The Daily iPad Newspaper Anounced

     The iPad has become increasingly popular, especially with news apps. When I looked in the Apple app store today, there were over 400 apps specifically designed for the iPad. That's a lot of stuff to read, and Rupert Murdoch wants to give iPad users the best.
     Today, at an event in the Guggenheim Museum in New York, Murdoch, along with Jon Miller, Jesse Angelo, and Greg Clayman, announced a new, daily newspaper for th iPad called The Daily. The Daily is a newspaper that completely rethinks news consumption for the iPad. The Daily takes the average newspaper or magazine, digitizes it, and adds a lot of multimedia affects.

Carousel on The Daily

     The Daily can be flipped through like a regular magazine. You can also browse articles with what The Daily calls "the carousel". This shows the front page of all of the articles in a carousel like way. Those familiar with the Apple MP3 players will recognize this as a kind of Cover Flow idea. You can then tap on an article, and it will be enlarged to full size and allows you to read through the article.
       You can also browse by category. The Daily is divided into six topics. These topics are News, Gossip, Opinion, Arts and Life, Apps and Games, and Sports.
       News includes the regular stuff, international news, important stories. Some stories include video or even 360 degree images. The weather section brings you completely away from a traditional magazine, and looks more like an app. It brings you very in depth reviews of the weather, while giving you the ability to tap on different icons for different things.
     Gossip has celebrity news and things like that. In the first issue, which they showed off at todays event, there was an article about two celebrities and their Twitter feeds. Using the special software that The Daily developed, the Twitter feeds were shown just under their picture.
     Apps and Games was a section The Daily did because they knew that their audience was one that owned iPads, and therefore many of them were interested in the app thing. Apps and Games has app reviews, along with photos, and a direct link into the App Store if one decides to download the app. Like a traditional newspaper, it includes daily crossword puzzles and Sudoku, which, unlike a traditional newspaper, can track your time and scores, and even let you play against others.

Weather on The Daily

Sports on The Daily

    The sports section offers a very unique experience and customization abilities. Since The Daily is a national newspaper, it needs some sort of way to customize it. You can choose the teams you want to read about, you can also see live scores, stats, and more.
    The Daily seems really great, but how much would you pay for it? Five dollars an issue? 1 dollar an issue? The Daily will be available for... 14 cents an issue! At 99 cents a week, The Daily gives you great value for your money.
    The Daily said at the event that it would eventually come to all major tablets, but the few two or three years are Apple's. The Daily also said that right now most of the revenue would be based on subscriptions, but they would like to eventually be 50% advertisement revenue and 5o% subscriptions.
    You can find The Daily on the App Store, on Facebook, and on Twitter.
    The Daily is free for the first two weeks, so if you own an iPad, you should definitely check it out. If you have an iPad and tried it out, please leave a comment telling us what you like or don't like about it.

Watch the Video Below for More Info. To watch the entire The Daily announcement click here.

The (Media) Empire to strike back

Are we at a cusp of media upheaval? Are we soon going to see a war betting the old (traditional) media vs. new (Online) media??

Rupert Murdoch, speaking at the World Media Summit in Beijing, was mentioning that Search Engines and other content aggregators need to pay for any news reports or articles they currently take for free

He said “The aggregators and plagiarists will soon have to pay a price for the co-opting of our content”. A Media Mogul whose company owns newspapers, other publications and TV channels across the globe, his view comes as ominous. He was particularly harsh on Search Engine like Google, Yahoo! And other websites like Wikipedia, YouTube and Facebook

While Mr. Murdoch and other media companies are right that there is a price for the content they create. As content owners they need to be compensated for exploitation of the original content for commercial purpose.

Having started my career with a media company, I have been taught and now know that there is nothing called Free in ‘Media’ business :)

While the new media companies had focussed and invested on technology and interactive features, they had left out information. Information was already available in the offline world, and since the ‘paid’ business model of online information business (News) has not been successful, the information was not available for free for one and all.

The idea of charging the Search Engines, and other website (content aggregators) is justified, it would have a domino effect on the way Internet would function. Broadly, the following are ways a media company would charge –

1) Flat fee for content basis time period
2) Cost per content basis

This would mean that the websites who are not breaking even now (I’m not talking about Google here:)) – will have to shell out more, and get deeper into red. The only option then left for them would be: -

- Tie up with fewer media companies, or
- Fewer content on their sites

Also from advertising revenue perspective the following would happen – Online companies would start charging more for advertisements (to offset the extra cost incurred for content), the number of ad impressions served would decrease (as the content pages decrease, and the user visits to webpages decrease) which means lower ad inventory.

But another truth is that most of the online media company websites get their traffic from the very sites the plan to charge for content. Search Engines like Google / Yahoo!, websites like Wiki, YouTube, and Facebook are the ‘gateways’ who are generating and driving traffic.

If the idea of charging for content fructifies, then there would be drastic changes in the online business models and way the most of the Internet businesses function
I feel while this would take time to happen, and if it does happen it would be with trade-off from both sides. What the trade-offs could be?? Mail me, I’ll let you know :)

Cheers

Santosh

Article reference taken from news.bbc.co.uk

The (Media) Empire to strike back

Are we at a cusp of media upheaval? Are we soon going to see a war betting the old (traditional) media vs. new (Online) media??

Rupert Murdoch, speaking at the World Media Summit in Beijing, was mentioning that Search Engines and other content aggregators need to pay for any news reports or articles they currently take for free

He said “The aggregators and plagiarists will soon have to pay a price for the co-opting of our content”. A Media Mogul whose company owns newspapers, other publications and TV channels across the globe, his view comes as ominous. He was particularly harsh on Search Engine like Google, Yahoo! And other websites like Wikipedia, YouTube and Facebook

While Mr. Murdoch and other media companies are right that there is a price for the content they create. As content owners they need to be compensated for exploitation of the original content for commercial purpose.

Having started my career with a media company, I have been taught and now know that there is nothing called Free in ‘Media’ business :)

While the new media companies had focussed and invested on technology and interactive features, they had left out information. Information was already available in the offline world, and since the ‘paid’ business model of online information business (News) has not been successful, the information was not available for free for one and all.

The idea of charging the Search Engines, and other website (content aggregators) is justified, it would have a domino effect on the way Internet would function. Broadly, the following are ways a media company would charge –

1) Flat fee for content basis time period
2) Cost per content basis

This would mean that the websites who are not breaking even now (I’m not talking about Google here:)) – will have to shell out more, and get deeper into red. The only option then left for them would be: -

- Tie up with fewer media companies, or
- Fewer content on their sites

Also from advertising revenue perspective the following would happen – Online companies would start charging more for advertisements (to offset the extra cost incurred for content), the number of ad impressions served would decrease (as the content pages decrease, and the user visits to webpages decrease) which means lower ad inventory.

But another truth is that most of the online media company websites get their traffic from the very sites the plan to charge for content. Search Engines like Google / Yahoo!, websites like Wiki, YouTube, and Facebook are the ‘gateways’ who are generating and driving traffic.

If the idea of charging for content fructifies, then there would be drastic changes in the online business models and way the most of the Internet businesses function
I feel while this would take time to happen, and if it does happen it would be with trade-off from both sides. What the trade-offs could be?? Mail me, I’ll let you know :)

Cheers

Santosh

Article reference taken from news.bbc.co.uk

The (Media) Empire to strike back

Are we at a cusp of media upheaval? Are we soon going to see a war betting the old (traditional) media vs. new (Online) media??

Rupert Murdoch, speaking at the World Media Summit in Beijing, was mentioning that Search Engines and other content aggregators need to pay for any news reports or articles they currently take for free

He said “The aggregators and plagiarists will soon have to pay a price for the co-opting of our content”. A Media Mogul whose company owns newspapers, other publications and TV channels across the globe, his view comes as ominous. He was particularly harsh on Search Engine like Google, Yahoo! And other websites like Wikipedia, YouTube and Facebook

While Mr. Murdoch and other media companies are right that there is a price for the content they create. As content owners they need to be compensated for exploitation of the original content for commercial purpose.

Having started my career with a media company, I have been taught and now know that there is nothing called Free in ‘Media’ business :)

While the new media companies had focussed and invested on technology and interactive features, they had left out information. Information was already available in the offline world, and since the ‘paid’ business model of online information business (News) has not been successful, the information was not available for free for one and all.

The idea of charging the Search Engines, and other website (content aggregators) is justified, it would have a domino effect on the way Internet would function. Broadly, the following are ways a media company would charge –

1) Flat fee for content basis time period
2) Cost per content basis

This would mean that the websites who are not breaking even now (I’m not talking about Google here:)) – will have to shell out more, and get deeper into red. The only option then left for them would be: -

- Tie up with fewer media companies, or
- Fewer content on their sites

Also from advertising revenue perspective the following would happen – Online companies would start charging more for advertisements (to offset the extra cost incurred for content), the number of ad impressions served would decrease (as the content pages decrease, and the user visits to webpages decrease) which means lower ad inventory.

But another truth is that most of the online media company websites get their traffic from the very sites the plan to charge for content. Search Engines like Google / Yahoo!, websites like Wiki, YouTube, and Facebook are the ‘gateways’ who are generating and driving traffic.

If the idea of charging for content fructifies, then there would be drastic changes in the online business models and way the most of the Internet businesses function
I feel while this would take time to happen, and if it does happen it would be with trade-off from both sides. What the trade-offs could be?? Mail me, I’ll let you know :)

Cheers

Santosh

Article reference taken from news.bbc.co.uk