Category: media industry

Posted on

If it quacks like a duck, it must be the Robertson family

DuckDynastyIn case you haven’t heard, the current TV ratings powerhouse is a reality TV show on A&E about a family from Louisiana that made $millions making duck calls. Duck Dynasty is cleaning up in the ratings and has surpassed the long-time ratings champ American Idol (which had fallen on hard times of late).

The season finale last Wednesday attracted an amazing 9.6 million viewers and beat everything else on TV according to Nielsen. With a 4.3 rating in the desirable 18-49 demographic, DD is the highest rated reality show on cable, and only one scripted show on cable, The Walking Dead, does better.

Broadcast TV programs traditionally pull higher ratings than cable TV shows, but DD has even been beating its broadcast competitors on Wednesday nights.

Some critics have been left scratching their heads over DD’s rise to fame. Some say it is the folksy, down-home humor of the main characters. Others point to the authenticity of the relationships between the patriarch Phil Robertson, his sons, and their Uncle Si. And still others point to the Evangelical Christianity of the family members as a draw for viewers who live in the Bible Belt.

Whatever it is, Duck Dynasty is a certifiable hit…and just one more example of how good programming ideas are difficult to come by, and impossible to predict.

Posted on

The “Holy Grail” of Advertising

In this social media saturated landscape, word-of-mouth (or word-of-MOUSE as the case may be) advertising carries a lot of clout. Because so many of us are skeptical of traditional advertising pitches, a referral from a trusted friend…yes, even a Facebook friend…is highly valued. In fact, according to Reuters, “Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg was quoted as saying that a trusted referral was the ‘Holy Grail’ of advertising.”  And just as money is what advertising is ultimately about, money is also central to a class-action lawsuit that Facebook lost when it was accused of using Facebook users’ “likes”, without their consent, to pitch products to their Facebook friends.

This is not a new story. Most of it transpired in Summer and Fall of 2012, but the lesson is worth reviewing and repeating. The poster-child for this particular violation is Facebook user Nick Bergus. According to Venturebeat.com,

The most egregious example of a user becoming the inadvertent spokesman for a less-than-lube-in-barrelsqueaky-clean brand, of course, is Nick Bergus, who became the leading pitchman for Passion Natural Water personal lubricant — in 55-gallon allotments.

A class-action lawsuit, brought in California court, sought damages from Facebook for their use of “sponsored stories” without paying Facebook users or allowing them to opt out. According to Reuters, “A ‘Sponsored Story’ is an advertisement that appears on a member’s Facebook page and generally consists of another friend’s name, profile picture and an assertion that the person ‘likes’ the advertiser.” In the case of Nick Bergus, his likeness was used to sell 55-gallon drums of personal lubricant.

Now that the lawsuit has been settled, a potential 125 million Facebook users are eligible for a settlement of … wait for it … two cents each, or up to $10 if they apply.

One thing is certain, the advertising business is changing. Native ads, what some are calling the “next wave” of advertising, are replacing traditional banner ads, pop-ups, and pre-rolls. As new media companies attempt to find new ways to monetize their business, too often they step over boundaries intended to protect users’ privacy.

Posted on

Bleeping and Blurring on Network TV

Regulating indecency on broadcast TV is a tricky business. First of all, the American public does not agree on what is or isn’t indecent. Differences of geography, background, religiosity, and age account for much of the variance…but even then it is difficult to find commonality on what is or isn’t appropriate for prime time TV when children may be in the audience. Another complicating factor is that the networks are competing with basic and premium cable/satellite TV programming which is not subject to the same regulatory scrutiny as over-the-air TV networks. To further confuse the issue, the increase in IPTV and smart TVs that stream video content over the internet makes the distinction of broadcast TV’s more restrictive content policies appear less and less relevant.

Despite–or perhaps because of–the confusion, the controversy is not going away. A study by the media watchdog group Parents Television Council revealed a significant increase in the number of instances of pixelated “full-frontal nudity” on network TV. According the PTC, there was one instance in the 2010-2011 season and 64 in the most recent season. Use of pixelation allows the networks to avoid prosecution by the FCC while implying nudity for comedic or dramatic effect.

According to a quote in the LA Times, PTC President Tim Winter said,

pixilated flesh is “unfortunate, unnecessary and offensive to the family audience” and that it happened more often in 7 to 9 p.m. shows, when kids could be watching, than in those airing after 10 p.m. Nor did the shows’ ratings always warn parents of sensitive content.

Because of the sensitive nature of these issues and the difficulty of making the right decision during the initial filming or taping, occasionally special effects are used in post production to modify the frames that might cross the line. According the same article in the LA Times,

John Gross, a veteran visual effects supervisor at L.A.-based Eden FX, said he and other effects executives are often asked to add pixels or shadow parts of actors’ bodies so network shows will pass muster with censors. They also draw clothes back on so that programs can be sold to international markets more modest than the U.S.

The FCC’s polities on indecent language are also under scrutiny. Currently the courts are wrestling with the proper interpretation of regulatory policies that prohibit “language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities.” Radio stations carrying the Howard Stern Show racked up about $2.5 million in FCC fines before Stern moved from broadcast radio to Sirius XM satellite radio, which is exempt from FCC indecency policies. After several awards show incidents, it is now common policy on live radio and TV to have a short delay which allows a censor to hit a switch to mute the sound or picture in the event of an unscripted moment of vulgarity or profanity.

This practice has become so commonplace that Jimmy Kimmel has a reoccurring segment called “This Week in Unnecessary Censorship” in which he “bleeps and blurs” video clips to give the appearance of vulgarity and indecency when in fact nothing of the sort had taken place. But viewers are easily persuaded to fill in the gaps by imagining the worst. The same phenomenon is happening with the pixelation of full-frontal nudity. Even though the actors are wearing flesh-colored undergarments, the pixelated image encourages the viewer to assume or imagine that the actor is indeed nude in the scene.

So here’s the question: where does offense over indecency happen? Is it in the word or image presented,  in the mind of the audience member, or, somewhere in between?

Posted on

An Olympic-sized Effort by NBC

The Summer Olympic games have come to a close and the 10,000+ athletes and their fans have returned to their 200+ home countries. NBC Sports production personnel will be dismantling their enormous production facilities and shipping tons of equipment back to the US. I was fortunate to be part of the NBC Sports production team in 1988 at the Seoul Summer Olympics. It was a massive undertaking then, but every four years the US Olympics broadcasting team outdoes the previous effort.

NBCUniversal paid dearly for the rights to broadcast the XXX Games to a US audience…somewhere in the neighborhood of $1.18B. They spent hundreds of millions more bringing hours and hours of programming to your TV screen, laptop, tablet and cell phone.

Over a period of 17 days, NBC Universal provided 5,535 hours of coverage spread across NBC, NBC Sports Network, MSNBC, CNBC, Bravo, Telemundo, NBCOlympics.com, two specialty channels, and the first-ever 3D platform. While athletes were setting records in the pool and on the track, NBCUniversal set records of its own. Working with Panasonic, the games in London marked the first time that Olympic sports were broadcast in 3D in the US. To appreciate the size and scope of the Summer Olympic games, this is what their media guide said about the size of the audience:

To deliver the same number of gross household impressions NBC delivered during the 17 days of its primetime Beijing Olympics coverage, one network would have to own the rights and broadcast the Super Bowl, the Academy Awards, the Grammy Awards, the Golden Globes, the AFC Division playoffs, the NFC Championship Game and six games of the World Series all within a 17-day span.

Also from their media guide…

Posted on

Dark Knight Falls Short

The latest in the Dark Knight series is struggling to bounce back from the tragic shooting in Aurora that appears to be having a greater impact on attendance than initially projected. It may appear callous to be talking about box office receipts and financial success when so many lives were lost and others were changed forever. But that is the nature of the business of big media. The studio, Warner Brothers, took steps to try to appear sensitive to the tragic shooting. They delayed reports of box office receipts that first weekend and cancelled premiere events in Paris, Mexico City and Tokyo. According to the WSJ, a spokesperson for the studio said, “We just felt it would be disrespectful and not the right thing to do to go forward.” Warner Bros also pulled trailers for Gangster Squad from theaters because of a scene that includes shooting up a movie theater. Meanwhile, security has been beefed-up and theater chains are implementing new rules about patrons showing up in outfits and masks.

Christian Bales’ surprise visit to patients in Aurora hospitals was certainly well-received by both the patients and the media. The visit may have been inspired by a Facebook viral campaign calling for the star to make a visit to the victims. And while I sincerely hope that the visit was made for all the right reasons, we’re sure to hear criticism from skeptics and cynics who question motives whenever fame and fortune is at stake.

Public Relations experts have been weighting in on the difficult position facing Warner Bros. Some had advised that all screenings of Dark Knight Rises be pulled for a short time. Others have argued for business as usual. According to a report by Fox News, Daniel Keeney, President of DPK Public Relations and PR crisis expert, believes that the best response is to acknowledge and move forward.

“There realistically is no way in the foreseeable future to extricate the Batman brand from this horrific tragedy,” he said. “So instead of hoping to get beyond this, the studio needs to accept that this event is a part of this movie from this point forward. A simple way to acknowledge this and recognize as well as honor the victims is to add a slide to the beginning of the movie along with a moment of silence prior to the start of the film.”

According to a report filed by LA radio station WKZO,

Ronn Torossian, chief executive of New York-based 5W Public Relations, agreed that the public “has a very short-term memory” of news events and said the Aurora shooting would not leave a long-term impact on film promotion. “Reality shows have had tragic suicides and other incidents, yet reality shows continue,” he said.

Of course it is entirely possible that Word-Of-Mouth and film critic reviews are responsible for the lackluster performance. But it is also possible that potential movie-goers are not in the mood for a film that will remind them of senseless killing by a deranged “Joker” from Aurora.

Posted on

Rushing to Judgement

This blog post is in no way intended to add to the current public debate about the guilt or innocence of either Trayvon Martin or George Zimmerman. The tragic shooting has become the center of a national dialogue about race (Martin is African-American and Zimmerman is Hispanic), violence, and media coverage of the same. While there has been little verifiable evidence about the tragic incident, there is no shortage of opinion about what happened on that night of February 26th.

What we do know is that the national media were slow to report the initial shooting. Only after African-American commentators, bloggers and radio talk show hosts took up the cause–and after social media amplified the discussion–did the mainstream media finally pay attention.

Photos of Martin and Zimmerman widely disseminated by the mainstream media have also led some to jump to conclusions. Newer photos of both are now being released. One can’t help but think that the images being presented are part of the process of making a case for either innocence or guilt of those portrayed. Either way it is easy to see how important first impressions can be when forming an opinion in the absence of hard facts.

Additional facts about Martin’s record of suspensions from school are also changing the nature of the debate. Some are claiming that these are irrelevant facts that are being intentionally leaked to the media with intent to destroy the reputation of the victim.

Even coverage of the media coverage has been controversial. The Daily Texan, a student newspaper from University of Texas at Austin, pulled a controversial editorial cartoon that was critical of the media’s coverage of the story.

One of the most important responsibilities of the media in a democratic society is to draw attention to misbehavior and to do so in an even-handed and unbiased way. Crime reporting is just one example. But so is investigative reporting of how police and other civil servants carry out their duty to administer justice. When public outcry about a possible miscarriage of justice by the local police reached a tipping point, the US Department of Justice was called in to investigate the Sanford police department.

Questions remain: Is justice being served by the attention being given to this story? Would justice have been served if a few African-American journalists had not gained the attention of the social media megaphone…which then led to the mainstream media paying attention? Can truth and justice prevail in what some are now calling a “media circus”?

 

UPDATE 3/30/12

PEW Research has released an interesting study comparing the way that Twitter, blogs, and cable TV and talk radio have covered the story.

Posted on

Think Twice about SOPA and PIPA

If you plan to work in the media industries as a professional content creator, you need to pay close attention to the current debate over SOPA and PIPA. The two bills being debated in congress are designed, with substantial input from lobbyists representing “old media” interests, to shut down global websites that profit from the illegal distribution of copyrighted material: music, films and TV shows primarily. The issue is being framed by internet and new media companies (largely located in Silicon Valley) as a battle for internet freedom of expression and the rights of end users. Several major internet sites have gone black today or have modified their home page to express solidarity with the protest movement. But what about the rights of individuals and companies (largely located in NY & LA) that create media content?

Much of the early discussion that I’ve seen on Facebook and Twitter has bought into the new media companies’ arguments that this attempt to curtail copyright infringement will stifle creativity and growth on the internet. Others argue that the regulatory oversight will amount to censorship of creative expression. This is completely understandable from the perspective of those who are end users of content rather than creators. For the average consumer, more access to free content seems like a good thing. However, if you’re thinking that you’d like to work in the media industry as a content creator, you might want to consider what the future holds for you if creativity is not rewarded and protected.

Copyright laws exist to protect intellectual property and to reward the creative community for their investment of time and resources in the creative development process. Music, video and film content does not create itself, and those responsible for its creation and distribution deserve legal protection from those who would like to acquire, redistribute, or aggregate that content for their own personal or corporate benefit.

Now, while it may be clear that I am in favor of reasonable protection for copyright holders, I am not convinced that SOPA and PIPA are well-designed legislative tools to accomplish that goal. The video below points out some of the weaknesses of these bills and raises serious questions about their practical application.

[vimeo http://www.vimeo.com/31100268 w=398&h=224]

So, what do you think about SOPA and PIPA? Bad idea? Good idea? Good idea poorly executed?

Posted on

Indecency on trial

How do you define indecency? Do you know it when you see it? Or hear it? Are fleeting expletives indecent? Or does it depend on the context? And most importantly, with hundreds of thousands of dollars of fines at stake, who gets to decide what is and what isn’t indecent? The National Association of Broadcasters recently filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court arguing that the FCC’s enforcement of indecency rules is too vague and subjective, making it impossible for broadcasters to know what content might be subject to fines.

Some are wondering whether this brief is part of a larger effort to relax indecency regulations for broadcasters. Broadcasters, who have historically been much more restricted than cable networks when it comes to language, sex and violence, have felt that this differential treatment puts them at a disadvantage in an increasingly competitive environment. However, according to a quote published in Broadcasting & Cable, NAB spokesman Dennis Wharton said, “We do agree with the networks and the Second Circuit that the FCC’s indecency policies are unconstitutionally vague and chill broadcasters’ protected speech. However, we do not call for the overturning of Pacifica or Red Lion.” Wharton’s references to “Pacifica” and “Red Lion” refer to Supreme Court cases that are foundational to broadcast regulation.

The debate has heated up in recent years after several incidents of offensive language on live awards shows and scripted nudity on NYPD Blues attracted the attention of Parents Television Council. The recent overturning of the $550,000 fine against CBS for the now infamous wardrobe malfunction in the 2004 Superbowl halftime show suggests that the courts are less inclined to side with the FCC. What do you think? Has indecency enforcement been too aggressive, too lax, or too uneven?

Posted on

Steve Jobs, Typography and the Mac

Although the passing of Steve Jobs this past week was not unexpected, it still was an emotional event for Apple fans and anyone who followed technology and media. The death of Steve Jobs attracted extensive media attention with much of the coverage focusing on his contributions over the years to the development of a computer and media empire that consistently delivered more than it promised.

To commemorate his passing I had my Media & Society class watch the 2005 commencement address that Steve Jobs delivered to the 2005 graduating class of Stanford University. The speech is only 14 minutes in length and you can see it below. There’s much to reflect on when listening to Jobs talk about his upbringing, his abbreviated college years, the twists and turns of his professional career, and his bout with cancer.

The one thing that stood out to me was the role that a class in typography, from Reed College, had on Jobs’ design of the Macintosh computer and, in many ways, the direction of Apple computer. Font selection, leading, kerning, tracking and ligatures are the concerns of a fairly obscure group of individuals, namely printers and typography geeks, yet Jobs was captivated by the ancient art of arranging letters on a page. Prior to the Apple Mac, computer type was crude and utilitarian. Function certainly won out our over form for screen fonts and printer output. But Jobs equipped the Mac with Postscript font technology and that, married with the personal laser printer, made high quality screen and print typography accessible to the masses. We take for granted font selection and high quality print output…but for that we should thank Steve Jobs and his vision for the Macintosh computer that started when he dropped in on a typography class at Reed College.

Posted on

Sony Playing Hardball with new ToS

Do you enjoy using your PS3 to play online? Well, if you want to continue you’ll have to agree to waive your right to participate in any future class-action lawsuit against Sony if they should, say…for instance, compromise your account data by sloppy network security. The new Terms of Service (ToS) agreement that was released this week are designed to protect Sony…and only Sony. You, on the other hand, are at the mercy of a corporate power that has a pretty shoddy track record when it comes to protecting consumer data. You can read more about it here.

From Section 15 of the new terms and conditions:

If you have a Dispute with any Sony Entity or any of a Sony Entity’s officers, directors, employees and agents that cannot be resolved through negotiation within the time frame described in the “Notice of Dispute” clause below. Other than those matters listed in the Exclusions from Arbitration clause, you and the Sony Entity that you have a Dispute with agree to seek resolution of the Dispute only through arbitration of that Dispute in accordance with the terms of this Section 15, and not litigate any Dispute in court. Arbitration means that the Dispute will be resolved by a neutral arbitrator instead of in a court by a judge or jury.

There is an opt out…but it is pretty low-tech. If, within 30 days of signing the new ToS, you send a snail-mail letter to Sony’s legal department in California you can reject the dispute resolution clause. But seriously, how many PS3 users are going to read the new ToS, and how many of them are going to go to the trouble of writing and mailing a letter to Sony?

css.php