… what they are writing, and this often happens that they tend to copy press releases or use news agencies news services, the result is a useless news, empty of content, which can be found with the exact same sentences and quotes in newspapers and specialized journals, television and various websites (weblogs included). Sometimes I do it. But I’m not a reporter nor this is a blog intended to be a journalistic medium. And I think that is nice for people to know what they are reading. Is it is a press release, so be it. But let us know in advance that you are not producing any additional content, thinking about it or analysing the data.
News reporters often don’t have the necessary knowledge to think about what they are writing and usually reproduce their source. It this particular case (the one that made write abou this), in addition to the press release, the source made a PDF available with detailed information, as well as a podcast. With didn’t any of the reporters I checked tracked the information that was sent by the news agency? Is not if the published work (I won’t called it news…) is wrong, because it isn’t. Is just without reflection, without detail and collating data. What kind of journalism is that it merely reproduces, without thinking, without search, collate or interpret. Do not be surprised if readers look for the sources directly. It’s that they have more information than newspapers and are also available online…
The particular case that I’m reading is the news published today in several newspapers and specialized journals, TV channels, websites and blogs: The TMT Predictions 2011, by Deloitte. While having lunch, I say one newspaper with this news and immediately some questions arose,, concerning missing data to that being presented by the reporter. In fact, a more attentive reading made think that there were many aspects underdeveloped. Considering the news, the “TMT Predictions 2011” media predictions look at a diverse array of topics which are superficially explored: television, gaming, the music industry, and social media. The most interesting concerns television and the growing in number of viewers and advertising investment, as twice as the advertising investment in the press, and open sign channels will still be the most popular and gaining audience due to BRIC (Brasil Russia, India and China). TV audience is not to flee to the web and social networks. They even say that the Internet is potentially helping TV and not even rental services have been affecting the TV business. I wondered about many of these statements. I don’t question the number of viewers, but I do question the advertising investment. Although there are more investment, that doesn’t mean that TV channels aren’t cutting off they TV add prices, making them sometimes comparatively inexpensive as radio spots, or promoting campaigns bellow the TV add production costs. But much more interesting that this is to analyse the advertising investment beyond the numbers: is this investment only in TV adds? What kind of advertising formats are we talking about? Why aren’t these reporters analysing the importance of the interpenetration between brands and television programs and formats. Are we talking about the classical investment (there is, television commercials and sponsoring), with the clear assumption to the audience that is watching commercials or that a brand is sponsoring a program or are we talking about innovative advertising formats like product placement or branded entertainment. These new hybrid formats (like commercials that look like TV shows, actors using a brand and in the commercial break, promoting the same brand in a commercial, in which the transition between film and ad is almost seamless, or even TV advertising in schools are just some examples of how naif one can be, while reproducing data, since advertising formats challenge today is to engage viewers and create cut-hedge experience through brands. As for radio and other media, advertising formats are challenging and further more, relating brands and consumers to engage them. Missing this point and leaving the information straight to numbers is not enough to understand advertising in media.
On the other hand, the reporter quotes someone who we don’t know if is related to Deloitte, saying that “they don’t believe in the implicit value of Facebook” (first of all, who are “we” and who is “he”?) and I should add that this sentence, out of context, equals to say that they don’t believe in the implicit value of mouth-to-mouth. As Eduardo Cintra Torres wrote yesterday the information in social networks is related to personalized emotions and lost of advertising, pretending not to be so… He talks about reality advertising, there is, something like classifieds produced by the networks users. He also remembers that brands infiltrate like trojans, becoming friends with people. There are also many comments that can be more an example of payed communication than true ciber-citizenship, similar to the culting of brands, or as Atkins (2004) explored, the way costumers become treue believers and drive the belonging into another sense, making the brand become themselves.
There also information about the 1% of advertising investment in social networks. It’s a fact. There are few social campaigns. And about the surreptitious advertising? As Cintra Torres also wrote, Internet advertising Investment grew around 20%, but most of this is in camouflaged advertising, using posts, messages, tweets or comments…
The news that fostered this post is “Televisão 1, Internet 0. Pequeno ecrã continua rei da publicidade”, Jornal i 10.02.11
Eduardo Cintra Torres
Atkins, Douglas.2004. The Culting of Brands
Found very similar news, by searching Google
More, about TMT Predictions 2001
Press + PDF Report (at the end of the page) http://www.deloitte.com/view/pt_PT/pt/industrias/technology-media-telecommunications/536fee8215a0e210VgnVCM2000001b56f00aRCRD.htm