What is Digg?Sponsored by Gilt Man
It's a Gilt Man's world view!
giltman.com - Get gear and gadgets at up to 70% off. Shop like a guy, dress like a man. You're invited.
48 Comments
- raustin, on 10/29/2009, -5/+36Imminent... pfff... Wasn't radio supposed to crush newspapers, and then tv crush radio? The internet will change the game, but don't expect the other formats to disappear anytime soon.
- marcand, on 10/29/2009, -1/+23Newspapers are all like falling dominoes now. As for Vaynerchuk, I remember when he first hit the social media scene. He's blown up like a Pepsi full of Mentos. With smart phones proliferating like rabbits, it's only a matter of time until the majority of media is consumed online rather than anywhere else (if any other option exists).
- badqat, on 10/29/2009, -0/+18I think old media should be embracing the changes in technology. If they don't, they'll be replaced by those that do.
And while NewsCorp may think they're sitting on a gold mine by charging for content - they're wrong. They'll manage to torpedo themselves if they think that is going to fly. - badqat, on 10/29/2009, -1/+16Normally, I'd be apt to agree with you totally - but I do believe the interconnected nature of the 'net is going to seriously change the game. However, I suspect that there will still be plenty of old media hanging around for some time.
- Frankzulla, on 10/29/2009, -1/+16A very interesting view on the fundamental changes in media. It'll be the future soon, folks.
- Blinker1315, on 10/29/2009, -1/+15In fact, radio wasn't supposed to "crush" newspapers, but the industry was shaken by television. And, as more households obtained tv sets in the 50s, it was the beginning of the end for afternoon newspapers. In 1960, in New York City you could buy 8 daily newspapers. A decade later that number shrunk by half. So yes, television had an enormous impact on the industry. And while newspapers won't disappear entirely, they'll eventually become niche products, similar to vinyl records today. There's a reason why the New York Times just announced another round of layoffs or buyouts, this time 100 people. There's a reason why The Washington Post's circulation has tumbled from 900,000 to less than 600,000 in five years time.
- evenflowdave, on 10/29/2009, -0/+11as always, gary saying it like it is. i have worked in a media sales team (magazines) and i can tell you that already a few years back, the outlook was very dim
- phogasmic, on 10/29/2009, -0/+10Gary Vaynerchuk. I love that dude.
- nicolasgervais, on 10/29/2009, -1/+10Gary VAY-NER-CHUK is the definition of passion.
- BBryan, on 10/29/2009, -0/+9worth watching the entire program
- ledsaled, on 10/29/2009, -0/+7I work in radio. This topic scares me. So I choose to ignore it.
- filltev, on 10/29/2009, -1/+7Great speaker 6 Blocks! 70,000! He doesnt need a space shuttle
- spworm, on 10/29/2009, -0/+6I've worked in media. He's absolutely right.
Right now it feels like I've wasted years of my life. I'm taking break, and I'm getting another degree. Magazines will always exist, but not like today. - inactive, on 10/29/2009, -0/+6Well, it seems to me that radio, newspaper, tv aren't being crushed... they are being absorbed and changed into components of the Net... and evolving beyond that. It's happening all the time. It doesn't seem like many people are hip to this yet even though they use these new things. It makes me feel like my parents are really old when they reference things they saw on T.V. or read in the newspaper... I always know about these topics before they do. Sometimes several days before it shows up in a paper. I think the only thing that'll slow the change is, frankly, people who didn't grow up with the 'Net. You can't compare the Internet to old media, it's just not the same thing at all. Internet does radio, news, and t.v.... and even more. So go buy your newspaper, but I'm gonna keep my hands clean.
- blindhammer, on 10/29/2009, -0/+5Well, at least you don't work in the telegraph industry.
- mufasa, on 10/30/2009, -0/+5I'm a morse code operator, i'm starting to get anxious.
- wettestwillie, on 10/29/2009, -0/+4Radio will live as long as people drive cars. Granted the technology has and will change a dozen times (AM/FM, Sirius, XM, etc).
- Mateo2, on 10/29/2009, -0/+4It doesn't matter if newspapers break some stories. They are spread instantly. The common consumer doesn't know who broke a story. But they probably read about it on the internet.
By the way, Twitter is quickly becoming one of the leaders in breaking stories. Pretty much 3/4th of sports stories in the last year were broken on Twitter (often by the athlete in question). The Iran protests were broken on Twitter. And the list goes on. - BossKey, on 10/30/2009, -0/+4Academically speaking, you are correct.
Unfortunately, that's not the question that print publishers need answered, not even close. The question publishers are asking is...are there *enough* people who prefer to hold a newspaper or magazine *to pay my bills?*
If the market of paper-holders is not big enough to push a publisher past that threshold of not losing money, it won't matter that there are people who prefer that because they won't be a big enough group to keep paper publishing going. This is what we are seeing, right now. - wassamatta, on 10/29/2009, -0/+4Gotta have love for someone that utilizes straight talk. The clip is short yet makes me want to take that leap and start working for myself.
- FredFredrickson, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3Why is there this big distinction between "new" and "old" media? Why does "new media" want "old media" to die so much?
Honestly - what is so unfathomable of having multiple mediums for media? Like it or not, there is still plenty of room for books, magazines, and yes, even newspapers in the world. I don't think any of that stuff is going away anytime soon, unless of course, you think only the people who can afford expensive e-readers and high-tech phones deserve to have information. - bastardx, on 10/29/2009, -0/+3This is what powerusers actually believe.
- inactive, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2I like Gary, but I've always thought he should probably cut back on his daily intake of espressos by about 12. Although, he seems fairly chilled in this vid.
- robwhite1979, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2Flying cars and silver jumpsuits?
- korvan504521, on 10/30/2009, -0/+2News shouldn't be about news papers or news channels. It should be about news agencies, that use a variety of tools to disseminate their information and proffit from people paying attention to them.
They need to work on their dependence on outdated revenue streams. - GelfTheElf, on 10/29/2009, -0/+2Watch the No More Excuses section. It's truly inspiring...
http://fora.tv/2009/10/23/CRUSH_IT_Gary_Vaynerchuk ... - LokitheComplex, on 10/30/2009, -0/+1He's right that created change but not all change is good. You can't always tell until its too late.
- Stormwern, on 10/29/2009, -0/+1Every industry is desperate to keep their business model, way past the point of being obsolete (record companies anyone?), nice to hear someone actually spell it out.
- Stormwern, on 10/29/2009, -0/+1TV will probably remain largely unchanged for the time being since having a stream hardwired into people's tv sets is such a huge competitive advantage. In 50 years though we'll probably look at a system where TVs can tap into an internet infrastructure that is designed for watching media, in the same way that handheld internet is adapted for handhelds today.
- LarkStew, on 10/30/2009, -0/+1Who's that guy who keeps banging on about accelerating change? I forget his name... ;-)
- imcostalong, on 11/01/2009, -1/+2When is this dudes 15 minutes going to finally wrap up? Is it just me... or is does his voice and immature mannerisms just drive you nuts.... and if it is just me.. well then, hey, I guess I'm a jackass hater
- MattBlackCat, on 10/31/2009, -0/+1You have a poor understanding of what media is and miss the point
- Frankzulla, on 10/30/2009, -0/+1It's the Amurican dream!
- tgc1, on 10/29/2009, -2/+3I liked that presentation. The guy who was doing the presentation was very well spoken and engaging. And he's absolutely right. The game is changing. All the time. Maybe it stays the same for 10-20 years. But the rate at which it stays the same is shrinking. Maybe back in 1960 the game stayed the same for 30 years. But these days people are having less time to get comfortable. Maybe in 10 years nothing stays the same for 10 years. Maybe after that it's 5 years.
Technology pushes the boundaries for us all the time. Technology is leading the way here. Opening new avenues. Changing perceptions, engaging new people. I'm going to try and watch the whole presentation. I like where this talk was going. - ledsaled, on 10/29/2009, -0/+1Yeah. I'm hoping to maybe lean more on voiceovers as the years go, but turning that into my 'main job' could be tricky.
- MattBlackCat, on 10/30/2009, -0/+1Then explain the continued success of 'celebrity' gossip magazines like The National Enquirer or Hello ?
- jrackow, on 10/29/2009, -0/+1LOL, me too. The greatest thing we can do is provide great content and change as the game changes.
- Groovydoo, on 10/29/2009, -0/+1Before the Gutenberg Press, the Cambridge University owned 122-books in 1424; each book costs as much as a farm or villa. Gutenberg created his printing press in 1426 but the Gutenberg Bible was not printed till the 1450's. ( source Wikipedia) Within 30-years, books were available.
The MP3 came out in the middle '90's yet you can still but a CD at Wall Mart.
Traditional media always dies a slow death. - fingerrockets4, on 10/30/2009, -0/+0I need a Space Shuttle!
- Ferago, on 10/30/2009, -2/+2I'm not convinced. I think there will always be people who prefer to hold a newspaper or magazine in their hand rather than staring at yet another screen of text.
- FunnyData, on 10/31/2009, -1/+1there not main stream media, they are entertainment magazine and papers
- FunnyData, on 10/30/2009, -2/+1The media is so full of lies that people do not want to spend 50 cents to read about lies
- Ne007, on 10/29/2009, -3/+1I pray for its death.
- Watson516, on 10/29/2009, -5/+2Gary told me he was sending me a book but he never did. What a jackass. Why say it if you're not going to send it?
- buddypriefert, on 10/29/2009, -5/+2@cambob76
True yes, I agree with you that the NYTs and WP are getting hit from technology, but they have also become far more biased to the left over the past 10 years. Air America same thing. - KevinRowz, on 10/29/2009, -6/+2Haven't watched the video (I'm at work) but the title is stupid. Technology may change how old media is delivered, or how it generates revenue, but not a single medium out there is going to meet "demise." The short of it is that you are never going to change the fact that some conditions best accommodate reading, some best accommodate listening and some best accommodate watching. There will always be a market with people for each of these. The only way to successfully change the game is not get rid of any of these mediums, but create something for the senses that are not spoken for yet. Smell, touch...
- DChapgier, on 10/29/2009, -6/+1***** this guy. David Simon forever.
- V767, on 10/29/2009, -9/+4I think it is funny how people believe newspapers are dead.
No, they are hardly dead. Big newspapers will dwindle in their news power, but look at where big stores break, Palin's resignation was first grabbed from an Anchorage newspaper and the NY Times just broke a story on Karzai's drug cartel brother being on the CIA's pay list.
The spread of information is where the game change is occurring. Newspapers still have their place. Especially at smaller, local levels where a lot of residents still have slow to no Internet connection.
Newspapers need to evolve in order to survive better. They can modify their attitude toward new media, definitely. The public perceives newspapers at shunning new media, when plenty of newspapers have Web sites, Facebook Fan page and Twitter accounts.
Also, my other complaint about the dormaint newspaper industry is that people think advertising is dead in it. Hardly. Who advertises the hardest in newspapers? Retailers, cars and real estate. Who is getting destroyed in the recession? All three sectors are.
And they aren't advertising differently, they just aren't doing it at all!
They will come back to newspapers, and there are other statistics to show how more affective paper advertisement is to online advertisement.
Anyway, people can think it is dead, but newspapers will rebound, and modify themselves in order to survive into the generations of news readers to come.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is