The Dwindling Magnate

November 4, 2009

With Time Warner’s earning reports coming in, Time Inc. will start to reveal details about planned layoffs.

The magazine division’s revenue dropped 18 percent (to $914 million) in the third quarter, with a 22 percent decline in advertising revenue and a 13 percent decline in subscription revenue.

Time Inc. will therefore take a $100 million restructuring charge in the fourth quarter, which they hope will balance out $100 million in cuts.

“As Time Warner noted in the 3Q results announcement earlier today, Time Inc. has begun a restructuring program that will result in a charge of up to $100 million,” Time Inc. spokeswoman Dawn Bridges said in a statement. “While advertising remains challenged, readers continue to value print publications and affiliated websites. This restructuring will allow us to most efficiently focus our resources on the creation of compelling content at our world class titles. Unfortunately, given the tough market conditions, this restructuring will mean a loss of jobs. We wish our departing colleagues and friends the very best with their future projects.”

Another possible option is a buyout. Employees who are members of the Newspaper Guild get two weeks’ severance for each year of service, and non-Guild employees are being offered similar packages, said a source that refused to be identified. In essence, every employee in New York State, whether covered by the Guild or not, should be offered an additional 13 weeks of pay.

It is up to the individual magazines to decide when to start the layoffs, based on their publication and vacation schedules, the source said. But employees at People, Time, Money, Fortune, Fortune Small Business, and Sports Illustrated require at least two weeks to consider buyout offers, and the company expects to complete most of the layoffs by Thanksgiving.

Time Inc. states it will not be closing any magazines despite having closed Southern Accents and Time Style & Design earlier this year.

Here’s my two cent: converge into online media instead of print? It’s a risky move, but who knows… Maybe it could save the company money. Sure, it would still mean firing employees and making cuts, but empires are built on labour, blood and tears, are they not?

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/more-layoff-plans-trickle-out-at-time-inc/#more-18199

Stephanie Clifford

French Wrath

October 22, 2009

France threw itself into the same fray as Britain did a while ago over digital piracy. But unlike Britain, France appears as the vanguard of the global battle since it approved a plan to deny Internet access to people who illegally copy music and movies.

The country approved a so-called three-strikes law after rejecting the key portions of an earlier version last spring. Supporters say they hope that France will set a precedent for other countries to follow whereas the UK failed to do so with its leaner ruling of slowing down internet for repeated offenders.

“France is acting as a spearhead,” said David El Sayegh, director general of the Syndicat National de l’Édition Phonographique, the French music industry association. “Piracy is not just a French problem, it is a global problem.”

Yet as with the UK case, critics call the measures draconian and that they will be ineffective in curbing file-sharing, or in converting pirates into customers of legitimate digital media businesses. They argue that disconnecting Internet accounts is unfair because of the increasing importance of the Web as a venue for commerce and political expression.

People like Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesman for La Quadrature du Net (a group that had campaigned against the law) thinks that it’s a sad day in France for internet liberty and that opponents of the law would hopefully seek new ways to subvert it.

The law creates a new agency that will send out warning letters to people accused of copying music, movies or other media content illegally via the Internet. Those who ignore a second warning and copy files illegally a third time could face yearlong suspensions of their Internet access, as well as fines.

The court reviewed the previously failed proposal because of a challenge by the opposition Socialist Party following parliamentary approval in September. The reversal is a big victory for President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose wife, Carla Bruni, a singer and model, had championed the measure.

The main difference between the initial proposal and the version approved Thursday is that a judge, rather than the new agency itself, will be required to sign off on any account suspensions. Without that protection, the court had said, the law would have violated free-speech protections.

Across Europe, policy makers have been wary about embracing “three strikes” solutions. Critics say disconnecting people’s Internet access is inconsistent with many governments’ stated objective of increasing broadband penetration.

The government has estimated that the law could result in sanctions against 50,000 people a year according to some leaked reports.

As I followed the Britain case, I can safely say that the French are once again moving to drastic measures where less hostiles ones could be taken. The downloading mentality has been around for many years now and the governments are putting down official sanctions whereas moral shame was previously the only deterrent against a frowned upon action. I find it repulsive that governments are going to such lengths and suddenly making thousands into “criminals”.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/technology/23net.html

Eric Pfanner

P2P Leak Creates Frenzy

November 7, 2009

We all use technology without truly knowing the means of how it works and the same can be said for Members of Congress who enjoy sharing music on the Internet. Sadly for them, they’re  learning the hard way about the potential dangers of peer-to-peer software.

It turns out that a House ethics committee staffer did not know that P2P would prove insecure and he ended up leaking a secret list of lawmakers facing ethics investigations.  The staffer ignored policy and brought the sensitive information home, hence creating the instant brouhaha. Many are now rallying behind Representative Edolphus Towns, chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, who has been warning the American nation for the past nine years about the insecurity of P2P software both for private users and government workers.  

Such blatant leaks of the past also include the revealing of the location of the First Family’s safe house and schematics of the presidential helicopter’s electronic system. Many military members have had their personal records disclosed and even those of a Mafia hit man.   

The software is so popular that about 20 million users are estimated to be on file-sharing networks at any given moment. It’s only now that concerned individuals are heading Mr. Towns’s argument for legislating a ban on recreational file-sharing that does not clearly warn users that it makes it possible for determined filchers to download official, financial, medical and family secrets stored on a user’s computer.

“The days of self-regulation should be over for the file-sharing industry,” Mr. Towns states, hoping that Congress will act.

Though I agree that such regulations should be put in place as to prevent random files from being made available from P2P, I would expect that people would actually click that they’d rather select which file they’d make available for sharing upon the installation of a P2P program… It’s simply logic. That’s what I anyway: only content I select from my own computer or files that I have downloaded will be made public.

I think there’s just a lack of true ignorance from the general populace. Yes, laws should be made to protect sensitive information, but individuals themselves should actually learn to use certain systems on their computers before clicking on any options that pop up… After all, you wouldn’t let someone without any driving skills drive a car. So why should people be allowed to use computers when they don’t know the damage they might be causing?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/opinion/08sun4.html

Author unnamed

Card-Carrying Movies

by Rachel Croft

Now that online video streaming has become a popular method in which individuals view their videos, both legally and illegally, video rental stores have been trying to find a way to increase revenue.

Blockbuster has recently launched a new plan for movie rentals on SD cards. Customers will be able to purchase an SD card for $1.99 with the film on it, and a digital rights management (DRM) that will allow the customer to start the film within 30 days and when the movie starts, they will have 48 hours to watch the video.

So far, Blockbusters new idea is facing some concern.  Some laptops do not have an SD card slot and many televisions do not have them as well. Paramount pictures will also begin selling films on USB memory sticks. There is also the concern that physical media will have no future, and the venue of video rental stores will soon be a part of the past. Media and technology can be an unpredictable phenomenon, so no one knows yet what the result of this venture will be!

Williams, Stephen. “Card-Carrying Movies”, The New York Times, November 11th, 2009.

Cleaning Up the Clutter Online

by Rachel Croft

We’ve all been there. You’re surfing on the internet and are constantly bombarded with banners, promotions or flashing and animated advertisements, which will often distract you from the content you are reading or the video that you’re watching (illegally, I might add). Fear not media junkies, for the days of pesky advertisements are gone with the click of a button.

Thanks to Readability, a free website tool that allows you to change the layout of a webpage might just become my new favourite internet tool.  You just install Readability into your web browser and drag its button onto your toolbar to remove the annoying advertisements and banners from the webpage. It also gives you the option of choosing a background, the font and text size so that the page is simpler, looking like a printed book page or an e-reader page.

Readability won’t snatch away advertisement costs either. When you open up a new page, the advertisements still show up before you click the Readability button.

I can see the Readability tool becoming a big hit, especially for the older generations who just want a simple webpage layout that they can read. It’s a beautiful thing.

Pogue, David. “Cleaning Up the Clutter Online”. The New York Times, November 6th 2009.

NBC = 30 billion dollars?

Reuters reports that General Electric has been in talks with Comcast to get rid of NBC Universal. They’ve both agreed that the value of the television network is worth 30 billion dollars. So if plans go all the way through, Comcast will own 52% of a major American network. Howeveer, Vivendi, a French media conglomerate that owns 20% of NBC Universal, has been delaying the sell-off plans.  They’re trying to get the bets value for their 20%, understandably. However, they say they’re eager to get rid of the share.

Although the deal have yet to be made, the media is reporting that it will most likely go through by the end of the month.  Convergence is the key word of the day. Comcast, a cable/internet/telephone provider might have it’s very own television network. This is really one of the final nails in the coffin for the big networks who have been struggling to keep up against cable.

I suppose the big question worth asking viewers of television would be is NBC truly worth 30 billion dollars? To quote Whitney Houston, “Hell to the no!” That’s only my personal opinion of course but I mean, I guess they’re buying the name more than anything. WELL, I guess Comcast truly just wants a platform to spread their ideology and influence and NBC seems to be the only network that’s on the verge of being sold. NBC’s problem is not something that can be turned around with simply a new ownership, however. NBC is probably the leading network to posting their content for free online. And even THEN, they’re having problems. So of course the medium isn’ the only problem, the audience is also completely fragmented. Let’s be honest, the tv shows are really where the problem lies. Programming lacks the quality it once had and content needs to be changed, renewed and rethought. No more “incompetant fat guy with a smart skinny wife” tv shows, please.

Jui Chakravorty Das, Nov 9, Reuters

http://www.reuters.com/article/innovationNews/idUSTRE5A801F20091109

Amazonian Idle

November 10, 2009

Amazon, the behemoth of the book industry, bumped knees with book agents. According to Matthew Flamm at Crain’s New York Business, Amazon flew a dozen of New York’s top literary agents out to its headquarters to suggest that its aggressive discounting of books and sales of e-books is designed to help the business of publishing, not destroy it.

According to one participant, the aim of the meetings was for Amazon to “explain itself” to the agent community, because its members fear that e-books could bring down the print industry in a way that file sharing is bringing down legal methods of acquiring online content.

Agents and publishers are worried that the standard price for most e-books will undermine an industry accustomed to getting more for popular books. When word of the summit filtered back to New York, publishers could not help but wonder if there might have been something else on the agenda: a direct relationship between Amazon and representatives of authors that might leave traditional book publishers out in the cold.

News of the meetings fuelled many suspicions that Amazon might be trying to get agents on its side in the battle over e-book publication dates. Some in the publishing community wonder if Amazon might be trying to go around publishers to make direct e-book deals with major authors.

“We asked them, ‘Are you going to make deals directly?’” said Lynn Nesbit, co-head of Janklow & Nesbit. “They said no.”

According to people who were there, most of the talk was about the implications in regards to Kindle and how it could benefit all the players in publishing as more and more e-books are sold.

As a former librarian, I can understand the book industry’s worries. For me, there’s nothing like buying a new book and setting down to read it with a nice cup of tea on a rainy afternoon. I’d much prefer holding an actual book in my hands than a device that runs on batteries. True, the machine might be slimmer than some bulkier books, but if it runs out of energy, it’s done for. Whereas all you need for a regular book is a source of light, no matter how dim.

True, some people might call me a hypcryte for reading comic books online instead of reading the paper copies, but there’s a big difference: I will buy and read the old stuff from the 60s up to the mid 90s. Stuff nowadays just makes me mad and I’d rather not have to pay for content I truly don’t agree with.

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/amazon-and-agents-friendly-chat-or-workaround/

by David Carr

Rupert Murdoch to block Google searches

The Guardian reports that NewsCorp CEO Rupert Murdoch may try to block The Wall Street Journal and some of his other e-newspapers from appearing in Google News. Murdoch states that Google is a “kletomanic parasite” for using NewsCorp content on their news feed. People who use the very free Google News have access to  full articles from the Wall Street Journal, something that is not even capable on the WSJ website (you only get the first paragraph on the site). Of course, NewsCorp is not pleased about this since you must subscribe to the site for content.

So they’re losing money, they want people to pay for their content online and Google provides a way in for free. Murdoch is very keen on getting people to pay (literally) for access so this comes as no surprise. Murdoch says he want to block Google and non-subscribed users all together with a wall that goes “all the way to the ceiling”. Well, that’s great to hear on the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Such news is so significant when it comes to traditional media outlets (and their CEOs) not understanding or being able to read a new generation and a new medium’s users. They have very little idea what we like, what we want and how we want to access it.  It shows how out of touch billionaire media moguls truly are. A corporation is trying to block the outside world (ok, the non-paying world) from viewing it’s content. Google uses the “fair use” rule when justifying why they are allowed to legally aggregate news from a series of websites. Fair use basically says that if it’s on the internet, Google has the right to use it in their search results.

Hey, Rupert, while you were playing tennis in the Hamptons did you ever learn about internet piracy and how people will NOT want to pay for things? No? I didn’t think so. That’s why you bought Myspace in it’s dying years for 500 million dollars.

Bobby Johnson, November 9th, The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/nov/09/murdoch-google

Coming soon to a computer screen near you…

There’s a new sheriff in town and his name is…Hulu. “The online video service Hulu added a long-overdue feature last week: A ‘coming soon’ page designed to give the site’s millions of users a heads-up about when they’ll be able to watch the next new episode of ‘Fringe’ or ‘Parks and Recreation’ in their Web browsers. Ever since it launched in 2007, as a joint offering by News Corp. and NBC Universal, the site has been remarkable for its way of enhancing the channel-surfing experience with some of the added frills of Web surfing. Got a favorite show coming up? You can now get Hulu to send you an e-mail reminder.”

Isn’t technology a beautiful thing? I’d like to think that for some part, it makes us less dependent and adapts itself to us. And in this case, it can only make things better for us. Now pretend that I am an American, living in the good old U.S.A. and that I actually have access to this beautiful piece of technology, how could I not use it? If there’s internet and a need for it, consumers will definately want in on this product and why wouldn’t they? It lets you access what you want, when you want and it’s free! It can’t get much better than that, now can it? Until now, where they’ve added a ‘coming soon’ section where you are able to see what’s in store for you in the coming weeks! Crazy right? The computer seems to be more and more like the television and honestly, I’m finding it not to be such a bad thing, at least when it comes to this. So bring it, the more content online, the more I’ll be able to watch on my time, when I want, and this, I want!

Musgrove, Mike, November 08, 2009, The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/06/AR2009110604756.html?wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

Pro-Rape Facebook group gets shut down

Facebook recently shut down a group dedicated to anti-consent and pro-rape which made by “elite” (frat boys) males from the University of Syndey. The group existed for a few months before finally being shut down by the New South Wales police sex crimes unit. The group has been deemed described as “grooming perpetrators of sexual violence” since the message is so openly hateful, offensive, misogynistic and repulsive to name a few.

It’s so disturbing to know that there’s a group of men out there who have the capability to join together in a public group to support their twisted views on rape. This is one of the bad parts of Facebook. It’s so large that it’s hard to monitor everything constantly and since users generate their own content, it can’t possibly all be controlled by the moderators and site filters. Not all of the networking site is this messed up but on occasion, all it takes is a few frat boys to make you think twice about the use of the website. Hopefully this can be used as a learning experience and will not influence more young men into thinking it’s ok to rape women.

Granted, just because there is a pro rape group does not mean we can judge the rest of society and say every male in university is anti-consent. University students are sheltered/cocooned from the rest of society, in a sense. They stay amongst their smal group of friends, operate in their own spaces and have a similar group mentality. They make their own rules for what they think is appropriate and are often heavily influenced by their friends and not the outside world. There’s  a lot of partying and binge drinking involve in university so it’s no surprised a group of morons, I mean students, got together and made this group.

Ruth Pollard, November 9th, Sydney Morning Herald

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/elite-college-students-proud-of-prorape-facebook-page-20091108-i3js.html