Campaign asked me to do one of those group interview/opinion things a while ago. You know, they ask a few industry big-heads the same questions and make a piece out of it.
Obviously they had to edit it down a bit so I thought I might as well stick my answers up here for you all to mock.
The Future of Media - Questions
Can content replace the 30-second TV ad? (By content we mean ad funded programming, brand-owned TV channels, product placement etc)
That’s a bit like asking whether chocolate can replace ice-cream. They have some things in common, but that’s not really the point.
We’re entering a world where people will only watch what they want to watch. So they may well watch short bursts of communication (maybe 30 seconds) or ad funded programming or whatever, but only if it’s better, more interesting or more compelling than all their non-ad-funded options.
And it’ll probably help if your brand has a history of providing exactly that kind of thing, and experience in doing it. So we’re excited by this future.
Will people still be reading newspapers in 20 years? (How must newspapers adapt to survive?)
Yes, in that people will still be reading news printed on paper. Paper is incredibly convenient and humans are evolutionarily adapted to be interested in news. So news plus paper makes sense.
Whether the existing newspaper brands will survive is a different question. I think they have to realize that innovation means more than ‘getting slightly smaller’ and that they need to move from being newspaper brands to being news brands. People like The Guardian are getting that. I’m not sure about many of the others.
Will we ever watch ads on our mobile phones? (If not, what will we watch? How will advertisers use mobiles to target consumers?)
People are already watching ads on mobile phones. We’re offering ads on mobile phones. Isn’t everyone?
But the idea of targeting consumers with mobiles is wrong-headed. We make content available to consumers via mobiles – if they find our brand and communications compelling enough then they’ll seek them out and ideally, pass them on. We can’t target consumers any more, they have to target us. And in those circumstances the most relevant, most interesting, most useful communications win. Not the ones with the biggest ‘targeting budget’.
What effect will time-shift TV have on advertising? (Will changes in technology mean ads become more targeted? Will consumers search out ads/info via their TVs like they do on the internet?)
Time-shift TV will kill bad advertising. Just like it’ll kill bad programmes.
People will only want to watch what they want to watch.
And they’ll only seek out what they want to find. So if your ads are funnier, cleverer, more moving, more involving, or more useful than all their other options they’ll watch them. If not, you’re toast. The channel’s not important, the story-telling, the connection and the content is important.
Who will be the dominant media owners in 20 years?
Regular people will be the dominant media owners in 20 years time. They’ll construct their media viewing from thousands of different sources.
Some of them will be existing media brands – the BBC, Google, Rocketboom, Univision.
Some of them will be emerging media brands - already, today, 30 or 40 of the most visited 100 blogs in the world are Chinese.
Some will be brands who we don’t think of as media brands right now - I suspect Nike will be one.
But most of the time people will be constructing their own media channels from stuff sent to them by other regular people. The idea of ‘dominant media brands’ is going away.
I'm not going to mock it; I think you are spot on, particularly with the first answer.
Consumer dominated media will begin to rule the roost - the amount of members YouTube now possesses is testament to that.
Posted by: Will | May 28, 2006 at 05:23 PM
Russell
Does Campaign Magazine understand where its future lies? When will they stop charging us fees to access their online magazine?
Posted by: Nishad | May 28, 2006 at 05:44 PM
Russell [or should I say, Mr Romance] this has nothing to do with the subject - I just wanted to say your 'film' is beautiful, though I'm not really sure why. Abit like the plastic bag scene in American Beauty.
Anyway, if you want to know the damage you've done on my relationship [again] ... my response in on my blog. I'd email you, but my bloody phone has had a mental session and won't bring up my contacts details.
Hope you're tops ...
Posted by: rob@cynic | May 29, 2006 at 02:05 PM
I think I agree with all of that.
:)
There is definitely going to be an explosion of Chinese brands, and if they are ahead of the game (so to speak) then it could definitely change things significantly.
Lenovo are one of the first to make the move, after their IBM computer buyout.
I agree about Nike, they seem to be one of the few BIG non-media brands that really grasp the idea of using media in original ways.
Posted by: Rob Mortimer | May 30, 2006 at 01:23 AM
Wanna hear something scary? The final of the China equivilent of 'Pop Idol' was watched by FOUR HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE - making the winner the most popular popstar in the World!
However, whether the show will have a repeat performance is still in debate as the Chinese Government felt very uncomfortable that the population were able to cast individual votes [via SMS] ... meaning that democracy was experienced by the masses.
Posted by: Rob@Cynic | May 30, 2006 at 02:34 AM
Russell, did you read the book Who's afraid of Niketown?
I know it's an anti-Nike book, but it offers some interesting points (and I think in the end it only demonstrates how Nike is able to build a 360° brand identity by bringing into realities claims like Just do It).
Anyway the scenario the whole book portrays definitely points out how Nike already is a media brand.
Isn't Joga Bonito a TV Show (here in italy hosted on SKY)?
So the path is already traced. Maybe it will require some shiftings, maybe will evolve into something different.But it's there.
My question is how traditional media will react to this. Will they become 360° brands themselves?
Or just be "media supports" (meaning paper, tv stations... all without content)?
Posted by: Luca Vergano | May 30, 2006 at 11:24 AM
The Joga event is being shown on Sky this weekend apparently.
Posted by: Rob Mortimer | May 31, 2006 at 01:26 AM
Apparently it's still easier for traditional media to expand within their own business first, because they already have the credibility, expertise and audiences for it.
Why would they take a boat up the sea if there's still enough fish to catch by the pier?
Building a 360-degree brand sounds cool and looks powerful, but I doubt whether it is the most profitable option for every company.
Posted by: Merati | May 31, 2006 at 11:42 AM
Then again, interesting report here about a recent DECLINE in VOD ratings in the U.S.
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=42824amp;amp;Nid=20070&p=117792
Posted by: Scamp | June 05, 2006 at 10:56 AM