Jeff Jarvis (Minneapolis, 1954) is primarily a journalist with chameleon journalist. After going through the newsrooms of Chicago Tribune and San Francisco Examiner founded Entertainment Weekly , one of the reference journals in the cultural field. He was one of the first journalists to cover atentandos 11S; caught him around and when everyone ran, he went to interview the victims. He regrets the experience, but maintains that his career changed that day.
It was the moment when he realized that a chronic closed no longer good, you had to constantly update information on popular demand. This opened a blog, Buzzmachine , which brings 100,000 daily readers. His passion for experimenting led him to inform day-to-day evolution of prostate cancer was diagnosed in 2009 and is now recovered.
Focusing on education and technology dissemination, Big Media is the raffle as a consultant. Google has brought to Madrid to participate in Big Tent, where he will provide his vision on new business models for media. And of course, to stoke the rate Google days before approval
Question. You come to Spain in a moment of turmoil for the media. Catches us looking business models and also these days we deal with Google rate. Are you aware
Answer: I am aware of this reality and also I do not like. Moreover, it upsets me. It seems that Spain is following in the footsteps of Germany and is sticking with it in the hole. The situation is such that incumbents who feel threatened are choosing to take refuge in the foothills of the Government. These initiatives, which primarily seek to undermine the competition, I do not look very good.
Q .: This is to tax the ‘link’, right?
R .: Sure! It is breaking the link , which is equivalent to breaking the Internet, as killing the network. These initiatives Spain may end up being considered hostile territory for innovation, investment, and ultimately to technology. I fear for the situation in Spain.
Q .: Given the crucial role that Google, Facebook, Twitter and other actors known as ‘over the top’, do you think that is precise special regulation, if only to maintain its neutrality?
A .: I think it is a great mistake to regulate specific technologies or companies. Look what happened with Microsoft: they said they were going to rule the world and finally put them in the market place. Technologies change and undertakings, and all we have is to regulate human behavior. It is illegal to steal in real life and in life is online , as is impersonating someone. There is no reason to specifically regulate the internet. The law already exists.
Q .: I have a feeling that the mainstream media internet conceived as a new way for doing business without the need to respect the essence of the medium
R .: What happened to the mainstream media is that they have transplanted their uses and business models to the Internet without any adaptation. Obviously this is not working, and we’re still drawing lessons from it, it’s like an ongoing project we have.
The big media are accustomed to treating their audience not as individuals but as fragments of mass . Internet is not about this, but the value. . The mainstream media focus on the advertisers, and advertisers looking volume, but the internet is not volume, it’s basically value
Q .: Will the newsroom of 400 viable journalists?
A .: In general the technology means efficient, and that is resulting in massive loss of jobs, including in the press. It’s the story: some work while others disappear arise. We do not know how this will end.
In any case, the dismissed journalists are faced with a great opportunity. I’m talking about launching your own company, your own media.
Q .: A question that they have ever done. When paper die?
R .: I do not know, because there is still value in the paper. The media still living paper to be marked a date for the end of printing. When that time comes they must be sure to have a 100% digital and 100% profitable. If by then you have not achieved it will be too late for them.
Q .: We are experiencing a global transition from paper to digital, which houses another transition from desktop to mobile format. Both are unfinished. What a mess
A .: We are getting a world that was shoveled into another that has nothing to do. Books, newspapers and magazines are still a recognizable format that keeps
Consider this. They spent 150 years since Gutenberg invented the printing press until the first newspaper was printed. One hundred and fifty years. The press as we know it will be at the level of the barkers, as primitive. We are not yet able to get an idea of how and how much they will change the news. Furthermore, it is not so much about giving people content, but the context, community, understand what the needs of this community and learn to meet them.
Q .: Are you a university professor. I, who consider myself young even trained typographer blessed me with. They were completely useless five years. Tell me that things have changed
R .: (Laughs) My university has a year, so we have to consider itself as a startup . While in other universities, for example, we let the students the first year escogiesen between television, radio or newspapers. We saw that this was a mistake, because all students need to learn about all media.
Look, before there was Twitter and today is a leading tool journalism. We have founded, nothing, a course in social media, which is based on journalism for a community of readers. Technology changes very quickly, so that curricula must do it even faster.
Q .: Speaking of social journalism …. ¿die cover as we know it in favor of access social networks?
R .: The cover is dead. In places like The New York Times they are concerned that only 10% of readers served by its cover, when this percentage was nothing twice. There are news sites that do not even have cover because they know that traffic comes to them from other sites.
Q .: Does this mean that we will stop journalists set the agenda and the reader will take over?
R .: Good question. I mentioned before: this is the goal of social media, pressing the needs of a community. If we consider journalism as a content factory, come evil. The new journalism should be focused on public service, to report what matters.
Q .: The media are exploring new business models such as the ‘paywall’ or ‘branded content’ and that normal advertising is not holding large corporations. Have opted for one in particular?
R .: Advertising has become a commodity, a commodity. Before the model was based on scarcity, the need to obtain information from the city, and now is based on abundance. So what we have to offer is worth; we can not continue based on volumes and clicks , but nobody better serve our readers. On this basis we have to find new sources of revenue, but it is important not to forget.
I’m not necessarily against the paywall . Can be used to sell a book, but I think that the paywall be a long term option for the press. There are newspapers like The Guardian or New York Times using other formulas as models for partners or organizing events. What we can not hope to finance very great essays in these media with such vertical hierarchy; because those companies no longer exist. An ideal scenario would be that they would employ the same number of journalists but many smaller headers.
Q .: In this regard, has left the details to be a packaged product to become a subject premium, as it should always be?
R .: Information is a commodity , but not journalism. There is a great scholar in University of Southern Denmark, Tom Pettitt, who speaks of the Gutenberg parenthesis. Before printing, the information conveyed by word of mouth, without control or business or authors. We have now become a bit this time.
Journalism is not a raw material while adding value. How? Confirming sources, for example. Or explaining the context. Or making a barren information accessible to a majority.
Q .: Internet is not only the platform. In Spain, with the advent of new media, have fallen curtains as ancestral steel that protected the Royal Family
R .: I know. This does not exist in America, because we enjoyed absolute freedom of speech. It is a sacred right, no subjects are taboo. In Europe there are other regulations that prohibit, for example, neo-Nazi comments. Overall internet has made taboo subjects impossible. You can not build fences around anything.
Q .: The attitude of the mainstream media, and lack of strategy, innovation journalism is weighing on the internet?
R .: The mass media are not burdening innovation on the Internet, are only lastrándose themselves. While they are creating opportunities for new players. Only they will suffer the consequences of their action and as you say, their lack of long term vision.
Q .: Finally, what advice would you give someone who is thinking of undertaking in this sector?
R .: The first, looking for a community whose informational demands are not being met. Then talk to the members to know where to find news and seek ways to improve the news. Finally, to design a product with the minimum required to run, because from this experience will learn, slowly, what should be the next step. Now only will explore different business models; course advertising, but also trade, events and dedicated services.
In general that specializes, because specialization brings efficiency, and to judge their success not by the metric old volume and visits, but wondering if it has achieved its goal, which is simply to improve the lives of its readers.
No comments:
Post a Comment