Saturday, June 01, 2013

Why Gannett is chasing Web video more than ever

From a Barron's magazine story about Google's rosy prospects, out today (paid subscription required):

The average person recently spent 13.1 hours a month watching videos online, up sharply from 8.4 hours two years ago, yet the fast-growing Internet segment accounts for just 20% of global advertising spending (versus, say, 41% for traditional television).

Earlier: Corporate wants newspaper reporters producing more videos.

12 comments:

  1. Why Jim is chasing his tail more than ever (get it?):

    No donors.
    Few sponsors.
    No news.
    No analysis (unless you hold the ysis).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is interesting how his "insiders" aren't there anymore. He hasn't been ahead of a story in more than a year.

      Delete
  2. Unfortunately, nobody is there anymore at Gannett that cares. A sign of the times.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It doesn't take an insider to see dominoes falling...

    ReplyDelete
  4. 12:17 and 2:24 - and your point is what? So what? It doesn't matter who's first with any inside information. I agree with 12:27am. It doesn't take an insider or a rocket scientist to see the direction this company is headed. Just wait to Q3 and Q4.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Making excuses for passive reporting. I get it. I just don't genuflect like 7:55

      Delete
  5. wait a minute... i see it coming... some sheep will send in 25 cents and yay! Jim will celebrate it in a blog entry while validating his existence! But hold on folks, he still needs your contributions! Send those nickels in NOW!

    ReplyDelete
  6. How did this whole tread turn into bashing the blog?

    Anyhow, people may spend x hours watching videos online, but it's already been shown that they're not spending that much time watching news videos. It's more likely they're watching dumb cat videos, viral videos and people getting hit in the crotch with various blunt objects. So, to chase this audience with news video is not going to yield the results they're looking for.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly right, that is why it says Googles rosy prospects because they own YouTube. This isn't a rosy picture for Gannett a Newspaper company that still gets most of it's revenue from print.

      Delete
  7. It's because there is no one left to write news stories!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Each video is preceded by a targeted ad which pays more than the ever ignorable banner ad. I'm on board with video because this is a digital world and like it or, the painful lesson for this industry is evolve or die. Having said that, they have to be decent videos or readers will ignore them. I've seen videos I've produced have a long shelf life on line than the "print" story they accompany.
    That doesn't mean I advocate the elimination of print, because there is only so much information you can cram in a 1:30 to 2 minute video before people tune out.
    But when it's time to buy the second generation of equipment, we need iPhones with more memory (video eats a lot of memory and the 8 gig doesn't cut it) and some sort of zoom feature or attachment (even Target will sell you an add on lens.
    As for the Jim bashers, collect your $5 from corporate and crawl in a hole. The rank and file appreciate what he does,

    ReplyDelete
  9. The problem with the targeted ads is that many people are like me, they don't want to see the damn ad so they click off the video and leave the website.

    I've discovered this happening to more and more information websites. Videos come up when you open a page and force an ad upon you. That's obnoxious and enough to make me get the hell off the site. You don't keep people on your website this way.

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.