MediaFlect

Shallow Thoughts: Comcast's Challenge to Hulu

2009-07-06T14:40:00.002-04:00

From Naked Media: Comcast's confusing deal to try to challenge Hulu with a new paid service:

Walls or No

2009-06-30T18:38:00.005-04:00

Wore this T-Shirt for "Shallow Thoughts" on Naked Media today. Relevant to the discussion on magazines. (Click the shirt for the whole Tweet on the T-shirt.)

The Media Consumer's Bill of Rights

2009-06-30T18:11:00.002-04:00

I told my guests today on Naked Media, designer Roger Black and Complex Media CEO Rich Antoniello, that I had started to draft a (half-joking) “media consumer’s bill of rights.” They asked me to share it with them. I have. And here I’m sharing it with you:

THE MEDIA CONSUMER'S BILL OF RIGHTS

AS A MEDIA CONSUMER, I DESERVE:

TO BE ABLE TO RECORD SOMETHING -- ANYTHING -- IN ONE ROOM AND CONSUME IT IN ANOTHER ROOM, WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY EXTRA
TO READ ANYTHING I'M READING ON WHATEVER I CHOOSE TO READ IT ON -- WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY OVER AND OVER AND OVER. KINDLE, E-BOOK, PRINT, BLACKBERRY, WHATEVER! LET ME SWITCH AROUND!
TO CHOOSE WHETHER TO WATCH ADS AND GET SOMETHING FOR FREE, OR PAY TO GET IT WITHOUT THE ADS
TO HAVE THE ADS SHOW FOR LESS TIME THAN THE PROGRAMMING (OR AT LEAST FOR IT TO FEEL THAT WAY)
TO NEVER FEEL GOUGED FOR THE MEDIA I PAY FOR ($20 for a CD? $50 for a DVD? When you’ve already made a big profit and it costs you maybe a couple bucks to manufacture, distribute and promote? C'mon.)
TO (OH, HORROR!) BE ABLE TO SAMPLE IT ALL AT THE LIBRARY.
AND , FINALLY, TO BE ABLE TO CONNECT ALL MY MEDIA DEVICES AND MOVE PROGRAMMING AROUND ON THEM -- AS EASILY AS I CAN NOW DRAG AND DROP TEXT FILES.

I’m sure I’ll think of more -- next time I’m trying to hook up a Windows laptop to an Apple computer and play something back on a set-top box with some sort of S-video to-coax cable work-around, while cussing and twitching.
But I’d love to hear yours.
REALLY

PS The media professional's bill of rights, I guess, would be the right to break any and all of the above any time the professional can find a business model to justify it; alienated consumers notwithstanding.

Privacy Bill In the Works to Require Opt-In for Cookies

2009-06-23T10:41:00.011-04:00

Members of congress are preparing legislation that could severely impact how advertisers and others gather information and present material on the Web and through other digital means. The legislation would restrict the ability to place third party cookies* on the computers of those visiting Web sites, according to industry veteran Dave Morgan, speaking at the Advertising Research Foundation's Audience Measurement 4.0 conference today.

"Congress’ position is that consumers are not appropriately aware of what is being done on their machines, and the use of cookies delivered by a third party is something consumers have not been appropriately informed of," said Morgan, who oversees privacy initiatives for the Internet Advertising Bureau and is CEO of the startup Simulmedia. He was in Washington last week talking to FTC officials and congressional staff, he said. "Congress’ default position is that that will require an opt-in," to serve a third-party cookie. Rep Rick Boucher, who is working on the bill said he could get it through the House, that it would be passed, and that he was willing to work with the industry and consider self-policing measures, Morgan said.

But, Morgan said, the industry has to move fast, and legislators are skeptical of the industry's ability to police itself. There have, he was told, been many abuses. He said he'd had a conversation with a senator from the state of Washington who had worked in the industry who understood that cookies are relatively innocuous but "her constituents don't believe that." Washington senator Maria Cantwell worked at RealNetworks for a time after losing a congressional seat in 1994 and prior to joining the Senate.

Morgan said the tactic the industry could best use at this point was to approach legislators and inform them of the jobs created by the industry, $300 billion worth, according to a Harvard study he cited. Morgan previously led advertising company 24/7 Real Media and behavioral ad targeting firm Tacoda, sold to AOL for some $250 million. The technologies of the companies relied heavily on cookies. Morgan has often been called upon to answer concerns about user privacy.

NOTE: I videotaped Morgan after the panel and will run it during the next Naked Media (noon ET, June 30). along with Morgan defending and Nielsen Online's CEO calling him to task for saying Twitter can be used a measurement tool that could compete with Nielsen. The video will later be available on demand at NakedMedia.org.

= = = =
*Cookies, pieces of code, are key to understanding Web users' behavior through everything from ad serving to the number of pages seen and paths taken through a Web site. Third-party cookies are those placed on a users' machine by someone other than the Web site the user is visiting, for example via an advertiser or partner. Currently, such cookies are served automatically and data collected that way as well, unless the user chooses settings in a Web browser that block them, or chooses to actively delete them.

iPhone Sells (Despite Reports it Didn't)

2009-06-23T09:51:00.002-04:00

So, the analysts said the iPhone 3GS didn't sell. Then Apple released data that said it did. I was at the Apple store on 14th St in Manhattan on Saturday morning before it opened at 9a. Here's the pic.

Google Not Enemy, Not Friend

2009-06-12T08:36:00.001-04:00

Jeff Jarvis says Google is not the enemy but for many it’s also clearly not a friend. Panelists yesterday at Digital Hollywood’s Advertising 2.0 conference cited $Goog for creating an environment in which consumers expect that information and entertainment will be free, and for confusing the idea of capturing and engaging consumers, getting them involved in a marketing message, brand and the like. “Google is the culprit, they’re not interested in engagement,” said Jonathan Klein, CEO of Getty Images. “You come in, and then go out.”

This, just a couple days after The Wall Street Journal’s article on the Justice Department taking a closer look at Google’s deal with publishers to put books online, in the context of a broader push toward antitrust investigations in the technology industry. Clearly, a portion of Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s job is going to be focused on battling Washington, and wooing the advertising and publishing industries. And, of course fending off competition from a host of companies and products like Microsoft’s Bing that are, in the words of Warren Lee, Venture Partner at VC firm Canaan Partners, trying to “out-Google Google.”

For most though, though, Google is simply an “is.” It has to be dealt with and understood. Its analytics are useful for those who want at least an entry-level solution for Web analytics. Its search, and sometimes its ads, and office tools can be used to good effect -- again, especially for those who don’t need large enterprise solutions, or don’t have large staffs to build them. It has a valuable, if not highly diversified, business model, and a model that is not the panacea for media, but rather a component of some media businesses.

Video View from IAC at Digital Hollywood's Advertising 2.0

2009-06-11T16:47:00.005-04:00

Sometimes the view is worth sharing, as much as the content. From the 9th floor room where sessions were being held at the IAC building on New York's far west side.

Lack, Wolff, Go at It

2009-06-11T11:02:00.004-04:00

Bloomberg LP's Andrew Lack holds up Michael Wolff's 1999 book "Burn Rate," which he would read from later, in part to chide Wolff, at the Digital Hollywood Advertising 2.0 summit in New York. Hashtag #dhadv on Twitter has some running commentary on their vigorous back and forth.

Wolff's take, largely, is that old media (Bloomberg included) is on the outs, and won't survive. Lack says that quality -- Bloomberg, NY Times, etc. -- will and must survive and that those businesses Wolff is writing off still exist, strongly. Lack of course is the former president of NBC News. Bloomberg hired him to oversee Bloomberg News' radio, television and interactive divisions, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Journalist, Editor, Ad (Wo)Man

2009-06-10T21:58:00.002-04:00

Yes, journalism and marketing are converging, sharing the same terms and concepts. Editorial icon Tina Brown, journalist-turned-entrepreneur John Harris of the Politico and Tina Sharkey of BabyCenter were very comfortable at Digital Hollywood’s Advertising 2.0 conference today talking up the value to advertisers of their sites, and their willingness to go well beyond the banner ad to try to integrate advertising in more creative and interesting ways (though Brown and Harris were careful point out that advertising initiatives were labeled as such). “The muscles you use on the editorial side,” help with advertising, Harris said, in helping a message “break through” to the audience. “We see the journalistic and advertising sides as two forces galloping together.”

“There was a time when advertising staff was not allowed to step into the newsroom,” observed moderator Sarah Ellison of The Wall Street Journal. “Obviously we’ve come a very long way from that point.” Brown noted that in the magazine world, as editor of such leading publications as Vanity Fair and The New Yorker, she was always comfortable working with the publisher to “create an environment where advertisers want to be.”

But she seemed to take umbrage at the idea of marketers trying to do their own journalism (such as this recent Pepsi-led project for Internet week, for which I was editor in chief). To them, “I would say good luck,” Brown said, defending journalism and saying it takes real skill to practice it, and to edit it. (Assuming, it seemed that those who practice it on behalf of Pepsi are not journalists.) I had asked her how she would convince an advertiser to put ads on her site, if they could go to their target audience directly without her Daily Beast as an interlocutor. Sharkey, who is not and has not been a journalist, acknowledged that it was all a mishmash, very confusing with “marketers as publishers, publishers are marketers, brfands are agencies, agencies are brands ... it’s like ‘Who’s on First.’ “

News and Advertising Converge

2009-06-10T13:49:00.003-04:00

It's fascinating how the language of news and advertising are converging. Both sides now are talking of the need to "engage" their audiences, stop preaching from on high and include others in "the discussion" or "the conversation." Straddling the two worlds, as I do, I see them coming closing together than ever, rather than being diametrically opposed universes, as they used to be.

Does Huffington's Argument Hold Oil?

2009-06-10T13:29:00.005-04:00

Arianna Huffington was very provocative yesterday at the Mirror Awards, where she gave a keynote address and accepted the Fred Dressler Lifetime Achievement Award (for which Nora Ephron, introducing her, joked that Arianna she wasn't old enough). The Huffington Post founder not only answered critics in saying she has not been killing newspapers and that she pays journalists -- issues you can read about elsewhere -- but she also likened those who would charge for news to those who are putting up protective walls in other industries. If I heard correctly (I'm trying to get a transcript -- silly me for Twittering while she spoke, instead of taking notes or running a recorder), she talked of oil companies that try to tamp down on gas mileage advances.

But how are those who wish to charge for news are hurting the industry? For, if they're wrong, the market will prove them so. There's not, to my knowledge, a push for government regulation to force sites to pay for news, or make consumers pay for something they don't want. Sure, there are those who want to get paid for the content they produce -- that gets into issues of fair use, and fairness, in general.

Still, if if someone wants to try to charge for news they produce, why stop them from doing so? It's just another business model. There's probably room for that way and Huffington's

Tweets From the Mirror Awards

2009-06-10T13:12:00.003-04:00

... for which I was one of the judges. These are my tweets from there.

Huff: news and opinion must be shared, supp'd by advertisg. Likens pay wall to protectionist tactics in other industrries. #mirrors

Huff: as long as there r people our generation there will be newspapers. #mirrors

Huffington: Arthur Sclessinger and Nora Ephron were my first bloggers. Both said 'i don't get it". Now over 3000 bloggers. #mirrors

Ephron: 1200 channels and not 1 to watch. 1 reason obama won was Huff's enthusiasm. She dragged many into the future w/ her. #mirrors

Nora Ephron cracking up audience w/ jokes about Arianna. Sleeping w/ Al Frankin, dating the same man, "daffy", amazing 2 c a funny Republican ...

To me, the real recognition of the honorees is how much their work is blogged, twittered, friend-feeded, forwarded, linked etc #mirrors (This was my, Dorian's, opinion)

Bill Moyers can't present Arianna Huffington her award because of a medical procedure #mirrors

Obama for America accepts award, says election was first time bottom-up. Really? They taught us that's democracy #mirrors

David Carr: media story used to seem silly, but now it's a story about the crucial #mirrors @carr2n

Meanwhile, Over at Internet Week

2009-06-01T22:37:00.002-04:00

I'll be doing a lot of work on Internet Week in New York, this week, at the Pepsico sponsored site covering the events -- I'm editor in chief for the project.

Here's a post I wrote from the Conversational Marketing Summit hosted by Federated Media about how the wall's are coming down between advertising and editorial.

Is 'Free' The Right Price for News?

2009-05-26T10:38:00.000-04:00

Tad Smith, the CEO of Reed Business, home to dozens of publications including Variety, Broadcast and Cable, and Multichannel News last week on CNBC questioned the idea that “free” is the best price for media. “Price communicates a lot of value, and when it’s free, it really says it’s not worth anything,” he said, also noting that we’re conditioned to believe, “you get what you pay for.”

In another part of the show, not in this linked video, he said that Reed is considering charging for its publications that are currently free online.

What do you think? Can ads, alone, support a news operation? What are the other means to doing so -- subscription, e-commerce, events, and so on. Should you charge -- especially if your site is for a limited audience defined either by geography or subject? How can you figure it out before taking the first steps?

Log on and share your thoughts here. The Reynolds Journalism Institute's Business Assessment group is coming up with pointers.

The Business of News - Can You Help?

2009-05-26T09:34:00.002-04:00

Over at the Collaboratory, a project of the Reynolds Journalism Institute, I'm putting together pointers on what makes journalism a business today -- how can someone, for example, evaluate whether a project is viable: is there enough ad revenue, other revenue streams, what are the costs of staffing, technology and so on.

Here's the link. Love to have your input, thoughts, and experience.

Naked Media Measurement Jingle (and Show)

2009-05-21T15:28:00.001-04:00

And the show, with Jon Gibs of Nielsen, and Todd Juenger of TiVo, talking about the ins and outs of media measurement.

The Value of a User

2009-05-01T21:42:00.003-04:00

Check out this chart, on what makes a user more valuable, plus a presentation, explaining the"Virtuous Cycle": How to create value in digital media." It's on Teeming Media, here.

To Build a Better Trade Show

2009-05-01T14:23:00.005-04:00

I was recently asked by the good folks at The Hired Guns for "blue sky" thoughts on what might make a trade show or conference work better, in the future. It seems that people attending these days aren't getting enough to justify the couple thou it can cost to attend, and the sponsors and exhibitors and speakers are generating the interest they would like. Maybe the typical "panel speaks, then some networking happens in little segments" format is a bit tired.

I asked "how blue sky do you want? Star ship Enterprise holodeck? MIT Media Lab? Something else?" And was told to go with the Media Lab and maybe some more pragmatics. So here, with a little editing, is what I submitted, for all to share. Love to have your thoughts, as well, through this, Twitter (@dorianbenkoil) or, if you can access it, directly into my biochip implant.

What would, both in technology and other ways of conceiving, make conferences, events, trade shows that much more effective?

Conference/Trade show, Blue Sky thoughts:

Equip conference goers with a smart phone app that allows them to interact with each other at the conf across sessions, monitor the session they want, tap into Twitter feeds, etc. Later, aggregate those communications, and combine with Twitter hashtags and other parsing and sorting mechanism, to create an intelligent cloud of info that will inform coverage of the conf. Hook the app up to a private social network for cross-platform aggregation.
Enable GPS monitoring of above for a geographic overlay.
Equip conference goers with “ear-cams” small mounted cameras (and mics, perhaps) that record everything each of them see. Aggregate that video in a rich chat platform that allows someone to select an individual’s video. Allow those who pay to attend the conference special abilities to slice, dice, parse and access the videos both in real time and later. (This could also offer sponsors a further opportunity of a more packaged video product, honing in on their specific interests and target group.
Cameras in the hands of all, aggregated in a video chat displayed on site, and integrated with outside video, for a flexible, video chat conference that those in the panel can also interact in real time. Similar to above, but minus the "ear cam".
Audience cams. Point a handful of cameras at the audience, remote-controlled. Use these later, more packaged, as a service to sponsors, speakers, etc., to gauge the reactions to specific speakers, presentations, etc.
Allow remote attendees to select at will from an array of cameras, audio, etc. Aggregate it with Twitter and any other feeds, coverage, etc.
Have goers volunteer to be part of an attendee panel (panel in the media-measurement, not conference sense). Monitor their media consumption and communication before and after the show to see how the show influences it.
Rather than separate SF and NY and LA and Boston and ... conferences, have one, but conduct them with virtual rooms, so they interact with each other in real time. Today, teleconferencing and Second Life. Tomorrow, virtual chambers, holo-deck like, as the one that’s being developed at Media Lab. This is not a stunt, but rather a real-time interaction and a way to get the geographically influenced ideas cross-pollinating.
Discussion turned inside-out, where the participants are mic’d and the panelists circulate among them.
Panel interaction with Twitter (and any other real-time chat mechanism). Those on stage are ENCOURAGED to tweet, photograph, video, etc., for a multilayered portrayal of the event, and interaction with people in a more multi-dimensional way than panel speaks, question’s asked, panelists respond. So, for example, someone watching could see not just a camera pointing at the panel with that audio, but also click to see a camera of what a panelist sees, read his/her tweets, and so on.
Those at the event are tasked with specific brainstorming, and in breakout groups devise solutions, virtually, on site and virtual shared environments. EG, the question of the day can be “how do we come up with financial models for journalism — in 2 hours come up with a spreadsheet and mockups. Go group.” Or “Here’s the product. Spread it virally. Prove the concept. Go.”
My friend Luke Haseloff has suggested that events, rather than allowing people to rush the stage to talk to speakers, put the speakers quickly at round tables where they can lead a sort of after-panel discussion.

What else? What other ideas for panel/conference/discussion that will inspire and bring this all to the next level, with or without technology?

More Ways Nielsen May be Missing It on Twitter

2009-04-29T16:08:00.004-04:00

Not only do Nielsen stats saying Twitter has a hard time retaining users miss all those who use third party applications to Tweet, as Steve Safran notes, they also miss the mobile portion. Twitter, let's not forget, was initially devised as a mobile app whose founders discovered its power during an earthquake. Part of Twitter's beauty is its ability to let us communicate seamlessly across apps, platforms, handhelds, networks, etc. It's in my browser one moment, a mobile phone, next, a favorite app after that. Conceiving of the impact of a digital property as traffic to a Website under a specific URL is not very 2009. Web traffic, alone, misses a significant portion of the impact. Just ask Tweetdeck, Tweetie, or anyone who gets alerts and tweet via their mobile phone using the short code 40404.

Nielsen, in trying to get at Twitter's impact, compares its Web traffic to that of MySpace and Facebook, and retention of users at a similar stage in each company on their websites. But, today, making someone go to a specific site can in itself be considered a weakness -- a lesson Facebook appears to be learning with Facebook Connect and more open architecture that allows people to interact, at least some, "off-deck."

Each of these social networks is different, impactful in different ways. I discover musicians on MySpace, friends and colleagues on Facebook, colleagues and business leads on LinkedIn and news on Twitter. Each feels different, and attracts different crowds and different uses. As Twitter is unique in its use case, stats that count only its website's traffic don't just miss the boat quantitatively, but there's also a qualitative disconnect.

I hope to explore this topic with Jon Gibs of Nielsen, when he's on Naked Media next month, along with Todd Juenger of TiVo.

An aside: It's incredibly frustrating that I have to go to a Facebook, or LinkedIn or any other page to communicate w/ my network(s), rather than being able to easily have it all in one place. (I am aware of one venture trying to let folks do it all through one interface -- I hope they get funding and come out of the box strong. And I hope their architecture is open.)

Larry Kramer: Another Financial News Venture

2009-04-27T17:15:00.001-04:00

Larry Kramer, who founded Marketwatch and sold it to Dow Jones for $500 million, hints that he'll be getting back into the news business, maybe even financial and business news, in this segment of Naked Media.

To Be A Successful Entrepreneur

2009-04-24T11:19:00.004-04:00

At the Entrepreneur's Week panel Translating Your Idea Into Reality at NYU's Tisch auditorium, heard some tips for entrepreneurs, some were typical, but with new nuance.

- Guard your cash. "Spend imagination,"where you can, instead of spending. Barter. Give options. (Steve Brotman, Managing Director at Greenhill SAVP talked of offering a landlord 50,000 options to save $2,000 - $3,000 a month on rent. "They don't know how much of the company that is," but they get excited for the chance to be involved.)
- Good advisers
- Get a “rock star” sales person. They’re very rare. Find one, pay him/her what they’re work.
- Don't keep the idea to yourself. Get it out there.
- Don't worry about lawsuits and be overly legalistic. When you're starting, and don't have $1/2 million or $1 million in assets, you won't likely be sued. A plain language agreement is often fine. Brotman said he knew he was going out of bounds to say this.
- Don't be greedy with your equity. Don't be stupid, but to get the right people give enough away to get them invested (and vested) in the project. This also Brotman, who said you could say to a top sales person, as an example, not necessarily literal: "If the company makes $5 million in revenue this year, I'll give you 10 percent."

(Here are some more I've written before, based on Naked Media.)

Crovitz, Brill in New Pay Journalism Project

2009-04-15T12:09:00.004-04:00

Steve Outing today pointed me to Journalism Online, a new attempt to charge for journalistic content. The press release makes it seem they’ll be offering readers a way to pay one price and pick from among paid content they want, and publishers a chance to make their efforts available at a price point they choose. Users will be able to pick stories a la carte, or via subscription. The release frequently mentions newspapers, but also says there are talks with magazines.

The release says ads, alone, can’t and never have paid for quality journalism. Maybe not. And we’ll find out if J.O. is right that Americans will pay for journalism because they understand it needs to be supported. I’m not so sure. They will pay for convenience, ease of use, utility and access they wouldn’t otherwise have.

What will make this work, I think, is from the reader side:

if they can get what they want with ease
if the price point is low enough that convenience outweighs the desire to go hunting for the info elsewhere (think iTunes)
If there are enough publications available
if the content is not commoditized or the kinds of stuff available so many other places that it’s easy to find. (I doubt breaking news or big stories available all over the place will make much money.)

... and for publishers:

the ability to make additional incremental revenue from content they couldn’t get on their own.
strong Incentives to cooperate in the project rather than go it alone, as they’re so used to doing
ease of installation and use
flexible pricing -- Journalism Online is promising to let publishers charge their own prices and adjust them.
data, which J.O. is also promising, to allow quick changes in pricing, story mix, etc. (“Journalism Online will provide reports to member publishers on which strategies and tactics are achieving the best results in building circulation revenue while maintaining the traffic necessary to support advertising revenue.”)
assurance their content won’t be pilfered, will be in an environment they can trust in every sense
enough revenue and revenue share that they’ll feel it’s a fair shake, that J.O. isn’t taking too much of a cut.

I can imagine some arduous negotiations with publishers, many of whom will take the position that their content is invaluable, deserves a higher percentage, and so on. J.O. will have to hold the line and figure out incentives, as well as, perhaps, cut some special deals for must-have publications. I also can’t help but wonder what scale Journalism Online needs to break even. It would seem to be a perfect model from their standpoint -- they are a platform, with relatively low cost, paying nothing to create content, and can scale at little incremental cost. If the application they provide goes on the publisher site, even easier for J.O. The only stipulation for publishers is that they charge for at least some of their content, meaning they can still make much of it free, and, presumably, get the benefits of linking, SEO and the like.

It will be a delicate and difficult balance among all the participants, and finding terms they all can live with. There will have to be adjustments over time. Other experiments along these lines -- including Congoo, in which I was a minor participant -- have not been overwhelming successes. Still, with Gordon Crovitz participating, it could work. He’s the former Wall Street Journal publisher who’s been lionized for helping build the WSJ.com brand to, maybe $100 million per year in subscriptions, a figure Larry Kramer mentioned on Naked Media yesterday (we’re promised the on demand version will be ready this week; check NakedMedia.org).

What media consumer isn’t enticed by the idea of paying one reasonable price and then getting whatever you want from, say, a swathe of subscription newspapers and magazines? This was an attraction of AOL in earlier days (they offered Time Inc. magazines through the service), and got them some added subscriptions. What if we could also add publications from Conde Nast, Meredith, Hearst and others? What if it were also the Financial Times and Wall Street Journal? (But can J.O. really herd all these cats together?) J.O. will have to be significantly less expensive than existing aggregators like Factiva, as well. And, Crovitz had the WSJ to work with -- that’s was a preeminent must-have brand for a well-heeled, info-hungry mobile audience.

The other founders are Court TV and American Lawyer founder Stephen Brill, and former cable exec Leo Hindery.

Ask Larry Kramer - April 14 on Naked Media

2009-04-10T11:34:00.003-04:00

I'll be hosting Larry Kramer, founder of Marketwatch, of CBS' digital media division and really smart media and money guy on the next Naked Media, Tuesday, April 14, from 12:00 - 1:00pm EST.

I'm really excited to have him as a guest. Got a question for him? Send it along in the comments, or email, Tweet, Link In, or mentally beam me through my dental filings with what you'd like to ask. And please watch. You can logon here, now for a reminder and to ask questions or chart directly on the Naked Media show.

It should be a great show. Larry's not only really smart, is not afraid to speak his mind.

Help Price 'Finance for Media Professionals'

2009-04-06T09:25:00.002-04:00

It's surprising to me how difficult it can be not to produce a great seminar but rather to figure out how to price it. Pricing, of course, is a science in itself with people getting Phd's to figure out its ins and outs and teach it at prestigious business schools. My partner at Scribe Media, Peter Cervieri (a graduate of one of those schools), has written a very open post on the Scribe site talking about some discussions he and I have been having about how to price our 'Finance for Media Professionals' video course.

I'd be grateful for your feedback. The post is here. You can comment there or below.

We have to cover our costs, and also want to make the video as widely available as possible. We want to make at least some profit. Price it low, and we might sell more copies. Price it higher, and we may sell fewer but make more money. Those who attended the shoot told us they thought we could charge $149-$179.

Forum: How To Choose The Right Web Publishing Tool

2009-03-31T13:14:00.002-04:00

In my partnership with BGV Media, I'll be helping out with a seminar at the Magazine Publishers of America next Tuesday in New York, being presented by Amy Webb of Webbmedia Group and lead author on our paper on Content Management Systems. She's great. Those attending the seminar also get half-off the paper.

Here's details, on the MPA site, where you can also register and pay.