Slashdot Mirror


Adapt to New Technology or Die

An anonymous reader writes "Yahoo! News is reporting that in a recent speech to fellow stationers and newspaper makers, Rupert Murdoch has stated that the 'newspaper industry needs to embrace the technological revolution of the Internet, MP3 players, laptops and mobile phones or face extinction.'"

18 of 196 comments (clear)

  1. And Then by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The greatest challenge for the traditional media now is to engage with more demanding, questioning and better educated consumers, adapting their products for new technology, the Australian-born media mogul said.

    "There is only one way. That is by using our skills to create and distribute dynamic, exciting content," he said.

    And then the self made man was struck by lightning.

    Seriously, with all the crap this guy has ushered into media, he can say "questioning and better educated consumers" with a straight face?

    Ok, all that aside, I think he's about 6 years late with that rhetoric. Most media are already edging, some hesitantly, others a bit faster, toward embracing new technologies. The core problem is how to make a buck at it. Traditional channels have done very well for him. I can't see them entirely going away.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:And Then by jZnat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If I'm not mistaken, the guy who said this is CEO (or president or something) of News Corp (owns Fox and whatnot), so I think his word should be quite influential to the other broadcasting companies like Time Warner, Turner Broadcasting, Disney, etc.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    2. Re:And Then by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If I'm not mistaken, the guy who said this is CEO (or president or something) of News Corp (owns Fox and whatnot), so I think his word should be quite influential to the other broadcasting companies like Time Warner, Turner Broadcasting, Disney, etc.

      Yeah, but remember, this guy made his fortune before the internet came along.

      Remember Edison talking trash against Tesla? Calling Alternating Current the Devil's something-or-other? Edison was already a success, but felt certain Direct Current was the way to the future. Bugger all the great inventor know about resistance.

      I'm not saying he's an idiot, I just think he's waxing enthusiastic on a technology he really doesn't understand, even after 6 or more years. Some companies do well in it and others founder.

      I like the internet for instant news, but would I pay for it? No. There's too many free outlets.

      Do I click on ads? Once in a while, but most of them are rubbish or things I have no interest in anyway. Perhaps better linking stories to advertising would serve them better. If I'm reading about death in a car bombing I don't think I'm going to be in a mood to look at the new Fords.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:And Then by kfg · · Score: 4, Informative

      I believe it was actually Westinghouse that Edison was trash-talking on AC vs DC.

      Tesla worked for Edison, but left him to work for Westinghouse. Our entire system of electrical power generation and distribution is pretty much the work of a single mind. Tesla's.

      A complaint was lodged at the time that Tesla had left nothing for anyone else to do, although Steinmetz managed to come up with a trick or two.

      And speaking of Steinmetz:

      Murdock doesn't have 1100 patents, for one.

      Neither did Edison, really. His company did. People like Tesla and Steinmetz did most of the real inventing and Edison tacked his name onto the patent application. It was work for hire, just as it is today when working for GE.

      And Murdock is talking about publishing, which is, like, his field and shit. Until recently they didn't even give patents for things like "a method for arrangeing text in columns."

      KFG

  2. Facing Extinction... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The biggest reason that newspapers have it so tough is that the delivery person keeps throwing my newspaper down the hallway. Not near my door, not even at my door, but down the hallway. On Sunday mornings, I find my paper at the bottom of the stairs after the ads been rifled through. Customer service is what needed to save the newspaper industry! I hate to see MP3 players being toss down the hallway...

  3. I'm kinda afraid of this. by AnonymousPrick · · Score: 5, Insightful
    FTFA: But -- and this is a very big but -- newspapers will have to adapt as their readers demand news and sport on a variety of platforms: websites, iPods, mobile phones or laptops.

    What I see happening is that information is being broken down more and more into sound bites and geared more towards the intended audience. For example, you'll hear a completely different take on a story say from Fox as you would from Salon.com. That's assuming they even cover the same stories all the time.

    There's only a few folks who will actually want to read the whole story - whatever it might be. And there's even fewer media outlets that will come out and actually state their leanings. The only one that comes to mind is "The Economist" (they state quite often that they are "a conservative newspaper.").

    --
    Saturday is April 1. Slashdot will be shut down. Sorry for the inconvenience.
    1. Re:I'm kinda afraid of this. by AnotherDaveB · · Score: 5, Informative
      The only one that comes to mind is "The Economist" (they state quite often that they are "a conservative newspaper.").

      Disclaimer - I subscribe to The Economist's online edition, and I think it's a very good publication. (The FT's probably better.:) )

      If by 'conservative' you mean ' [USA] conservative republican', I think you're mistaken. The Economist is primarily a 'free trade' supporter. That very often leads to common cause with the political right, but the allegiance is to 'free trade'

      Another Disclaimer - I let my print subscription to The Economist lapse during the early part of President GW Bush's first term as US President as I thought they had lost sight of this, and their USA coverage was offering fawning paeans to the White House, rather than the [wry] analysis I was paying for.

      The quote below is taken from The Economist's website, so it's their philosophy in their own words.

      What, besides free trade and free markets, does The Economist believe in? "It is to the Radicals that The Economist still likes to think of itself as belonging. The extreme centre is the paper's historical position." That is as true today as when Crowther said it in 1955. The Economist considers itself the enemy of privilege, pomposity and predictability. It has backed conservatives such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. It has supported the Americans in Vietnam. But it has also endorsed Harold Wilson and Bill Clinton, and espoused a variety of liberal causes: opposing capital punishment from its earliest days, while favouring penal reform and decolonisation, as well as--more recently--gun control and gay marriage.

      Lastly, The Economist believes in plain language. Walter Bagehot, our most famous 19th-century editor, tried "to be conversational, to put things in the most direct and picturesque manner, as people would talk to each other in common speech, to remember and use expressive colloquialisms". That remains the style of the paper today.

      Established in 1843 to campaign on one of the great political issues of the day, The Economist remains, in the second half of its second century, true to the principles of its founder. James Wilson, a hat maker from the small Scottish town of Hawick, believed in free trade, internationalism and minimum interference by government, especially in the affairs of the market. Though the protectionist Corn Laws which inspired Wilson to start The Economist were repealed in 1846, the newspaper has lived on, never abandoning its commitment to the classical 19th-century Liberal ideas of its founder.

      The Corn Laws, which by taxing and restricting imports of corn made bread expensive and starvation common, were bad for Britain. Free trade, in Wilson's view, was good for everyone. In his prospectus for The Economist, he wrote: "If we look abroad, we see within the range of our commercial intercourse whole islands and continents, on which the light of civilisation has scarce yet dawned; and we seriously believe that free trade, free intercourse, will do more than any other visible agent to extend civilisation and morality throughout the world - yes, to extinguish slavery itself."

      Wilson's outlook was, therefore, moral, even civilising, but not moralistic. He believed "that reason is given to us to sit in judgment over the dictates of our feelings." Reason convinced him in particular that Adam Smith was right, that through its invisible hand the market benefited profit-seeking individuals (of whom he was one) and society alike. He was himself a manufacturer and wanted especially to influence "men of business". Accordingly, he insisted that all the arguments and propositions put forward in his paper should be subjected to the test of facts. That was why it was called The Economist.

  4. The Google Way by RunFatBoy.net · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Traditional media needs to take a que or two from Google.

    Sergey Brin made the statement once that you need to innovate on all levels including business models. When Google first launched they were just like any other startup, cool technology but no profit model. He was determined to have a profitable business and thus Google Adwords was born.

    The point is this; the migration of print media isn't about just transitioning the text from a paper page to a website. It's about knowing the context of the environment (e.g. interactive) and finding ways to embrace that environment so that the consumer benefits (e.g. more knowledge, entertained, etc) and profits are sustained.

  5. Re:BLEA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Adapt to new anologies or die!

  6. ridiculous by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    old technologies don't die, they just get shoved around and reincarnated in alternate, smaller forms

    take radio. there was once a time when people sat around these giant vacuum tube behemoths listneing to serials like "only the shadow knows"

    tv killed that kind of radio, but radio came back as the medium for music, the golden age of the radi dj

    now in the internet age, and with satellite radio, radio has an even smaller niche. and yet talk shows and drive-time formats still mean radio has a purpose

    old media never dies, it just loses its lustre and fills smaller, less lucrative niches

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  7. Paper Delivery by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Funny
    The biggest reason that newspapers have it so tough is that the delivery person keeps throwing my newspaper down the hallway. Not near my door, not even at my door, but down the hallway. On Sunday mornings, I find my paper at the bottom of the stairs after the ads been rifled through. Customer service is what needed to save the newspaper industry!

    Must be past the end of the Paper Boy Era.

    When I was in my late teens I inherited my older brother's paper route. It was somewhere about 65 customers. As this was my main source of income I took a particularly aggressive view towards growing and maintaining the route. In 3.3 years I had it up to 150+ customers, much to the annoyance of paper boys of neighbouring routes. My parents always sent me out with our paper, just in case I saw someone moving into a new house -- I'd introduce myself and give them the paper free and ask if I could sign them up. I was breaking my back, but I was also raking in some decent cash for a highschool kid. I made certain papers weren't left in wet or could be blown away or anything. When I retired and left for college the newspaper said it was too large a route for any one carrier and split it.

    Now people drive past and chuck papers in the general vicinity of doors. I know what you mean.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  8. Re:Analog data distribution is dead... by nbert · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Clearly, analog data distribution is dead. On the digital side, the importance lies in the method of distribution.
    If this is the case there is no reason to keep publishing newspapers at all, right?

    I believe that newspapers in general have adapted to many new trends in the last decade and that it did more harm than benefit in most cases. IMO the problem for publishers is that they fail to convince young people that they might be better off with a traditional newspaper subscribtion than 20 RSS feeds from various souces. I use both sources and I'm quite often disappointed by the lack of background commentary and information of reputable sites like the bbc or faz.net (the latter is a German site). My guess is that most traditional newspapers and TV networks try to tie new customers to their original services without providing too much information online. This might be contemporary problem and I will cancel my newspaper subscription the moment I believe that there's better information available online. But I'm not in need of a more flashy version of the mediocre online content I'm reading occasionally.
    On the other hand we're talking about Rupert Murdoch here, so there's no new need to complain about a lack of vision (we could discuss how this lack results in high mass circulation afterall, but this is a different topic)
  9. Re:BLEA by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 4, Funny

    Adapt to new anologies or die!

    Adapt to new spelling or die!

    (Sorry)

  10. Sorry Rupert... by carlmenezes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...but until there are some pretty radical advances in power storage, display and user interaction, there will always be a place for the newspaper. You can get the info anywhere, true. But right now, for a really small price, you get a very large "paper screen" with the info on it that you can browse through at your own speed regardless of battery life, internet connectivity and how much space you have around you. Yes, you can get the info in a browser, but have u ever tried lying back in bed and browsing with your laptop or other mobile device? How long is it before you get tired looking at the screen, get tired of the weight or notice the heat? Or how about just get tired of the position you have to be in to use the darn device?

    Until those problems in technology are solved, I'm sorry Rupert, newspapers will not die.

    --
    Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
  11. Re:Analog data distribution is dead... by msobkow · · Score: 4, Funny

    Interesting. I find that most of the online newspapers I read only make a few key headline articles available, not the entire content.

    Besides, I hate dragging a 19" monitor with me to lunch, and people keep tripping on the cables... :)

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  12. Dear Rupert by pandrijeczko · · Score: 5, Funny
    Tens of thousands of years ago, a scruffy bloke with long hair who smelt of rabbit skins & said "Ugh!" rather a lot, was sat in his cave pondering a particular problem - how to move a very heavy rock from point A on the Earth's surface to point B. Although this bloke wasn't to know it at the time, he had to find a way of overcoming the friction that the rock exerted on the Earth's surface due to it's mass and surface area.

    Perhaps more by luck than chance, he found that if he could lever up the rock and place cylindrical logs under it, he could move it...

    Some time later, another bloke less pre-disposed to living in a cave, decided to create circular discs, probably of wood, that could be placed in each corner of a heavy object by connecting them in order to move it easier - and so it was that "the wheel" was born...

    And as we leap forward through the millenia to our present day, we see that the concept of the wheel remains fundamentally unchanged - it's still circular, probably has an axle and is best used in numbers of four or more.

    The wheel, and numerous other technological developments over the centuries, serve to demonstrate that some inventions can be pretty much designed correctly from the time of their inception without the "need" to replace it completely purely for the purposes of technical advancement.

    Besides, as the owner of "The Sun" newspaper in Britain, a journal aimed specifically at those modern-day individuals who are pre-disposed to cavemanhood & writing with crayons, can I suggest that you, sir, are a complete and utter gobshite who is totally out of his depth and has far too much money for his own good.

    In summary, therefore, may I suggest that you continue publishing stories about "Lesbian Vicars" for those knucklescrapers who continue to find amusement for their unicellular brains in your newspaper & leave those of us who are more pre-disposed to understanding technology to make decisions about whether we still want paper newspapers or not.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  13. "24" On Demand? by tholomyes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps he should be taking his own advice. Why can't I get caught up on last week's "24" on On Demand, or iTunes? (Or any other Fox content, for that matter...)

    --
    When did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? -C. Palahniuk
  14. Newspapers have adapted - in the wrong direction by tentimestwenty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think newspapers have completely changed with the times and as a result they have shallow articles targeted at young idiots. The result is that the entire demographic that actually wants to read newspapers has been turned off. The newspaper I want today is the one we had 40 years ago. Well-researched news and human interest stories about local and international topics. Enough meat so that you can consider yourself informed and have a discussion with another person. Even the NYT reads like the USA Today.

    If newspapers just provided the service they were good at and didn't try to chase the technological trends there would be plenty of people to read them.