02/05/2006 01:35:00 PM 
(2) 
(2) "We can no longer compel people to pay attention. We used to be able to say, there's this really important story in Poland. You should read this. Now people say, I just look up what I'm interested in on the Internet."
He is talking about the demise of the printed newspaper, but this quote has wider ramifications for any media and advertiser that still believes it controls the eyeballs.
To be relevant, please make sure you answer these questions.
Meta Question:
How do you make the reader/viewer care about what you have to say?
1. Are you offering the viewer or reader anything new- really new news, a new insight, a new observation or valued exclusive content?
2. If not, are you at least as entertaining to them as other alternatives, not just in your category?
3. Do you have a way for the viewer or reader to interact and truly engage with you
Whether you are brand, broadcaster or even a blogger- you need to always be asking yourself these questions. It demands a thorough understanding of who it is you are talking to, what is that they need and what turns them on emotionally?
Being open and engaging has replaced commanding and controlling.
Share / Bookmark:
Demise of the printed newspaper?
If everyone really did adopt the attitude of not reading/watching news but looking up "what they're interested in" on the Internet then over time, people would become rather one-dimensional. <br>Take a subject like Bird Flu. No one was interested in it until they read about it or heard about it on the TV - most, even then, sadly don't care. <br>Intelligent people need permanent input and not only that which they know about already. We can't ocunt on TV news informing these people about much at all - so still need the newspapers. Of course, you can read the online editions but it's hard to stick them under you arm when you go for a coffee. <br>Lastly, the idea of always being interactive is overrated, I fear. Often, simple one-way communication is exactly what people want - there's not the time to respond to everything and merely to have the opportunity to do so isn't that valuable. <br>As always, there are various needs and desires - and offers will be available to meet them all. Newspapers will survive - an evolve. <br>MS <br>
Posted by Mel Schoen on 02/10/2006 06:42 AM
If everyone really did adopt the attitude of not reading/watching news but looking up "what they're interested in" on the Internet then over time, people would become rather one-dimensional. <br>Take a subject like Bird Flu. No one was interested in it until they read about it or heard about it on the TV - most, even then, sadly don't care. <br>Intelligent people need permanent input and not only that which they know about already. We can't ocunt on TV news informing these people about much at all - so still need the newspapers. Of course, you can read the online editions but it's hard to stick them under you arm when you go for a coffee. <br>Lastly, the idea of always being interactive is overrated, I fear. Often, simple one-way communication is exactly what people want - there's not the time to respond to everything and merely to have the opportunity to do so isn't that valuable. <br>As always, there are various needs and desires - and offers will be available to meet them all. Newspapers will survive - an evolve. <br>MS <br>
Posted by Mel Schoen on 02/10/2006 06:42 AM
It appears you don't have Flash installed.
Don't forget podcasters, who are just bloggers with cool toys. On my show, The Cranky Middle Manager, I'm faced each week with the question, what do my listeners want to hear. Since I'm no smarter than they are it usually matches my interests but I take show ideas from my email all the time. You might want to check the show and blog out at http://cmm.thepodcastnetwork.com