I've been online since 1995 (pre-Netscape) and consider
myself a creature of the Web (obsession to e-mail, willingness to try just
about any Web 2.0 application/service, blog-oholic, etc.) but I was blown away
impressed earlier today by a presentation given by Jeff Cole, who
is director of the USC Annenberg School Centre for the Digital Future. (The
event was sponsored by eBay). Cole is heading up an ongoing study looking at
how the growth and growing use of the Internet impact what people do online and
offline. The audience, which is pretty Web-savvy, was entranced by some of the
findings that Cole presented. For a newspaper journalist, however, it was a
little depressing because Cole believes newspapers face a declining future over
the next 20 to 30 years. Rather than read a newspaper, people will more and
more of their information from the Web. So what does this mean for newspapers?
Well, it means they need to leverage their brands and credibility to create Web
sites/services that generate revenue. Cole also had some ominous news for
television industry. He argues television advertising has been in decline since
the 1970s when the remote emerged as the way to consume television. A
particularly troublesome reality is only 5% of people actually watch television
commercials. Does this mean product placements will be the new way to reach
consumers? No. So what does the television industry do to survive? Cole said if
he knew the answer, he'd be on his private island rather than giving
presentations in Toronto
in late-March. In any event, it was a fascinating presentation that rasised
more questions than answers. If there was any consolation from Cole's
presentation is he touched on many of the questions and areas (business,
politics, marketing, advertising) we'll be trying to answer at the mesh conference on May 15/16.
Update: I'll augment this post on Sunday with some more facts and figures.
Are Blogs Coming In From the Cold?
My column in the National Post this week takes a look at Time Inc.'s recent hiring of Andrew Sullivan and Ana Marie Coxe to write for the magazine and the Web site. The big question is whether Time's embrace of blogging and bloggers suggest blogging is coming out from the cold. If this is, in fact, happening, how do newspapers and magazines leverage blogs without institutionalizing them? In other words, how do they absorb blogs into their traditional ways of operating (editing, hours or days before they appear) and culture without affecting the vitality and personality of blogs? If newspapers and magazines try to institutionalize blogs, then they risk losing the essence of what makes blogs work. That said, there are forward-thinking newspapers. In a recent study, NYU said the Guardian has established a good reputation as one of the leading blogging newspapers in the world, while NYU recently cited the Houston Chronice, USA Today and Washington Post. Meanwhile, NYU said Canada – surprise, surprise – is lagging behind.
Zennstrom Bails on VON Canada; Vonage Savaged
This shouldn't really come as a surprise but Niklas Zennstrom has pulled out of his VON Canada keynote that was scheduled for next week.(hat tip to Jim Courtney). He'll be replaced by Stefan Oberg (who?), Skype's v.p. of product development. Zennstrom's disappearing act comes days after Skype, Janis Friis and Zennstrom were sued under RICO laws by Streamcast. Given the sensitivities of a lawsuit, the idea of Zennstrom giving a keynote must have benn quickly killed by eBay's P.R. folks and its lawyers. This is yet another big blow for VON Canada, which saw Vonage decide not to participate because its Canadian P.R. firm apparently doesn't think VON has enough of a consumer angle. Needless to say, the VON folks are not pleased given VON founder Jeff Pulver was one of Vonage's co-founders. It's also curious to see Pulver isn't kicking off VON Canada. Instead, sidekick Carl Ford will give the opening remarks.
Update: Speaking of Vonage, CNN/Money has a story suggesting Vonage is shopping itself, which may explain why its IPO has been filed for two months. The potential buyers, according to CNN/Money, are Sprint, Verizon and Qwest. Om Malik hits the nail on the head when he asks if there's little interest in the IPO, why would there be any interest in an acquisition. Meanwhile, Alec Saunders weighs in with a blunt post – “Worst IPO Candidate of This Year?” – looking at the bad economics of the VoIP markets – lots of competition, lower prices. Saunders concludes it would represent the “ultimate triumph of greed and stupidity over common sense” for anyone who buys into the IPO or acquires Vonage. That's harsh, Alec, but oh so true!
Rejoice Couch Potaotes: Slingbox Goes Live in Canada
After months of speculation – well, at least a couple blog posts and bunch of click-throughs – the Slingbox is being sold in Canada. So rush down to your local Future Shop, Best Buy or London Drugs store and slap down C$299. I had big plans to install my Slingbox last weekend but had to put things on hold after realizing it would take some time – and involve the brainpower and patience of my younger, tech-savvy brother.
Google's Insatiable Appetite for Cash
So Google is raising another $2-billion to meet demand as it prepares to join the S&P 500. Why? The company already has a $8-billion war chest so it's not like it needs the money. And if index-focused investors have obligated to buy stock for their portfolios does it mean Google has to play nice and accommodate them? So what's Google thinking? The last time the company tapped the markets for cash, it used $1-billion to buy a 20% 5% a stake in AOL. Susquehanna Financial Group analyst Marianne Wolk thinks Google could be looking to enhance its presence in Asia through a strategic investment or acquisition. Another possibility, she said, is a “massive investment” in storage for Web developers along the lines what Amazon is doing with its S3 Storage Service. Then, there's Wi-Fi and the rumours Google is looking to launch an advertising-support, nation-wide network. In any event, Google now has $10-billion of cash on the balance sheet so something has to be going on. Given how close Larry and Sergey hold their strategic cards to the vest, we'll likely only find out when the a deal is unveiled.
Update: BuyGoogle has an intriguing – and detailed post – on whether Google might use its cash hoard to acquire Amazon.com.
The RIAA's Russian Nemesis
While the RIAA has been on a legal jihad in recent years, a growing number of consumers have been using allofMP3.com. The Russian-based service sells albums for $1 to $2.50 – depending on their popularity and the bitrate quality selected. Apparently, the company has been allowed to operate because of Russian copyright legislation, which lets "phonograms be performed publicly without the authorization of the copyright owner for broadcasting and cable transmission". If the music industry was pissed off with allofMP3 before, they'll be even more agitated with the release of alltunes – a desktop and mobile interface that makes it even easier to find and download music. TechCrunch has an overview on the new application.
 While allofMP3 can argue it's protected by Russian copyright rules, I wonder whether they protect consumers in North America? How do U.S. copyright rules, for example, apply to music downloaded from another country? In Canada – despite the claims of the music industry – downloading is still quasi-legal until the copyright rules over overhauled or clarified. A contentious issue in Canada is the levy regime, which slaps a "tax" on products used to record digital content such as hard drives, CD-Rs and audio cassette tapes. These fees, in theory, are supposed to compensate the music industry for loss sales but it doesn't work because music downloading is still wildly popular in the Great White North. For more on the controversial levy regime, IT Business ran a story on it earlier this month. You can also find a treasure trove of information on the issue on Michael Geist's blog.
