Showing posts with label HMF. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HMF. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Brand loyalty in the wwwild west
As soon as I started reading chapter 7 I thought of an oligopoly with a big price diffferential and wondered how that worked… then I saw it mention on p. 148. Top pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer still command a higher price for their drugs even after competitors like Ivax introduce much cheaper generics. That’s a great illustration of brand loyalty, and compensation for the original drug developer for their learning curve, or research and development (pp. 149-50). Can’t that same concept be applied to online aggregation of traditional media? Newspaper staffs do the research, reporting, writing and publishing, at significant cost, then find their work re-published (for free) on Yahoo, Google or 100 other news portholes. It’s also interesting to compare media monopolies in the digital age; the New York Times commands dominant market share in New York and across the country in print, especially on Sundays. But online it draws half as many visitors as MSNBC – and less than Yahoo, CNN.com and AOL – all of which “borrow” NY Times content http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2009/chartland.php?id=899&ct=col&dir=&sort=&c1=1&c2=1&c3=1&c4=1. Maybe that’s why conglomerates like General Electric, Post-Newsweek, Paramount and Disney are chucking TV holdings and investing much more in cross-platform brands (like Disney) and new media.
How to apply the theory of the firm?
From today’s reading, I would like to discuss The Theory of the Firm, especially about how we apply industrial organization framework to research questions we are interested in; and how we can conceptualize and measure each variables in that model (e.g., structure—market concentration and barriers to entry, conduct—pricing and product strategy, and performance—technological progress.). So my first question is:
Q1. How SCP paradigm (structure conduct performance) or IO framework (Industrial Organization) has been applied to research in the field of media economics?
In the case of Google vs. Microsoft, it seems interesting or doable to examine the relationship between market structure and the conduct of the firms by putting market structure as Independent Variable (e.g., perfect competition vs. monopoly (or by national)) and the conduct of the firms as Dependent Variable (War between Google vs. Microsoft). My second question is about this:
Q2-1. Does this research look doable?
Q2-2. If not, what would be possible?
Q2-3. If yes, how can we measure the conduct of the firms? (How the conduct of the firms has been/can be measured in general other than this Google vs. Microsoft case?)
(Continued to the Google vs. Microsoft case) while measuring market structure (IV) seems possible, for instance, by nation, measuring the conduct of firms seems tough (categorized variable for chi-square or logistic regression?).
As mentioned in the textbook, there are limitations in applying the IO framework, for example, data limitations (p. 156). How can we measure technological progress, which is one of the elements of performance? One of the major criticisms of IO framework is that “market performance is a multidimensional concept and therefore very difficult to define and measure for use as a dependent variable in multiple regression analysis (Cable, 1994, p. 3); To overcome some of the problems of the SCP approach, new industrial organization economists have begun to use game theory to develop oligopoly models of the strategic behavior of firms in markets and of individual agents within firms (Dixit, 1979, 1980, 1982; Roberts, 1987; Spence, 1977). (as cited in Wirth & Bloch, 1995).
Q3. What’s game theory and how game theory has been applied in media economics?
Last question is about the role of the individual level of consumer behavior in Figure 7.1 (Industrial Organization Framework). For example,
Q4. How can we explain people’s online news media use with IO framework?
Q1. How SCP paradigm (structure conduct performance) or IO framework (Industrial Organization) has been applied to research in the field of media economics?
In the case of Google vs. Microsoft, it seems interesting or doable to examine the relationship between market structure and the conduct of the firms by putting market structure as Independent Variable (e.g., perfect competition vs. monopoly (or by national)) and the conduct of the firms as Dependent Variable (War between Google vs. Microsoft). My second question is about this:
Q2-1. Does this research look doable?
Q2-2. If not, what would be possible?
Q2-3. If yes, how can we measure the conduct of the firms? (How the conduct of the firms has been/can be measured in general other than this Google vs. Microsoft case?)
(Continued to the Google vs. Microsoft case) while measuring market structure (IV) seems possible, for instance, by nation, measuring the conduct of firms seems tough (categorized variable for chi-square or logistic regression?).
As mentioned in the textbook, there are limitations in applying the IO framework, for example, data limitations (p. 156). How can we measure technological progress, which is one of the elements of performance? One of the major criticisms of IO framework is that “market performance is a multidimensional concept and therefore very difficult to define and measure for use as a dependent variable in multiple regression analysis (Cable, 1994, p. 3); To overcome some of the problems of the SCP approach, new industrial organization economists have begun to use game theory to develop oligopoly models of the strategic behavior of firms in markets and of individual agents within firms (Dixit, 1979, 1980, 1982; Roberts, 1987; Spence, 1977). (as cited in Wirth & Bloch, 1995).
Q3. What’s game theory and how game theory has been applied in media economics?
Last question is about the role of the individual level of consumer behavior in Figure 7.1 (Industrial Organization Framework). For example,
Q4. How can we explain people’s online news media use with IO framework?
Media market structure in digitalization era
In HMF, it mentions through the digital processing, maybe things will be changed. Deuze also mentioned the current media industry is constructed by few big companies and lots of really small companies (or even individuals). It's a fluid or liquid media work. Those small ones are very flexible and work for the bigger company. Will the media work become like: there're few big platforms and many individuals or small organizations work in the platforms such as provide content or various goods, but they're not hired or belong to the big company? For example, if online newspaper wants to cover everything but at the same time the company doesn't want to can't afford many staffs, it needs more outside (re)sources to help them (or it provides the opportunities for them…-_-) create content to attract more attention.
What would the market structure become and how the agents in the new structure work and apply different strategies to survive?
What would the market structure become and how the agents in the new structure work and apply different strategies to survive?
To conform or to confront?
Cringely seems to suggest Google and Microsoft should not be rivals, or maybe just stay in where they are now. Especially for Google, “…yet of those thousands of ideas, the company can really invest in only a dozen per year, leading the dissatisfaction and defections as the best nerds leave to pursue their dreams.” This idea seems opposite to the common sense of big companies' strategy: come up more ideas and more competitive goods to bit the rivals and maximize the profits. Is it related to the Industrial Organization Framework in HMF that different strategies are used in different market structures? If so, it's interested that how the company position itself. Maybe Google positions itself as a great competitor of Microsoft, so it tries to take over the market in this case. Is it right to have such passion or set up the goal to compete with the Microsoft and enter the monopoly market structure? However, the desire to become the best or the only is also the drive to success (success in current business world's definition, not mine). What should a company make its strategy under the oligopoly or monopoly structure? To conform, or to confront?
Like the news on Yahoo homepage: Walmart's new strategy. It's definately not good for smaller business, but is it really good to the consumer for the long run (short run of course is good because of the lower price)?
Like the news on Yahoo homepage: Walmart's new strategy. It's definately not good for smaller business, but is it really good to the consumer for the long run (short run of course is good because of the lower price)?
Monday, September 7, 2009
Sandra-Panic consumer
When reading the textbook, I was wondering, as a consumer (or my family as a household), am I or do we so rational in counting the marginal utility when purchasing? So, are the consumers rational or irrational in this aspect? Even though I doubt myself as such a rational consumer, theories mentioned still make sense to me in my decision-making process, but most of time I don't think I have many choices but have to do so or be controlled by the larger supply systems.
As Stepp said, it's time for the newspaper field to panic; to me, it's also time for some consumers like me to panic. (By the way, I like Stepp mentioned the broader changing power structure that causes the challenges.) While the news companies strive hard to survive or find a way out and with the increasing news providers, I feel panic what if one day I can't find anything good to read, especially reading the newspaper or watching news program. At least I have this strong feeling in Taiwan. (To be honest, reading newspaper in Chinese is a relaxing habit and a need to me, but in English is totally different.)
Maybe we can think about what is "news". Are all kinds of information messages news? Or the definition of news changed? When the newspapers, whether online or offline, try to cover everything, I am wondering what's the difference between Yahoo and an online newspaper website. When reading some news items, I was wondering why I need to read all the advertising on the newspaper,which just pure advertising but no deeper inside. It's good that Stepp gave us concrete suggestion (even though it still needs to be more concrete when putting into practice) without just saying it needs to be creative; still, what is news and what make news field different from other information or website. Providing thousands of information doesn't guarantee everyone will be drawn into here and help the revenue of printing newspaper.
At the same time, how do we know what consumers want when they're still confusing and have no idea what they want. Like many people will say because the newspaper doesn't provide this and that, like enough international news, so we're not likely to subscribe, but the truth is they just don't read it. Sometimes it's not about the category of what kinds of info we need to provide, but the content that in what way we provide the info.
Is the online forum or information provided online which generated by everyone help reduce the doubt or risk of purchasing credence goods, and what it would change the strategy for selling credence goods?
As Stepp said, it's time for the newspaper field to panic; to me, it's also time for some consumers like me to panic. (By the way, I like Stepp mentioned the broader changing power structure that causes the challenges.) While the news companies strive hard to survive or find a way out and with the increasing news providers, I feel panic what if one day I can't find anything good to read, especially reading the newspaper or watching news program. At least I have this strong feeling in Taiwan. (To be honest, reading newspaper in Chinese is a relaxing habit and a need to me, but in English is totally different.)
Maybe we can think about what is "news". Are all kinds of information messages news? Or the definition of news changed? When the newspapers, whether online or offline, try to cover everything, I am wondering what's the difference between Yahoo and an online newspaper website. When reading some news items, I was wondering why I need to read all the advertising on the newspaper,which just pure advertising but no deeper inside. It's good that Stepp gave us concrete suggestion (even though it still needs to be more concrete when putting into practice) without just saying it needs to be creative; still, what is news and what make news field different from other information or website. Providing thousands of information doesn't guarantee everyone will be drawn into here and help the revenue of printing newspaper.
At the same time, how do we know what consumers want when they're still confusing and have no idea what they want. Like many people will say because the newspaper doesn't provide this and that, like enough international news, so we're not likely to subscribe, but the truth is they just don't read it. Sometimes it's not about the category of what kinds of info we need to provide, but the content that in what way we provide the info.
Is the online forum or information provided online which generated by everyone help reduce the doubt or risk of purchasing credence goods, and what it would change the strategy for selling credence goods?
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Adapt or die? Definitely adapt. [Alice]
Last semester, I took a course and the instructor spent a lot of time criticizing how terrible it is that readers are not paying for news, citizen journalists producing stories without in-depth thoughts, or less people now appreciate hard-copy version of newspaper. The list can go on and on and on. Believe or not, sitting there listening to this kind of preaches is like a nightmare. As a future journalist and a kid grew up in digital era, I think it’s hard for me to say how much journalists deserve being paid. I’d never want to jump into a low-pay occupation. However, I know that I wouldn’t spend even only 75 cents on a newspaper everyday when I can read it online for free.
Do journalists deserve low pay? I guess no. But the problem now is nobody is willing to pay for intangible information. We’ve been so used to retrieving information for free. If some news organization, say NY times, decided to charge users online, we switch to other newspapers. I have no idea whether journalists, or their work, deserve low pay. But I’m sure that as long as there is free online information with acceptable quality, nobody will pay.
To put what we learned in economics here, I’ll say the demand curve is extremely sharp. No matter how the supply curves look like, the price will remain low. The chief editor of Texas Monthly once came to our class and he said, “The business is gone, and it will never come back.” (This is the direct quote.) I guess that’s the situation we’re facing. We can only adapt or die, or waste our time trying to “teach” audience that they should pay us.
This is actually the reason I became interested in marketing and economics of news media. Before I came here, I was so anti-business. I didn’t even finish my two-semester economic class. Now I think marketing and economics are the only solution for newspaper. News media is losing ground. Old people can complain and stay in nostalgically “oh-the-good-old-days” mourns. Young people, like me, can’t. It is us formed the anti-fee generation so we should be able to find out how news industry will be tomorrow. Well, I might sound silly or naïve, but I guess I’m young enough to be silly.
Do journalists deserve low pay? I guess no. But the problem now is nobody is willing to pay for intangible information. We’ve been so used to retrieving information for free. If some news organization, say NY times, decided to charge users online, we switch to other newspapers. I have no idea whether journalists, or their work, deserve low pay. But I’m sure that as long as there is free online information with acceptable quality, nobody will pay.
To put what we learned in economics here, I’ll say the demand curve is extremely sharp. No matter how the supply curves look like, the price will remain low. The chief editor of Texas Monthly once came to our class and he said, “The business is gone, and it will never come back.” (This is the direct quote.) I guess that’s the situation we’re facing. We can only adapt or die, or waste our time trying to “teach” audience that they should pay us.
This is actually the reason I became interested in marketing and economics of news media. Before I came here, I was so anti-business. I didn’t even finish my two-semester economic class. Now I think marketing and economics are the only solution for newspaper. News media is losing ground. Old people can complain and stay in nostalgically “oh-the-good-old-days” mourns. Young people, like me, can’t. It is us formed the anti-fee generation so we should be able to find out how news industry will be tomorrow. Well, I might sound silly or naïve, but I guess I’m young enough to be silly.
Sandra-HMF, Blodget, Picard
First I try to use what we learn about the determinants of supply and demand to see why the threat or fear of news business exists.
From the determinants of supply parts:
1. Price of related goods/services (too many substitute goods, and the news business needs to create more complementary goods or use the news or resources they have creatively)
2. Taste (which the ads can manipulate, so why not the news business creates the taste of audience, or make your products more attracting or special to them)
3. Maybe there's no problem of number of buyers because they want more and more subscribers; however, they possibly have the problem of which group do they really focus on. It seems like they try to draw all the attentions as decades ago, would it make the special niches disappear because too greedy to include everything and miss the focus or what they are good at or what they can do best under limitation of resources?)
From the supply part:
1. What are the prices of resources? It seems they always say they spend so much money in producing the product, but with the advanced technology, doesn't it help at all in cutting budget or saving time and energy in gathering information, reaching news sources, or producing news? Just saying cutting budget or cutting the number of reporters is not a rational enough strategy, must realize where the big profits they earned in the past go? Is it really because the huge amount of reporters' or editors' expenses, or is it because of the failed investment in other areas or just disappear in anywhere else?
2. As the number of suppliers increase, how can one news company compete with them (other business, bloggers, and free access, etc.), not just asking people to pay more or take readers' responsibility to pay, but how to make yourself survive and fit their changing needs in the changing environment?
The connection of three articles:
From the responses of active readers to Blodget's article, most of them (readers, consumers, audience) keep mentioning the content matters. Picard also points out the products reporters or newsmen created need to change or be differentiated, and the new skills they need in the new era. That's also what I feel for a long time. To me, content and the quality of news product matters a lot and are the roots of the industry. Platform is just a way for us to reach out those news stories (of course we know there're lot of meanings behind the adoption of the technology and the platform will change our daily life, but not the focus in this case).
It's important to use, adopt, and have the skill of masteing the new technology; however, how to equip the journalists or journalists-to-be the new professional skills to survive or to be creative in current environment is crucial, which is not just the way to put the information online or in print, but the knowledge to process, analyze, and organize all the information and find its meaning to the audience. With more and more people know how to gather news information and with the increasing competitive suppliers, what make news or news workers "professional" or valuable in the market and how the school or the academic field could help rather than criticizing them is a big thing and always interests me when I first stepped into this area. The two articles are so related because one just purely states from the owner's perspective and those budget-cutting, raising fees terms or strategy, which is the mainstream in today's business but also causes lots of troubles, but the responses and Picard's article voice out from users' perspective.
I have no answer or better way to save newspapers right now, but I do think trying some more creative ways that related to content, and keeping what makes news different and valuable to others are the niches of the news business. Without values, a business cannot last long.
(sorry, I didn't expect it would be so long... the topic just too intersting... :p)
From the determinants of supply parts:
1. Price of related goods/services (too many substitute goods, and the news business needs to create more complementary goods or use the news or resources they have creatively)
2. Taste (which the ads can manipulate, so why not the news business creates the taste of audience, or make your products more attracting or special to them)
3. Maybe there's no problem of number of buyers because they want more and more subscribers; however, they possibly have the problem of which group do they really focus on. It seems like they try to draw all the attentions as decades ago, would it make the special niches disappear because too greedy to include everything and miss the focus or what they are good at or what they can do best under limitation of resources?)
From the supply part:
1. What are the prices of resources? It seems they always say they spend so much money in producing the product, but with the advanced technology, doesn't it help at all in cutting budget or saving time and energy in gathering information, reaching news sources, or producing news? Just saying cutting budget or cutting the number of reporters is not a rational enough strategy, must realize where the big profits they earned in the past go? Is it really because the huge amount of reporters' or editors' expenses, or is it because of the failed investment in other areas or just disappear in anywhere else?
2. As the number of suppliers increase, how can one news company compete with them (other business, bloggers, and free access, etc.), not just asking people to pay more or take readers' responsibility to pay, but how to make yourself survive and fit their changing needs in the changing environment?
The connection of three articles:
From the responses of active readers to Blodget's article, most of them (readers, consumers, audience) keep mentioning the content matters. Picard also points out the products reporters or newsmen created need to change or be differentiated, and the new skills they need in the new era. That's also what I feel for a long time. To me, content and the quality of news product matters a lot and are the roots of the industry. Platform is just a way for us to reach out those news stories (of course we know there're lot of meanings behind the adoption of the technology and the platform will change our daily life, but not the focus in this case).
It's important to use, adopt, and have the skill of masteing the new technology; however, how to equip the journalists or journalists-to-be the new professional skills to survive or to be creative in current environment is crucial, which is not just the way to put the information online or in print, but the knowledge to process, analyze, and organize all the information and find its meaning to the audience. With more and more people know how to gather news information and with the increasing competitive suppliers, what make news or news workers "professional" or valuable in the market and how the school or the academic field could help rather than criticizing them is a big thing and always interests me when I first stepped into this area. The two articles are so related because one just purely states from the owner's perspective and those budget-cutting, raising fees terms or strategy, which is the mainstream in today's business but also causes lots of troubles, but the responses and Picard's article voice out from users' perspective.
I have no answer or better way to save newspapers right now, but I do think trying some more creative ways that related to content, and keeping what makes news different and valuable to others are the niches of the news business. Without values, a business cannot last long.
(sorry, I didn't expect it would be so long... the topic just too intersting... :p)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)