Bloggasm

Here are some media-related links for your amusement:

1. There have been times when people have emailed me and in the email itself declared something “off the record.” Though so far I’ve honored these requests, I think this is a very dangerous thing to do. Going off the record is a mutual agreement between journalist and interview subject — not a one-way street. I especially detest it when people speak in front of large groups of reporters and declare the conversation off-the-record. It’s a silly thing to do because it’s very difficult to contain that within such a large number of reporters. It looks as if at least one reporter has grown fed-up with these practices and refuses to go off the record whenever Obama requests it.

2. CNBC has grown worried that its viewers will be lured away by the boobs of Fox News female correspondents, so now they’re requiring their own females to change their wardrobes accordingly.

3. Adage has successfully predicted the new corporate logo for Microsoft once it buys Yahoo:

4. A reporter from Politico talks about his experience covering the media, and his having to walk a tightrope and not burn any bridges in the process. That is, the reporter he’s criticizing might one day be an editor with hiring authority.

5. Wow, who knew a weekly college newspaper could get this intense?

6. The New York Times vs the entire blogosphere. Who will win?

7. I’ve written before about the creepy online group known as anonymous. Now it appears that not only are they going after individuals in the Church of Scientology, they’re not too accurate in their targets.

8. Remember the Youtube phenomenon known as Obama Girl? She didn’t even vote in her state’s primary.

9. A comprehensive look at the trials and tribulations of the newspaper advertising industry.

In a post in December, I predicted that the lack of new content on television because of the Writers Guild of America strike would cause new opportunities to open up for online video. I went so far as to recommend that some WGA writers ditch television all together and try their hands at writing and producing content for online.

As the BBC reports, “YouTube’s audience was up 18% in the two months after the strike started, and newer video-sharing sites such as Crackle have also experienced unprecedented growth.”

“That is greater growth than you would normally see in such a short period and the strike could be a possible factor,” said Nielsen analyst Alex Burmaster.

I can’t help but wonder if other forms of internet content have benefited as well. My readership has visibly increased, but that’s probably because I’ve become more proactive in posting content.

Has anyone else experienced an inexplicable bump in traffic?

***
Related posts:
1. The continuing transition of AOL
2. Youtube still dominates online video industry by wide margins
3. Youtube’s revenue sharing

Though the arguments surrounding the Writers Guild of America strike are often complex and involve a good deal of number crunching and indepth knowledge of the DVD and online advertising market, one of the most salient demands that have made it into the media echo chamber is that writers want a cut of the profits made from the internet.

Many journalists, particularly newspaper journalists, have likely watched this debate with some interest. After all, we’re still having to figure out how to adapt to the online world ourselves, particularly when it comes to online advertising. Print advertising is shrinking, and though the online ad market is growing, it’s not quick enough. Not only that, but a good bit of it is getting sucked up by Google.

Dozens, if not hundreds, of media stories have pointed out already that the internet, the very thing being argued over, is helping to fuel support for the striking writers. They have unleashed a barrage of Youtube videos attacking the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, often employing the very writing skills that they use in their day jobs.

Part of the reason for this success is the low bar for entry: It costs very little to produce a six minute video and load it onto Youtube and then feed it through the appropriate channels. Imagine the WGA trying to do this with video tapes, the subject of the 1988 strike. The cost of production and distribution of video tapes would have been too costly to be effective.

So this leads us to the next logical step: If the internet is supposedly so profitable, and the cost for entry is so low, then why don’t some WGA members just bypass the producers completely and write solely for online content?

According to an AP article titled “Striking Writers Gravitate to Web,” some writers might do just that. “The operators of Internet entertainment sites such as MyDamnChannel, Break, Heavy and others have a message for striking writers – give us a look,” the article states. “Many writers are doing just that, with the hope of retaining total creative control over their work and collecting as much as half of all revenue – a potentially sweet deal compared to a typical TV gig.”

So now the AMPTP has a second problem to deal with in regards to the strike: Not only are they losing potential profits, they’re also losing potential talent. And the longer the WGA is on strike, the more writers who might try their hands at online video production.

Something tells me that this strike will not only have a strong effect on the television and movie industry, but the rise of professional online video content as well. Look out Video-of-a-Cute-Cat-in-a-Tree, the Big Guns have entered the saloon.

***
Related posts:
1. The art of celebrity profiling
2. Reality TV show overstates its effects?
3. Republican politicians don’t understand the internet
4. Youtube’s revenue sharing
5. Youtube still dominates online video industry by wide margins

Hitwise just released a study that shows that YouTube has 50% More Traffic than Other Video Sites Combined.

***

Related posts: Video of the day: Bring me the head of Charlie Brown

Everyone who follows online media closely has been watching to see how Youtube’s revenue sharing programs will work out. There’s something awesome about the idea of becoming an online video star using Web 2.0 and being able to make a living out of it. So far, Youtube/Google has been hushed about how this revenue-sharing would work, but Tech Blorge has an article about a 20-year-old who received a deal for his online dating show.

Of course it doesn’t say how much money he’ll be receiving. I’ll be interested to see how many people go from short film youtube careers to larger movie and television roles.