Panelist discussion with Loren Feldman, Rachel Skylar, Cynthia Brumfield:

• CB: broadcasters have never relied on on advertising revenues in the same way that traditional print media has; and yet they are loosing their audience to new and diverging media. Physical distribution of content, whether it be newspapers, magazines, or the music industry, will be fatally impacted by “the internet”.
• LF: ” Should big media be afraid of individuals such as yourself? ” The mistake is that the Internet isn’t a “little TV”– its a different medium entirely, and there’s room for both.
• “Google is destroying journalism — what do blogs, rss feeds and GoogleNews do for media?”
  • RS: It complements different forms of news, as if you only have 5 seconds then you’ll choose one thing … if you are in another space and time (like Muskoka) then you’ll need something else. There is something social about the portability of print media
• “Will traditional media go the way of the dinosaur?”
  • CB: My own parents used to subscribe three newspapers, but because of the online consumption of news, that has all changed. My father now reads 20 newspapers a day. It may not be possible *because* of Google — but the newspapers have felt the impact of that, and have felt the competition thereof. The efficiencies of Google is the real danger.
• Question: “What about new forms of entertainment in this kind of world?”
  • LF: uStream.TV is going to be a mechanism for event-based programming, and is a great opportunity for live-based programming.
  • CB: Less professional programming has a special allure, such as Justin.TV .. doing the most mundane things and it seems fascinating. Girls kissing (you had to be here) or watching Cheese age — there’s a niche for everything.
  • RS: The tools at our disposal are amazing, and the barriers to entry have collapsed. Even if there’s little talent, the best stuff will rise to the top.
• Question: “With more tools at your disposal, how will ownership of those pipes affect the content?”
  • LF: I’m not nearly smart enough to answer that — I just want people to watch my stuff
  • CB: Net neutrality, therefore, is the big issue; cable TV providers, it turned out weren’t the villains — rather, it was the telephone companies trying to charge companies like Google. It is too late for broadband providers handpicking content, however. A rational response is to charge as per how much people use.
  • RS: Google, with its buying of dark fibre, shows how far they’re thinking ahead, and that’s why Google’s doing so great.
• Question: “Do you perceive your content or tools being used differently between different age groups?”
  • LF: The attention economy means that the length of content will shorten. Being “damn good and damn short”is important to getting that attention.
  • CB: I have a teenage daughter, and they will be happy to wander in enclosed spaced. First its myspace, then it was xanga, now its facebook. They don’t seem to want to cruise and do what people in their 20’s do. They don’t do email — they do instant messaging. With Facebook’s opening up of its API, it will provide all the more reason never to leave. It seems like their world has shrunk than expanding
  • LF: Its funny because its like AOL
  • RS: I am a huge harry potter fan — and I know that everyone is going to be reading the last Harry Potter novel. Do you think that quality and ingenuity is a factor in holding attention? There’s no reason to sacrifice quality …
  • LF: Newspapers are never going to anywhere — they’re going to still be here 200 years from now. There’s a tactile sense … newspapers have to survive. I can get information from the New York Post faster than the Huffington Post (laughter). Not everyone has a computer yet — I know its hard for us to believe but that’s very much the case. When I’m in a diner I want to read a newspaper — if I get pickles on it, I won’t go crazy (laughter). Newspapers need to change content and go in depth rather than break news. The days of breaking news are done; the days of them analyzing and editorializing is the future
  • CB: Do you think the average 20 year old will want to read it in a diner 20 years from now?
  • LF: They will always be around — they’ve been around since journalism. They need to cut their infrastructure, they’re scared and don’t know how to react. They’re not idiots just old school guys. They’re just blind sided just like the record industry. I think it would be a great disservice if newspapers did go under.