Pacts: Hinder, Help, or just Convenience

Pacts are agreements between production companies and studios for development and output of (in this case) film.  These production agreements lead to continuous film production between studios and companies and have a positive correlation with box office success.  The production pacts speed up the production process; take Wasko's example of Michael Crichton's story and Fox studios.  The process was shortened because Fox was the only company the book was sold to instead of having it shopped around.

So why the big deal?  Why does it matter if all production pacts do is speed the process up an lead to box office success.  This is true but with production pacts many writers, ideas, and concepts cannot break into the market.  These pacts effect the process because it provides a shortcut for producers and studios, they are cost-effective, and a successful pact has been shown to lead to box office success; the flip side is they are not inclusive they do not provide a lot of opportunity for new ideas and talent to enter on the production side of film.

There is no denying that production pacts regulate and effect the film industry.  They secure success for major companies and are not really helpful to the "little guy."  Regardless of the negatives in concerns to the "little guy" they are economically valuable ways for production companies to continue success.  In any business money is the driving factor; the film industry is no different.  Unfortunately the desire for economic success has a negative effect on the production of texts.

The pact process does not include many "little guy" companies.  It does not provide great opportunities for inclusion and promotes consistency with major name companies.  Who knows how many ideas, concepts, blockbusters, and potential this system has disregarded or left out.  While the system creates convenience for big name production companies it has a negative effect on the production of texts and on "little guy" companies. 

Media's effects on the Stock Market.

For my paper I am going to focus in the effects that the media has on the stock market and its outcomes. After being in the industry personally and with Merrill Lynch it is amazing how much the popular and reputable media has on the outcomes of the stock market for the day. There was once a time when the outcome of the stock market was based on basic principles and ideologies. Although with the popular media that we see today this is no longer true. The market is essentially driven by the information that is received over the media wire.
It is a topic that is important to investments because there are traders that trust on investing on the public media. It would be interesting and potentially unique to see how reputable media such as the Wall St Journal, New York Times, and CNBC can drive markets. The importance of this is that most of these publications use online updates that are becoming the sources of information for traders on Wall St to Lasalle St to London to Beijing. The importance of information in the media to traders has stemmed all the way to sources such as twitter and its counterpart tweetdeck. This is a system in which people can create formations of their importances on twitter to receive news as it happens.
This is a topic that serves a purpose to the importance of media. Companies like CNBC rely on there ability to give the news as it happens so that they can be an important asset to Wall St. With a niche like this they are able to find their target market while also serving a purpose to financial markets, which is one of the largest business markets in the United States. I think that this project could serve a purpose in something that is changing the form of financial markets as we know it.

Should AT&T Merge With T-Mobile?

After stumbling through various articles on the Media Access Project website, this headline immediately caught my eye.  Potentially, a merger between the two giants in the cellular phone market would again make AT&T the largest cell company.  This would be a massive merger that would have an enormous impact on the cell phone market, and the way in which consumers make their cell phone choices.  First, the merger  would lead to less models, and in all likelihood, higher prices.  With less competitors, AT&T will have more freedom to increase prices, as there is a lack of alternatives.  What's more, they will be less inclined to make new models.
This is especially unfortunate given the low prices that T-Mobile currently offers.  Although other companies like Verizon will still exist, the blog makes it clear that AT&T would have no problem jacking up prices.  Think of the Iphone, and how AT&T was able to keep hold of that product for years.  They were able to keep the price ridiculously high, and ensure that consumers bought their product since they simply couldn't get it anywhere else.
It could also shape the media market and slow the advancement of social media and other applications on our phone.  The rise in technology of cell phones is incredible in the last decade alone.  That being said, this potential merger could definitely slow the acceleration of cell phones and their capabilities.  Personally, I would hate to see a merger between the two companies.  Not because I am a T-mobile customer, but I know it would hurt consumers in general, and who wants that.  With a merger, businesses and the general public would pay higher prices and have less freedoms or models to choose from.  The AT&T/T-Mobile merger would hurt consumers and lead to more media dominance by one outlet.  Plus I wouldn't get to hear the T-Mobile girl tell me to get more minutes.  I've grown accustomed to that.  Article

Consumerism, Media, and Digital Democracy

Do you notice when you search for a new pair of shoes, an Ipod, or a piece of clothing that all of a sudden every digital ad you come across is that product or others which are very similar?  This is one of the primary issues of media for the Center for Digital Democracy (CDD).  Their mission is to help protect consumers from an internet experienced which is "largely shaped to help advertisers."  The online advertising industry is a booming industry which was worth 24 billion (yes folks BILLION) dollars in 2008 and had a projected increase to 100 billion dollars by 2011.

Why does any of this matter; we can all ignore ads right?  The CDD is not concerned with the ads themselves or even the fact that the industry is corporate and ad driven as opposed to consumer driven; what matters to the CDD is the awareness of the consumer.  They strive to "keep consumers informed and the corporate ad industry accountable." 

Is this an issue does it really matter that we have someone shadowing our every move on the internet, what are the consequences of a culture and ad-based internet?  These questions loom large in our new share-everything mediated society.  This issue of being shadowed has the negatives of the idea of "Big Brother;" a system where every move you make is monitored.  It also has its positives of convenience and economic profit; if it finds a product you like and can display it in an easy click add that makes everyone's life a little easier. 

I believe the CDD's action is the proper action to be taken against this "issue" (notice the "" because I do not believe everyone believes this to be a problem); and that is to continue to inform consumers while holding this big ad agencies and big business accountable for what they are placing on the internet.  A world without these ads would be so foreign to us that demolishing them entirely would be alien, but at the same time they need to be held accountable to ensure that commercialism does not get out of control in this precarious media teeter-totter.     

Matrix Media: A Necessity in Current Society

In chapter 1, “Matrix media,” Michael Curtin describes a matrix media as a media system where corporations provide media in a variety of forms, allowing consumers to interact with and intake the media at any time.  This style of media doesn’t aim at mass audiences at once, but rather uses a large supply of outlets for their product adding up viewers among them.  An example of matrix media that Curtin uses is that of “Top Chef,” a cable show.  This particular show can be viewed on cable during its’ allotted show time or on their website for a period of weeks, can be purchased on ITunes, has video games and blogs for dedicated fans to play and read on the internet, and lastly has mobile applications so viewers can get information anywhere on their phone discretely and quickly.  This style of media, matrix media, has not been the dominant style forever.

            Technological shifts in the recent past, along with audience members viewing tendencies, guided the media industry into a matrix media set-up.  The continually improving video game market was one technological shift that had an impact.  As video games continually become more advanced, many consumers began to choose to spend their time playing video games over watching television.  Curtin states that the day after Super Smash Bros Brawl was released, television ratings dropped 14 percent.  Corporations were forced to make their media more interactive, maybe with fun games or blogs, and have more flexible availability in order to remain competitive, due to the fact that video games were interactive and available to be played at any time.

           Another technological shift was the increasing popularity of the internet.   The internet became a tool that almost everyone used daily, and with programmers creating websites where television shows and movies were free to watch illegally, it had a staggering effect on television ratings.  Thus corporations were forced to supply better, “professional” versions of their shows online that were able to compete with the illegal sites due to better quality and good availability.

         Lastly, the obsession with smart phones has led to very profitable opportunities involving mobile devices.  Curtin estimates that this market will be worth around fifty billion to corporations in the media market.  Thus, due to the advancement of video games, the increased popularity of the internet, and the creation of the smart phone, it became highly advantageous, if not necessary, for the media industry to become a matrix media.

A Time of Change; A Time of Oppurtunity

Technology has not stopped evolving and as Lotz & Haven said "media industries fear and depend on this evolution."  There fear comes from the ability to be rendered ineffective, obsolete, or any other technological curse.  With the advancement of technology and the open source internet this problem because especially hazardous for advertisers.

What would you do if your business model which worked for eighty years suddenly became obsolete?  This is question many advertisers have faced not once but a multitude of times since the rise of the internet, DVR, Netflix, and other accessible media sources have started taken the place of T.V.; but why have these things taken the place of T.V?

The answer to that question is complex but lets just scratch the surface.  First of all T.V. itself has evolved it has expanded channel choices and programs available on those channels (assuming basic cable is available); to keep it short T.V. is no longer primarily a news source with some entertainment value it is purely an entertainment product.  Even the news and informational shows are turning to programming which while still fulfilling as "news" provide entertainment as well.  T.V. has become a leisure product, something we do in our spare time; and now their is competition for that leisure.

Curtin list a few of these examples that compete with T.V.; video games, online video streaming, and general internet are just the beginning.  These sources have created a battle for our leisure time and by default our economic and advertising value.  This is the fear aspect of Lotz and Haven's definition but with this change comes great opportunity.

Advertisers, while they have to change, they also have the ability to make major advancements in their viewing audience.  The amount of technology available has seriously increased the amount of people who view these media sources.  They also spend a majority of their leisure time on media sources these two factors alone seriously increase the opportunity for advertisers to reach more people in less time with less effort.

Technological advances lead advertisers to have to constantly evolve and change and adapt.  Even with the unknown and the changes these advertisers have the amazing opportunity to reach countless viewers with relative ease.  This unrivaled change has led to an era of fear but also an era of unparalleled opportunity.

Break Down of the Three-Party Market

The Three-Party Market serves as the foundation for a vast majority of all of the media that individuals consume on a daily basis.  Within this market system, a third party pays to play in a market that was created around the idea of free exchange between two other parties. 

This triangle love affair revolves around the producer/media, the advertiser, and the consumer.  Together, these three entities make up an intertwined system that relies on each other to keep the system going.  Advertisers put their ad’s and money into the system, the producer cranks out “free” content  for the consumers, and the consumers watch the media and in turn support the advertisers by purchasing their products or services. 

The consumers are led to believe that they are receiving “free” media.  But is it really free?  The answer is undoubtedly, no.  Every entity that is involved in the Three-Party Market System ends up paying, either directly or indirectly.  The advertisers must pay the producers for air time of their ads.  The producers must pay to create the content and programs.  The consumer’s consume what they believe is “free” content when in actuality they are constantly being infiltrated with advertisements and product placement.  The advertisers are hoping that the consumers’ exposure to their ads will draw them towards purchasing their products. 

This cycle of advertisers paying producers, producers providing “free” content to consumers and then consumers purchasing the advertiser’s goods or services is what keeps this system going.  With this said, the idea of “free” content is very deceiving and it is very rare that a consumer will ever truly be given something entirely free of any charge.  

With the Click of a Button

It used to be a phenomenon that you could click a button on a large box (usually in your family room) and watch a few channels for hours on end. Then it became incredible that you could use your laptop to click a link that lead you to the most recent television episode you’d missed. Now we are able to click a button on our “smart phones” and instantly watch a television clip or even a full show. What is next? What button will we be pushing next to lead us to our end goal of watching a television show anywhere and whenever we want?

Curtin describes our current media era as the “media matrix”. Media industries have had to adapt to the way in which audiences want to engage with television and media as a whole. In an era of high speed Internet, “smart phones”, and the need to have everything at a click of button media industries where required to alter their approach in order to keep up with the times. The article gave an example about the Bravo network and more specifically the television show Top Chef. They explained that not only do they air the show on cable but now have a website that provides recipes, games, blogs, and additional mobile content. Top Chef went a step further and developed products that they promote (cookbooks) and open forums online where their views can interact with judges, contestants, and other fans.

The “media matrix” shows the demands and expectations that are put on media industries to provide viewers with the newest, most efficient, and up to date services. Years ago our parents were fascinated that you would watch a show through a box in your living room, now we expect to get every show and movie at the touch of a button. While it is exciting for industries to redeveloped and provide their consumers with the “newest” products, it makes you think – where will we be in 10 years? What will we be expecting of media industries?

Spanish-language media suffering less than mainstream outlets

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/entertainment/2011/08/30/spanish-language-media-suffering-less-than-mainstream-outlets/

I found this article on the Fox News Latino website, and it describes a trend in media that we may continue to see as the Latino population of the United States increases.

The article states that English-language "dailies," presumably newspapers, experienced a five percent decrease in circulation from 2009 to 2010. At the same time, Spanish-language "dailies" in the United States experienced a modest 1.9 percent increase. The article went on to display the other positive trends in Spanish-language based media in the U.S.

I think that there's a few interesting things going on here. First of all, as the Latino population of the United States increases, the need for more Spanish-language based media increases. Although it has been known for a long time that the Latino population is rapidly increasing in the United States, this article shows that there is an increasing demand for Spanish-language based media. It could lead to an even greater importance being placed on the Spanish language in the United States.

Also, this article brings out the point that for most, if not all, of the population, newspapers are suffering. The article does not point out the increase in Latino population, but it is easy to speculate that the circulation of Spanish-language newspapers in the U.S. is declining per person. As we have known, this is a trend that we expect to continue, with more Americans turning to the Internet as a form of written news. The main players in the newspaper industry (e.g. New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post) may continue to experience some success in print media, and an increasing success in online news. However, small town print publications are more than likely a thing of the past as the shift to online media continues.