traffic a year ago according to comScore. That may look modest compared with the 13m readers who flock to the New York Times%u2019 website each month but it's more than half the number visiting the Wall Street Journal's subscription site. The demographics of these users are just as attractive. The Huffington Post's readers make more money than the average internet user and nearly twice as many have gone to graduate school according to rating service Quantcast. And eyeballs aren't the only thing that top blogs are bringing anymore.


So the article says, it is actually not that much, but inflated expectations are still there. Dont purchase the blog itself, but hire the blogger. For the blogger, dont give up your day job!

All this to be taken with a grain of piquant salt!!!

Sunday, February 17

Attila the Hun!

I missed this programme on BBC1 last Wednesday for some reason but then decided to inaugurate the BBC iPlayer software which I have never used before.

First, I could not find a way to search for the programme on the main BBC site. It simply will not come up. A BBC encyclopedia note came up, but I would have thought that there would be sufficient intelligence in web software to link TV text to other text entries. Even when I explicitly select Search BBC Audio and Video giving the keyword, Attila, I dont get the link.

Nothing on iPlayer either on the search.

So I Google for iPlayer and then it takes me to a site where it asks me to download a software. Which I did. It went off seamlessly.

Clicked on the link and it upgraded my windows media player. And its busy downloading the movie to my hard disk. It will delete it after 7 days of viewing or 30 days of downloading, which seems to be fair to me. Although why on earth will it only store 7 days worth of programmes, I do not know, its not like storage is very expensive!

But still, progress :)

Technorati Tags: ,

Arab states plan TV crackdown

You already know what I am going to say, no? I am afraid this is fairly typical of these countries that they cannot see the truth or actually experience the intelligence of their citizens. Criticism and debate are good for the soul, they show the ways your country can be improved. But because most of the leaders are either autocrats or kings, their bases are very weak and rest more on religion and/or security pressure. Hence, press down on anything like debate and discussion.

Read this and weep. I quote:

In a collective effort to curb satellite channels such as al-Jazeera, Arab states have adopted a charter that authorises individual countries to penalise media organisations deemed to have offended political and religious leaders or to have damaged social harmony and national unity.

In recent years the explosion in the number of satellite channels - there are now about 500 on air, most of them privately owned - has meant that states have lost control over what their populations could see on their television screens.

Channels such as al-Jazeera, which has managed to upset most Arab governments at one point or another, have provided platforms for opposition groups and breached taboos by broadcasting stories about human rights violations and election fraud.

And see this

"The commitment to freedom of expression is a main cornerstone of Arab media activity, provided that the practice of this freedom should be informed by a sense of awareness and responsibility in order to protect the higher interests of Arab states and of the Arab nation," says the -document.

I was laughing and falling about. First about the fact that it was the Arab states talking about freedom of speech and secondly, they are actually dressing up the freedom of speech bit under the interests of "higher interests of Arab states and Arab Nations". Which means, the interests of the despots, autocrats and dictators. Esphoks. Disgusting. How hypocritical can you get?

Sunday, February 3

The Al-Queda/Israel Riddle

I spoke about the Arabs and their obsession with Palestine before. Here is an interesting another view, the author seems to say that there is no difference between the Arab commentators and Al Queda, both are obsessed and similarly unhinged! I quote:

Why hasn't Al-Queda launched a single operation against Israel despite all the pain and sympathy that Osama Bin Laden and his right-hand man Ayman al-Zawahiri boastfully harp on about when it comes to usurped, occupied Palestine?.....

The problem does not lie with Al-Zawahiri or in the Al-Qaeda discourse; it is in the state of verbal anarchy that is sweeping the Arab world. This anarchy does not enable anyone to distinguish between the language of Al-Qaeda and the language of the mass media. How can a person, a certain body, or a media institution be against Al-Qaeda and at the same time share with it the same vocabulary and language?.....

Isn't it time to shoulder responsibility? Isn't it time for us to tell our children who is the role model, is it Al-Sadat or those who killed him? Who is the hero? Is it really Osama Bin Laden or other Arab men who are categorized as state builders? Most probably when we say that these Arab media do not shoulder their responsibilities, those who seek false heroism reiterate that we unjustly lay the blame on the media and drown in self-rebuke, as if glorifying and holding oneself in high esteem means to be away from serious criticism when it comes to fundamental and important matters.

Then I read this. Perfect proof of the above about how mentally deficient these morons are. Think about it, this is an Arab commentator actually agreeing with an Al Queda Attack despite the 2 sentences condemning it. He is actually not doing it, he is encouraging these kinds of attacks. So he is immediately classified as a terrorist supporter of the ilk mentioned above at best or a basic idiot at worst. Now, if you take that argument forward, then he wouldnt mind if the embassies of UK, USA, China, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Columbia etc. are all attacked, no? What a blithering idiot. 

Sunday, January 27

Candles and sunlight dont mix!

This was the blurb from Reuters on the Gaza blockade

Palestinian lawmakers attend a parliament session in candlelight during a power cut in Gaza January 22, 2008. REUTERS/Mohammed Salem

Palestinian lawmakers attend a parliament session in candlelight during a power cut in Gaza January 22, 2008. Israel agreed to allow some fuel, medicine and food into the Hamas-run Gaza Strip on Tuesday, at least temporarily easing a blockade that has plunged much of the territory into darkness and sparked international protests. REUTERS/Mohammed Salem (GAZA)

Palestinian lawmakers attend a parliament session in candlelight during a power cut in Gaza January 22, 2008. Israel agreed to allow some fuel, medicine and food into the Hamas-run Gaza Strip on Tuesday, at least temporarily easing a blockade that has plunged much of the territory into darkness and sparked international protests. REUTERS/Mohammed Salem (GAZA)

Now can you see the sunlight behind the curtains? This is why one gets a bit suspicious of what gets put out. Also see my recent salty on bias.

Technorati Tags: ,

Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation

So what motivates people to participate in blogs? As it so happens, I just finished writing an essay on a related issue. But then, the question comes up, why would you want to blog? And to get a scientific reason, we can turn to a recent research paper which investigates the motivations of people who participate in blog activities. The researchers found that ease of use and
enjoyment, and knowledge sharing (altruism and reputation) social factors (community identification) and attitude toward blogging significantly influenced the decision to blog or to read blogs.

I particularly found the factor of knowledge sharing quite interesting. The concept of citizen journalism is well and truly here. I quote some of the results:

Our study generated some insights for blog-hosting service providers and bloggers:
1. The findings underscored the importance of enjoyment. Bloggers should strive to increase participants’ intrinsic motivations such as enjoyment, fun, curiosity, and exploration. For example, the home page of a blog should contain interesting, fresh, fun, and enjoyable
information. At the same time, blog-hosting services should continue to develop tools that make creation of innovative contents possible.
2. Most people recognize blogs as easy publishing tools. Our results also verified that ease of use is an important and influential factor in determining users’ attitude toward using blog. Therefore, blog-hosting service providers should continue to improve user friendliness, making the tools easy to use and accessible.
3. Many companies launch blogs as a marketing channel. Marketers should understand what drives people to share in the blog context. The findings highlighted the importance of altruism and individual reputation. Therefore
publicly praising individual participant’s effort can enhance attitude toward blogging.
4. Community identification is important in blogging. Therefore, blog-hosting service providers should promote and encourage people to share their social lives and opinions or at least add comments. Reward systems, such as keeping a billboard of top 100 blogs, rewarding virtual points for participations, etc. can also be a positive motivator. The more information and comments posted
and discussed, the longer people will stay in the blog. This will, in turn, establish a stronger sense of community identification among participants.

C.-L. Hsu, J.-C. Lin, Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation, Inf Manage (2008),

Saturday, January 26

TV Commentator Captured on film himself

On the day that the news about the Soc-Gen fraud story broke, I captured this TV commentator being interviewed on Bishopsgate, with a background of the city obviously! Click on thumbnail to get a bigger better picture picture.

 

Monday, January 14

My experiences with Vogue

I spend a considerable time at the vet, sorry, the hospital today. And as sod's law had to have it, I forgot to take a book. And as further poxy sod's law would have it, the only magazine I could lay my hands on was Vogue. After I managed to look guiltily around to see everybody was busy coughing, sneezing or dying to notice what I was reading, I pulled the magazine towards me.

It was the December 2006 UK edition with a lady called as Sienna Miller spread over the top. My first impression was that it was heavy, quite heavy. How on earth are women supposed to either carry it around, read it in the bath or what have you when it weighs a brick?

Ok, so opened it up. I stared blankly at the editor's page. It was English but I could not understand it. It was like I was slightly out of phase with the editor. It was supposed to be the Glamour Issue and page after page, it showed women in glamorous clothes and the reason for being so. For example, the Queen Elizabeth entry said that she was glamorous because of her jewels. Another lady's glamour coefficient was attributed to her legs. That supermodel who goes about tonking people on their heads with her mobile phone was apparently glamorous because of her clothes.

I realised something, none of the women, the featured or the women in the advertisements, had any breasts. Glossy hair, long giraffe like neck, knobbly back, legs up to the armpits, lovely eyes, but no, no breasts. I didnt understand that. Must be some kind of a deep women's secret. Mind you, pick up a guy's magazine and all you see are breasts! But back to Vogue.

So I wanted to check what's in Vogue. Well, seems like balloon or hoop skirts are in. They look like you have a 6 feet diameter ring at the bottom (or anywhere actually) of the skirt. I was amazed at the engineering involved. How would they climb on a bus or go shopping for potatoes in a normal supermarket aisle with that skirt? Or is this another of those secret women things (see breast note above).

Oh! there was another thing. These absolutely gorgeous women seemed to seriously get drugged up by sniffing some organic chemicals in seriously good looking bottles. If you look at any advertisement for any perfume, all the women look seriously drugged. Why would that be attractive to women? To actually douse yourself with chemicals which make you jump over water hydrants, poke your fingers down some guy's pants, clutch a bottle as if it contains your last peg of gin, undress in the living room....?

And the guys. The guys in the advertisements are plastic dolls. I am sure of it. Where's the beer? where is the beer gut? where is the chest hair? yes, question. What happened to the chest hair? you are not a man if you don't have hair emerging out of your nostrils, ear, armpits, chest, back, etc. etc. And why are all these men lazing around? They are all draped over some bloody thing. They should get some cold showers and buck up, all this draping is bad for the posture and spine.

By this time, the doctor came to take me away and then when I got back, the magazine was still there. I was waiting for my prescription to be delivered so flipped through the rest of the magazine to read some more, but didnt get much chance. Kate Moss and Naomi Cambell were apparently telling people how to become stars or how to have star quality. Its quite easy, no? become a coke head or be foul mannerly?

Ah! well, I was driven to write this note after reading this note.

Technorati Tags: