Sunday, January 29, 2006

Media roundup, Jan 23-29

It's been a busy old week (both for me and the world of media). We've had two lesser networks, UPN and WB, announce that they're to merge to form a new network, CW (apparently the letters are from CBS and Warner). Then there's the news that Disney is buying former partner Pixar, in a $7.5 billion deal that puts it solidly back in the world of profitable digital feature film animation. And though Bob Iger's Disney is the one doing the buying, there's a strong sense that it's Steve Jobs (CEO of Apple and Pixar) who's the real power in this deal -- the new "King of all media". We've had Google announce it's setting up a new operation in China, even though that means allowing the Chinese government to censor its service. (Lots of coverage of that -- for a flavor of the latest coverage, and the competing issues involved, see here, from the Christian Science Monitor; here, from the Financial Times; and here; and for some pieces that argue that Google did the right thing see here, from Reuters, and here, from the LA Times). But otherwise, Google remains flavor of the month. Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin seem to be, along with Jobs, the men of the moment.

So what's going on? Everybody in medialand is worried that their old media properties are decaying while they risk missing out on the upcoming digital bonanza. How bad is it? Well, of course everyone is still making money, but they're all worried about making less money sometime in the future. It seems it's time for the big boys to make some big moves. So while Disney is paying top dollar to stay hitched to Pixar's star, CBS Corporation (until recently known as Viacom) merges one of its networks with that of a competitor. And now, according to CNN Money, NBC owner General Electric seems to be thinking along the same lines. "With NBC's ratings suffering, Wall Street debates whether General Electric still needs a media unit, " notes the piece. One reason? NBC helps GE "control its image and present itself in a favorable light." Oh, and it’s still profitable. But how long can the network sustain these profits, especially when it’s losing the ratings war for that key 18-49 year-old demographic (where it’s been slipping for the past season and a half and is now well behind CBS and ABC)? Clearly there's a lot of maneuvering going on, and the people who can claim to be on the digital edge -- Page, Jobs, et al. -- seem to be pretty much in the driving seat.

Elsewhere, there are signs that more and more actual journalists are less impressed at the developments surrounding the digital revolution's cutting edge -- developments that mostly seem to revolve around entertainment rather than news. The Wall Street Journal notes that more and more TV journalists are looking to move from ailing network news to NPR. Notes the WSJ ("TB News Stars Move to NPR and Sound Off"), "Many television journalists say they are fed up with the move toward consumer-friendly news-you-can-use and away from weightier subjects like foreign affairs and government. And many also see news of any sort as an increasingly low priority for their employers. " The piece also notes NPR’s rapidly rising audience figures, up to 25.3 million for 2005, from just 22 million the year earlier. Seems there are still plenty of people who stil just want good, solid news and information, and never mind the digital bells and whistles!

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to Disney buying former partner Pixar, I personally feel that Robert Iger, the CEO for Disney, made a bold and strong move towards something he believes in. You have to give credit to a man who puts his job and future on the line in order to acquire Pixar, a company whom I feel has been a step above Disney for the past couple of years. This move leaves Iger in a tough spot. With him being somewhat new to the scene having only been CEO and tenured for a few short months, he has to be worried about what this means in regard to his job and his future. Steve Jobs, the CEO of Pixar, will be one of a few of the men making the transition over onto Disney’s board. With Jobs strong background, there is always the possibility that Iger could lose his job to Jobs at just about anytime with the slightest slip up. Nonetheless, I give Robert Iger a great deal of respect. This could be the move that Disney has needed to make for the past couple years in order to bring up there stock prices which have been more or less stationary.

Laura Salvalzo

1/30/2006 11:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to the WB and UPN merging to form one network, I think in the end it will be a good decision. Both networks do not average that impressive of an audience. Currently The WB's highest rated show ranks around average of 5 million viewers. While the UPN ranks around 4 million for its top rated program reality show America's Next Top Model; and wrestling staple, WWE Smackdown. Also, these networks regularally compete for the same demographics and produce many teen and young adult oriented shows, so this gives the new thriving network a chance for more potential and higher ratings. For Les Moonves, this is a profitable deal because UPN had less to offer in terms of programming than the WB so now by having some of their established series, as well as the more significant ones from UPN, he will be creating a better network with more growth potential.

Kelly Logue

1/31/2006 9:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to the scores of television journalists that are moving over to public radio I think it will be interesting to watch how this unfolds… Will the television broadcasting companies sit back and watch their star journalists leave? Will the public begin to turn back to radio as its source of true news stories? Will radio become more popular? Will the public embrace the familiar “free radio” or will satellite radio really take off? Once the consumers begin to hear “weightier news stories” on the radio, will they begin asking for them on television news? I find it very interesting that the news, just like the rest of society, goes through cycles of “what is in”.

Jenni Rowe

1/31/2006 10:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I feel as though the merging between UPN and WB makes the most sense, because let's face it, who watches those channels anyway? Granted, they had something going with Dawson's Creek, but the fact of the matter is that neither station has had a hit show in a while. I love America's Next Top Model and have to admit that I fell into the trap of Britney and Kevin: Chaotic, but I save my viewing of those programs for their all-day marathons on VH1. Hopefully, together WB and UPN can come up with better line-ups and find more success.

Lindsay Parker

1/31/2006 11:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Supposedly, more and more TV journalists are looking to move from ailing network news to NPR. At the heart of it all, television journalists want the opportunity to broadcast or write about the "weightier subjects" like foreign affairs and government. If this is really the case, maybe television will change. The Wall Street Journal makes it seem like there are a lot of journalists who are fed up with developments in the news that mostly revolve around entertainment. With a strength in numbers, it's possible. On the other hand, maybe the TV journalists just think radio is going to be the new trend and want to get in with the new. Afterall, NPR has a rapidly rising audience. The audience figures went from 22 million in 2004 to 25.3 million in 2005.... Maybe the journalists just have alterior motives that they aren't quite willing to fess up to. Who knows radio might be where the money is in a few years. Maybe these journalists are just trying to get ahead of the game.

Kim Veley

Kim Veley

2/01/2006 3:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The merging of UPN and WB I feel is going to benifit the network as a whole. Between ABC, NBC, CBS and many others, the competetion was too high, maybe the new CW will be able to produce better television. Dealing with NPR and making that a larger part of our networking system, I feel would be a good idea and benifical to everyone as having more world information rather than non stop entertainment.

Kristen Greiner

2/01/2006 3:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Disney made a wise move buying Pixar. When Pixar broke from the company, Disney executives knew they were in trouble. The company's more recent successes were all Pixar films, as support for hand-drawn animation is dwindling. The real money to be made lies in Pixar's animated movies, and Iger recognized that, just as Steve Jobs had to realize the benefits of sticking with Disney and being distributed through a company that is so recognizable and universal. This partnership is beneficial for both companies. Disney has been suffering from mistakes in the past, and needed Pixar in order to stay at the top of children's films/entertainment, and Pixar is at the edge of that type of entertainment. Pixar, being distributed through Disney, is guaranteed not only box office success, but success in the many other outlets that Disney has for their products.

Jennifer Wrobel

2/06/2006 6:59 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home