Segmentation is crucial for successful strategy (Be Remarkable)
"Marketing is merely a civilized form of warfare in which most battles are won with words, ideas, and disciplined thinking." (Albert W. Emery)
Segmentation is the most effective driver to create winning words, ideas, disciplined thinking and, ultimately, successful strategies. Segmentation begins customer understanding, allowing organizations to build healthy relationships with their customers. The media marketing sector will be a $1.6 trillion market by 2010...how will your company earn its stake of the future?
Up until the mid-20th century, the word "strategy" was mainly a military term, first used as stratēgos by the ancient Greeks, which referred to a 'military commander' during the age of Athenian Democracy. Later, Sun-tzu centered his Art of War on strategy. Machiavelli merged military strategies into political power.
Strategy didn't convert into a business term until the Depression forced academic thinkers -- such as John Maynard Keynes and Peter Drucker -- to literally help business and government "think forward" in order to break a desperate and deep economic situation. Strategy meant targeting to create new opportunties.
A strategy typically starts as an idea and ends with increased power or improvements for the owner of the idea. It's always been associated with empire building, which is why it's so tightly linked to war. However, as America's economy influenced the world's economy, the idea of "empire" shifted from the battlefield to the boardroom. New battles were for the minds of consumers and control of their spending habits, not just for kingdoms and property. Persuasion of the masses were not done just with guns and bombs; modern persuasion required strategy, marketing and the media.
For 50 years, TV was the ultimate marketing partner in order to reach the masses. Imagine, advertising we welcomed right in our living rooms! "As Sold On TV"...hey, it's got to be good!
That's been over and done for years.
Now that we are "new millenials" and deep into our Great Media Evolution, strategy, marketing and media are still the essential tools for successful business. To use those tools effectively and achieve strategic "victory", business needs to know its new target, which is constantly moving. Dependent on market conditions, consumer demands and brand image perceptions shift, erode, grow or die. New media times require new strategies.
In the past, marketing was unsophisticated. To reach the masses, marketers could "carpet-bomb" campaigns on TV, radio and newspapers. Consumers had fewer media options so this strategy worked because marketing messages could reach nearly the total population. After all, "carpet-bombing" worked as a military strategy. However, just as war's evolution now requires the use of "smart bombs" instead of carpet-bombs, marketing strategy has evolved, too. As "The Economist" recently wrote, marketing is now about small, not large, audiences. New millenial marketing requires multi-platform sub-niche strategies that precisely reach their intended target.
As author Seth Godin says in Purple Cow, being safe and boring is risky. Look at radio, look at NBC (and most of the cable channels), look at the advertising in any newspaper. Safe and mainly boring, not compelling or remarkable. When do billboards work? When they tease or boldly break beyond their rectangular dimensional space. To get heard through all the noise and clutter, today's marketing messages, programming and products need to be remarkable. There is no mass media anymore, just lots of free-wheelin' micromedias -- some with larger audiences than others.
Be remarkable, not safe and boring. And target the remarkable consumers best for you, not just the massess. How is that done best?
Segmentation, for starters.
You have to know your market and know what links the customers driving that market...the customers with influence.
What is segmentation? In layman terms, segmentation determines -- through market researched statistical techniques -- unique sub-groups of people with common likes and dislikes within a larger customer population. For example, in TV, some people just like comedy; others may only prefer news and talk shows. The list of different TV segments is long. Same thing for radio, music downloaders, e-zine readers and bloggers, and the rest of the multi-media universe. What's important is learning each segment's (or sub-group's) commonalities, demands and attributes...what makes them different than the rest of the target population...and how they impact or determine various business strategies.
Essentially, proper segmentation gives marketers precise targeting in order to achieve successful strategies.
In this hyper-competitive time for media companies, effective market segmentation is the #1 information advantage for the battle of today's consumer minds, whether you are on-line, over-the-air, wireless or in-print. Why? Because so few companies make the investment to segment properly. Too complex, costs too much, no budget and other excuses. If segmenting is done, it is done rarely. It is all too common for companies to segment only once in 4 years (if at all). This is true in all media platforms, mainly because of cost issues and an expectation that markets don't shift that much in 4 years.
Really? 4 years ago, the iPod and iTunes (still only for Mac users) was just getting hot. Broadband was in less than 4% of American homes. No cable system had HD digital delivery systems. Satellite radio was brand new with virtually no subscribers (which now are more than 10 million). In 2002, words like "blog" and "podcast" were pure geek science. ESPN and other networks now send custom programming to be viewed on cellphones. Think the media universe and how consumers use media hasn't changed much in 4 years?
Do you think target segments have remained the same? Think again.
Nowhere is segmentation most dramatically under-utilized than with web analytics. Strangely, with the amount of natural data constantly collected with web usage, you'd think that segmentation would be a given. But it's not. A recent JupiterResearch study found using Web analytics to target e-mail campaigns can produce nine times the revenues and 18 times the profits of broadcast mailings. Yet the same research says few marketers are using segmentation techniques.
The same is true for all companies utilizing media for their marketing, programming and content distribution. Consumers typically use media -- in one form or another...or several at the same time -- for nearly half of every 24 hour day.
Reasons for the lack of segmentation, in general, are clear:
1) Marketers (and the people responsible for putting marketing decisions into action) are suffering from tactical information overload (you name it, we all can get instant time media reports on deliverables),
2) Multi-tasking "do more with less" marketers are trying to do great things with little time and few resources (creating less than great results),
3) "Fix-and-run" decision makers can't slow down long enough to process the meaning of segmentation and how to effectively use the information,
4) Segmentation is still viewed as an investing luxury, not a necessary cost of wisely doing business to gain advantage.
As mentioned earlier, whether you are on-line, over-the-air, wireless or in-print, segmentation is the #1 information advantage for the battle of today's consumer minds. If you're not segmenting every year or so, you are missing a huge competitive advantage and probably wasting revenue on ineffective marketing campaigns. So, how can you start using segmentation?
Well, for starters, you can contact us at Joint Communications. We've been market segmenting since 1977, helping media companies around the globe win their perception battles with words, ideas and disciplined thinking...and successful strategic results.
posted by Unknown @ Friday, June 30, 2006,
,
Pondering the future of radio
"Radio" today is really just transferred audio. In the past, we only received radio from programming broadcast by stations via a transmitter tower. Now radio also includes online streaming, downloading, podcasting, timeshifting, file sharing and more things digital...as well as traditional broadcast radio stations transmitting to your traditional receiver.
Although traditional radio no longer has the transmitted audio platform exclusively, radio -- on the whole -- is way better. Radio, that is, including both the analog and the digital platforms. We all are listening to more total "radio" than ever before. So what is this doing to traditional radio?
The trend for media toward more user convenience, personal control, context-selected content and new community interactions of shared experiences continues to grow. Several new press releases on radio take a look at the current state of radio and its near-future.
At the beginning of the week, RADAR, Arbitron's radio network and national audience measurement service announced in its new national study that radio reaches 93 percent of all people 12 and older in a typical week. 81% of all people 18 and older listened to radio while in their cars and 25 percent listened to radio at work. And more than 183 million people, or 74 percent of all people 12 and older+, tune to radio on Saturday or Sunday.
Despite all the competitive advances in digital radio/audio, morning drive radio and afternoon drive radio are still radio's "prime times", with about 190 million Americans listening to week radio to start and end their workdays. Of course, radio still frustrates listeners with generic formats, reduced creativity/uniqueness and too many commercials...but the point is this: radio remains a strong and important form of daily entertainment and information.
However, radio's image has taken a hit these last few years, replaced by more "sexy" forms of digital audio on the iPod and through the Internet. So, if radio usage remains strong with consumers despite weakened marketing image, how are the experts viewing the future of radio?
The annual Radio Symposium took place in New York yesterday and a number of presentations gave some fresh insight for those pondering the future of radio.
Fewer and Shorter = Less. First, the broadcast data firm firm Media Monitors revealed a new study saying radio stations across the country shaved off a full minute of commercials per hour, reduced the total amount of ads played in a typical hour from 9 spots to 8.4, and shifted from fewer 60 second to shorter 30 second spots (1 of 5 commercials now heard are 30 second spots).
Overall, radio now has shorter breaks, fewer units and fewer spots per hour. Of course, that's not true for every format and that's certainly not true for markets with the largest ad revenues (Los Angeles, New York on down). Talk radio still regularly averages 16 minutes of ads an hour, including some stations selling more than 20 minutes an hour. However, nationally, as a media trend, total average spot loads are going down. Finally.
Meanwhile, Bridge Ratings explored the impact of digital media on radio with a new survey on listeners, asking how different types of digital media affected their radio habits. According to their study, the competing mediums are taking a bite out of regular radio, with an overall decline in the total time spent listening. Many respondents did say that other mediums cause them to listen to the radio more often, especially podcasting (58 percent), P2P file sharing (51 percent) and MP3 players (42 percent). However, radio is losing out mainly to Internet radio, with 55 percent saying it cause them to listen to less traditional radio.
Some formats are affected more than others. Not surprisingly, Rock and Alternative lose the most listenership to other mediums (-15 percent), followed by CHR (-12 percent) and News/Talk (-10 percent) while other (Adult Hits, AC) spend more time with terrestrial radio because of digital media. Of course, Rock and Alternative formats are the formats most rapidly disappearing from airwave radio, due to sample problems with 18-34 year men leading to lowered ratings.
Continuing at the symposium, Paul Heine of Billboard said tough question were being asked by Wall Street (whose love affair with radio seemed to end shortly after 9/11). Bear Sterns showed radio stocks trending down for 80% of 2006 and said radio hasn't been normal for the past 10 years. Radio group Cumulus chairman and CEO Lew Dickey said "radio provides a safe harbor in the digital convergence world."
For sure, radio is not going away. It's just evolving. Some on Wall Street say "with good management, radio companies can create better-than-industry-average returns." As for looking ahead, some predict satellite and Internet radio "will settle in the next few years and the radio industry will return to more of an even keel."
Billboard article here
Media Monitors press release here
RADAR press release here
posted by Unknown @ Wednesday, June 28, 2006,
,
PWC says media spending to reach $1.8 trillion in 2010
The issue of media cross-platform ownership is back on the FCC and Congress front-burner at the same time predictions expect global media revenues to soar. The two issues go hand-in-hand.
Media continues to be a strong investment. The latest estimate sees a growth rate for media globally at +6.6% over the next four years. Online and wireless spending will more than triple. By 2010, Internet advertising is expected to capture nearly 10 percent of global advertising dollars, compared with 3 percent in 2002 -- the fastest growth of all advertising platforms.
In other words, expect more commericals in the near future, not less. Despite the ad industry's concern of connecting brand marketing to consumers and that 30 seconds aren't working like they used to, really, there's no worries for the advertising world. Old thinking and old application is out, that's all.
Global media spending keeps growing and growing, fueled by expected gains for both new and old media. By 2010, global entertainment spending is expected to reach $1.8 trillion, thanks to the advances in digital media consumer reach.
This week's PricewaterhouseCooper report says the U.S. will remain the largest media spender -- led by video and Internet growth -- even though its predicted growth of 5.6% ($726 billion by 2010) is the slowest globally.
The key drivers:
* Wireless
* Broadband
* Internet advertising
* Anticipated renewed growth from the movie industry as it shifts to digital distribution
* Global event advertising (Olympics, etc.)
* Digital (satellite/HD/broadband) TV and Radio/Audio distribution
"Virtually every segment of the entertainment and media industry is shifting from physical distribution to digital distribution of content, creating new growth opportunities" said Wayne Jackson, global leader of PricewaterhouseCoopers' Entertainment & Media Practice.
So who will the winners be?
posted by Unknown @ Thursday, June 22, 2006,
,
What is media trend watching?
A media trend watcher connects the dots of emerging trends. Takes note of media catalysts, happenings and decisions that potentially create a larger impact later. Explores the ever-deepening digital landscape, seeing how it forces all media platforms to evolve.
A media trend watcher participates. For example, by conducting market research, observation and media strategy implementation, you are a media trend watcher. By monitoring ratings and usage performance and then relating them to past results, you are media trend watching. Sharing ideas and participating on this Jointblog as well as others with your commentary responses to posts contributes to media trend watching. Drawing inferences from one media insight to conclude something new. Media trend watching reviews the tactics of something newsworthy today and pieces together the long-range strategic direction.
For example, the Jointblog views "truthiness" as a strengthening media trend, which is why we reference The Colbert Report so often. Taking the 30,000 feet view, truthiness truly is the descriptive word of the decade. It applies to politics ("Saddam and weapons of mass destruction with ties to bin Laden", "A heckuva job, Brownie" or "Mission Accomplished"), business (Enron, Tyco, Adelphia, oil price vs executive compensation), entertainment (reality TV is not reality, news teasers during sweeps focusing on fear tactics on matters that really have near-zero likelihood of ever affecting your family) and the Internet itself (the rise of the blogosphere as well as the issues of net neutrality, identity theft, and copyright protection and royalties). As a media trend, if 9/11 killed irony, truthiness certainly filled its void.
There are so many other media trends to watch. Traditional media slow acceptance of the on-demand New Entertainment Economy, unwilling to give up its "push" model of control and ownership, is certainly a strong one. Nearly 50% of Americans now have access to high-speed broadband connection to the Internet, either at home or at work. Americans want stuff fast, easy and at a reasonable price without hassle. They want to choose the content and not have the content chosen for them. They want to pull media; they are tired of having media pushed at them with little or no choice. More and more they resist or simply ignore content -- on radio or TV as well as with other traditional forms of "mass" media -- that doesn't suit their real need. The result for those companies resisting? Smaller reach and frequency of usage, less time listening and viewing, reduced subscriptions, zero or negative word of mouth.
Media trend watching takes items that may seem like a small story and shows the bigger view. One trend I hope takes hold is simplicity. As a society, we are all overwhelmed with too much noise, too much stress, too many expectations. We have decision overload. And yet, so much of what we doing as media professionals is add to the noise, add to the stress, add to the expectations. As much as we try to create solutions, we often present more problems. Because we don't make it easy for the customer. We waste consumer time with useless contests or promotions that add zero value. That aren't fun or compelling. That require we jump through too many hoops. We bombard consumers with advertising that doesn't connect with the reader, the listener, the viewer -- expecting the customer to pay attention. Often, content looks good for advertisers but not for the audience.
In fact, as a media trend, it is the audience or the target consumer base that is often the last component considered for many media plans...if they get truly considered at all. Of course, at least conceptually, they should be the first compontent.
One marketing campaign of the last 5 years that impresses me is the Staples "Easy Button" campaign. After 15 years of growth, Staples began to realize their customers were getting more and more dissatisfied. Finding the items they needed while shopping was difficult. Customer service provided no help at all. Staples was in danger with losing their base and revenues were dropping. After honest reflection, they saw opportunity in their crisis: make it easy for their customers. Don't make it complicated. Get rid of the distractions and useless products that their business supply customers never needed in the first place. Retrain their customer service sales people to actually help, directing shoppers to the exact correct aisle and shelf location for the products they sought. Once they fixed their operations, they then marketed something that rang true: The Simple Button. Press the button and voila, it's done. Easy and simple. That's the Staples experience now. They listened to their customers and changed their ways to meet the demand in a new competitive environment.
The campaign launched 3 three years ago and immediately propelled Staples to new growth, strongly outgaining their competitors in revenue, profit and share. It even created strong positive word of mouth...including the crazy demand from customers actually wanting to buy Easy Buttons for their own desktops at work. Staples quickly responded and made them available for sale, generating charity contributions of $1 million a year.
Simplicity.
Truthiness.
Just some of the media trends we are watching. Are you a media trend watcher? Write to us. We welcome your participation...just add your comments to our posts or forward us your own observations. We thank you for media trend watching with us.
posted by Unknown @ Monday, June 19, 2006,
,
After The Viacom Split: A Battle of Titans Brewing
Now that megamedia corporate splits are in fashion, there's a new emerging media trend to watch. How will former "sister" companies behave after the "divorce"? Will they get along? Will that formerly-praised "synergy" carryover after the breakup?
Media heavyweight champion Viacom split into two new separate companies at the start of the year, with the new "Viacom" taking MTV Networks, Comedy Central, Spike, and other cable channels as well as Paramount Studios. The new "CBS Corporation" got radio, the CBS TV network, UPN TV, Showtime cable, CBS Outdoor, Simon and Schuster books and the Paramount content creating properties. Once Viacom Chairman Sumner Redstone made the split of the media kingdom, dividing the assets to his conquering co-CEOs charged with carrying forward the legacy, the question wondered was: will it be Tom Freston vs Les Moonves? Which company will outperform the other?
A battle of titans may be brewing...
So far this year, Freston's Viacom has maintained consistent net income performance despite a NYSE drop from a high of $45 to its current $36, while it spun off Dreamworks' library, acquired online community XFire and lost its longtime MTV Network Chief Digital Officer.
Meanwhile, Moonves' CBS Corporation stock shares have stayed between $25 and $26 on the NYSE, with little change in 1st quarter profit despite a very busy first six months of 2006. CBS got mixed up in a two-sided lawsuit with former radio star Howard Stern (which it settled, Stern paying CBS $2million), a disasterous experiment in car wreck morning radio with David Lee Roth (which it corrected with Opie and Anthony), a merger of the WB and UPN TV networks into the new CW and the announcement to hire The Today Show's Katie Couric as the new permanent evening news anchor beginning this Fall. On top of it all, CBS won the 12+ TV May sweeps and the top overall Nielsen ratings for the entire TV season as the top network.
Behind the scenes, things seem to be stirring. Last month, the New York Post reported that the battles were beginning between CBS and Viacom.
Well, there's new evidence of more battling. Viacom-owned Comedy Central's The Daily Show has released a new tongue-in-cheek (what else would you expect?) ad (for your Emmy consideration) saying "We had fake news years before CBS hired Katie Couric."
Ouch!
posted by Unknown @ Friday, June 16, 2006,
,
Colbert Report's Word on Indecency: Great F***ing Idea
The battle against obscenity remains an on-going media trend to watch. Or, on the flip side, anti-obscenity forces don't want you to watch it.
Both houses of Congress have voted in favor of the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act, which would increase the maximum fine that the Federal Communications Commission can impose for an indecent broadcast by 10 times from $32,500 to $325,000 each violation.
F*ck!
Stephen Colbert is ready to do his American part and you can bet your sweet ass he brought out his checkbook to prove it on last night's Colbert Report installment of the daily "Word". Click here for the videocast.
As Colbert says, somethings just don't belong on television (Tucker Carlson). And Congress should not interfere with the private lives of Americans, except when it comes with whom we marry, if and how we can protest and which positions are approved for sexual relations (the "abstinence" position).
This means shaved beavers are just not appropriate for TV.
The Senate approved the bill on May 18 by unanimous consent, and the House voted 399-35 (!) in favor of it on June 7. President George W. Bush said in a June 7 statement that the legislation would “make television and radio more family friendly by allowing the FCC to impose stiffer fines on broadcasters who air obscene or indecent programming.”
The FCC, which has authority to enforce federal obscenity law, has reported (on-line as a PDF here) it received about 1,000 times as many complaints in 2004 than in 2000. Complaints in 2004 concerned 314 programs (145 radio, 140 television, and 29 cable), while complaints in 2000 concerned 111 programs (85 radio, 25 television, and 1 cable). In 2004, the FCC issued 12 notices of apparent liability seeking $7.9 million in fines; five recipients of complaints paid or agreed to pay.
Of course, as Colbert mentioned, almost all of them were generated by mass automated email campaigns led by 2 individuals on an obsensity in media vendetta. So who fines the government and the FCC when they are both being obscene?
reference article here
posted by Unknown @ Wednesday, June 14, 2006,
,
Media Revolution Is All About Small, Not Large, Audiences
For those of you posting embarassing pics of yourself on the Net, not thinking about the eternal life they will have and who will ultimately see them (maybe even your kids 20 years later), there's good news, according to (of all places) The Economist. The Media Revolution going on right now is all about small, not large, audiences from this point forward. The Economist is a good old-fashioned magazine, worthy of slower digestion instead of instant disposal after a read. Often, it can be dull and hard to understand in this high-speed, gotta-know-now world. It's not pop culture; it's actually thoughtful or, at least, thought-inspiring. It's dense and perfect for those who like tearing out articles for future reference. It's one of those media choices out there in medialand attracting a very specific reader, offering a unique point of view of the world. In it's own way, it is a bellweather of the direction all media is going.
In the April 20th issue, The Economist covered the subject of Media in a series of articles (here, here, here and here...plus several others worthy of reading). I encourage you to read through the articles because they weigh in heavily on a Big Trend watching Media's evolution.
The Economist writes about the transformational powers of high-speed broadband, saying its advent represents a true revolution in the way the people of our planet communicate? When The Economist makes that observation, it confirms we are all living in it. In one article, the author points out that unlike previous eras in the history of communication, in which power resided with owners of the machinery, the Web era is quickly becoming all about its participants.
That IS the New Entertainment Economy. Media control is no longer only in the hands of the license and transmitter holders. Media control in the On Demand world is in the hands of consumers. Consumers now have the choices and possess the ability to get what they want...right now. It "has profound implications for traditional business models in the media industry, which are based on aggregating large passive audiences and holding them captive during advertising interruptions," Andreas Kluth writes. And traditional media is still having a hard adapting their economic models, as they have always been based purely on their control, not the consumers.
Continues Kluth, "In the new-media era, audiences will occasionally be large, but often small, and usually tiny. Instead of a few large capital-rich media giants competing with one another for these audiences, it will be small firms and individuals competing or, more often, collaborating. Some will be making money from the content they create; others will not and will not mind, because they have other motives."
The spectrum of content control has been completely redefined in this YouTube/digital radio/Broadband universe. On one side of the spectrum, you have people creating stuff to build their own reputations, hoping to bubble up their content to the masses through avenues like viral video or podcasts. On the other side, superbrands such as Steven Speilberg will become their own content portals, with corporate mothership surrogates no longer needed.
Dive in and let the articles slowly digest...they are rich in content and useful for when you put your thinking cap on.
posted by Unknown @ Tuesday, June 13, 2006,
,
Microsoft shops at The Apple Store (again) for new ideas
Over the long competitive history between Apple Computers and Microsoft, the list of examples is long where Apple does something first and then Microsoft tries its best to copy it (never as well).
Slower, cumbersome, less innovative Microsoft constantly walks in the same path already well-carved out and mastered by Apple.
The latest example comes after Apple's very successful latest new "Get a Mac" ad campaign, where hip MacBoy talks with awkward PCGuy. A few weeks ago, the Jointblog posted that for Apple, you are what you compute with.
In the Apple spots, MacBoy easily networks with PCs and any digital device (including the latest Japanese digital camera) while the PC can't communicate with "her". Healthy MacBoy has sympathy for PCGuy's sickness from one one of the 100,000 viruses attacking PCs every year, making him sneeze and ultimately freeze while MacBoy is completely immune. And there's 4 more variations on the theme demonstrating why Apple's are so much better, cooler and easier to use.
PCGuy is actually "The Daily Show's" 'resident expert' comic John Hodgman...a guy who really doesn't quite get it but still exudes a level of fake superiority anyway. A perfect character to spoof Microsoft.
Microsoft's marketing reply?
(As imagined from the Microsoft campus boardroom...)
Microsoft nerd #1: "Guys, these latest Apple spots are killing us. What are we going to do?"
Microsoft nerd #2: "I know, they always have better ads. They always look so cool. I even download them on my iPod to watch later. Ooops, I mean, my 'mp3' player."
Microsoft nerd #3: "Hmmm, I have an idea. Since they use a 'Daily Show' dude to represent us, why don't we use a 'Daily Show' comic, too, for our own ads. I hear it is a very popular show with the kids, although I've never watched it."
MS nerd #1: "'The Daily Show'? What's (using air quotation marks in the air) 'The Daily Show'?"
MS nerd #2: (air quotation marks) "'The Daily Show'" is a popular fake news show that spoofs the news. Jon Stewart hosts it; you know, he was this year's host of the Oscars. Although he didn't make many people laugh. I don't know why he is popular."
MS nerd #3: "Right, that Stephen Colbert used to be the show. He used to do those Mr Goodwrench ads and now has his own show. He seems like a good Republican, although I didn't get his jokes at the White House Correspondence Dinner last month. That was weird. I bet he would be too expensive since he's such a huge star."
MS nerd #1: "Okay, can someone create a spreadsheet to help us evaluate other comics from (quotation marks) 'The Daily Show' to use when we market Vista...that is, whenever we can ever finally get the kinks worked out and (more quotation marks) 'trojaned' onto the market?"
MS nerd #2: "Good one, Big Bill. We'll get right on it."
Putting their creativity and spreadsheets into action, Microsoft found their candidate (it is rumored, as reported by both The Seattle Post Intelligencer and the Hollywood Reporter). According to the publications Wednesday:"The rivalry between Microsoft Corp. and Apple Computer Inc. apparently extends to the cast of 'The Daily Show'. Microsoft has reached a deal with Demetri Martin, the young 20-something comic behind the fake news program's periodic 'Trendspotting' feature, to star in a marketing campaign for the upcoming Windows Vista."
Microsoft wouldn't confirm or deny the story in The Hollywood Reporter. Microsoft used to ask in their ads "where do you want to go today?" Apparently, Microsoft likes to go to the Apple Store for their ideas.
Seattle Post Intelligencer article here
"I'm a PC, I'm a Mac" ads here
posted by Unknown @ Friday, June 09, 2006,
,
iPods More Popular Than Beer
Talk about a revolution. Blutarsky wouldn't be holding a beer can if he were in college today and living at the Delta House. College life as depicted by John Belushi in "Animal House" must officially be over. Apparently, there's more to do than just drink beer for today's college student. Today's Blutarsky uses the iPod instead.
In a newly released study, Apple Computer's iconic iPod music player surpassed beer drinking as the most "in" thing among undergraduate college students, according to a firm monitoring college student activies biannually for the past 18 years.
According to the news reported by the AP:"Nearly three quarters, or 73 percent, of 1,200 students surveyed from 100 college campuses in March said iPods were "in" - more than any other item in a list that also included text messaging, bar hopping and downloading music.
So, if you are dependent on 18-24 year old ratings from Nielsen, Arbitron or BBM and you keep wondering why you're having a hard time reaching them, it's not just because they're doing another beer bong. They're on their iPod.
In the year-ago study, only 59 percent of students named the iPod as "in," putting the gadget well below alcohol-related activities.
This year, drinking beer and Facebook.com, a social networking Web site for students, were tied for second most popular, with 71 percent of the students identifying them as "in."
The only other time beer was temporarily dethroned in the 18 years of the survey was in 1997 - by the Internet, said Student Monitor."
Dean Wormer of Faber College would be so proud of that media trend.
posted by Unknown @ Wednesday, June 07, 2006,
,
As Seen on The Drudge Report Today...
Sometimes you just have to laugh.
Katie Couric just had her 3-hour farewell Today Show broadcast sendoff on NBC Wednesday, watched by nearly 9 million breakfast show viewers (according to Nielsen ratings). Commanding ad spot rates of $110K per 30 second commercial. Nice to see. Good ratings, good business, nice thank you to its star that helped bring in the money. Also rare, since most in broadcasting (both radio and TV) only get a few minutes to say thanks (if at all) when it's time to go. Only a few TV legends have even gotten an hour-long prime time broadcast party. Katie got three. Plus Tony Bennett! And yes, she showed those Couric legs. Must be the legs!
Anyway, I saw this custom headline on The Drudge Report that made me burst out laughing:"$15M A YEAR: Katie Couric hopes to end 'pretentious era' in news..."
Really? How pretentious is that?!?
There are so many natural riffs...add yours, if you like.
Of course, the Reuters' article Drudge pulled the headline from didn't connect the price tag with the Couric quote. That was a nice Drudge twist. Too funny.
posted by Unknown @ Friday, June 02, 2006,
,
