Let me start by confessing that my crystal ball is faulty at best. Of
all the items on the 2012 list, I would have predicted few if any of
them 12 months ago. Still, the following eight items deserve attention
even if they don’t turn into major media moments.
The current month is likely to leave a couple of interesting points
unresolved. In early December the United States backed out of talks
about a new international telecommunications accord. At the outset of
the consideration the terms seemed completely uncontroversial, the sorts
of things that would interest only telecom nerds. But then a coalition
led by Russia and China began building references to the Internet into
the language. Though the accord wouldn’t have imposed an actual duty on
any government to censor the net, the idea of incorporating content
restrictions into a purely technical bargain rubbed the United States
and several other countries the wrong way. As of this writing the deal
looks dead, but it’s worth keeping an eye on. At least it’s nice to know
that someone in our government understands the issues at stake.
Less comforting is the FCC’s current stance on ownership deregulation.
Rumors from DC suggest that the commission is poised to further relax
the rules governing how much of the country’s media markets may be
dominated by a single company. The name Rupert Murdoch keeps coming up
in criticism of the anticipated move, though of course Newscorp isn’t
the only player that stands to benefit. So far the commission hasn’t
made an official announcement, so this stands to be big starting early
next year.
With the election over and politicians less immediately concerned about
their popularity with voters, we need to watch closely for a
brain-eating-zombie resurgence of SOPA. Recall that big media companies
want this draconian crap something fierce, and folks with that kind of
money generally aren’t great at taking no for an answer.
The net neutrality question will also probably continue to percolate.
AT&T’s back-track on the FaceTime front feels more like a strategic
retreat than a genuine surrender. I don’t know exactly where the next
battle will flare up, but I nonetheless feel it coming.
A couple of media industries bear watching in the coming year. For some
time now I’ve been wondering exactly when non-media corporations were
going to start taking a closer look at the value of advertising. With
budgets tightening and audiences migrating, I expect more and more
companies are going to start asking hard question about the
effectiveness of spending money on ads. I’m not predicting some sudden,
momentous collapse of the entire ad industry. Still, this is an area
worth keeping an eye on.
The movie industry also may be making some changes. For decades now
Hollywood’s revenues have steadily increased with only a few relatively
small hiccups here and there. But in 2011 the studios saw a decrease in
box office receipts for the first time in years. The final numbers for
2012 aren’t in yet, but if they show continuing downward progress then
we may start to see some changes.
One of the more disappointing trends to emerge during the election this
year was wholesale disregard for media aimed at Hispanic audiences.
Spanish-language and other Hispanic-oriented TV networks saw only a
small fraction of the total money spent on campaign advertising. This
was likely tied to efforts by the parties in power to prevent Hispanic
people from voting (because if you can’t vote, why would anyone bother
trying to talk you into voting for his candidate?). That might reflect
the short-term status of this crucial demographic, but it isn’t
sustainable in the long term. This segment of the population is growing
too rapidly to be successfully marginalized forever. So wise media
planners will monitor the growth of Hispanic-oriented media.
And finally, I’m counting the days until Google Fiber actually arrives.
The company’s web site currently indicates that I can expect my
fiberhood to get hooked up sometime this coming fall. Let’s hope the
process stays on schedule. Because if it does, the “biggest moments”
list in 2013 is likely to have at least one obvious entry.
And on that cheery note, I wish you all a happy new year.
Showing posts with label Copyright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Copyright. Show all posts
Sunday, December 23, 2012
Sunday, December 16, 2012
The Eight Biggest Media Moments of 2012 – #7: The death of SOPA
Congress kicked off 2012 with a couple of eerie efforts to smother free
speech on the Internet. The version in the House was called the Stop
Online Piracy Act, and the Senate’s was the Protect Intellectual
Property Act. Of course the two versions differed in some details, but
the main idea was the same: extend copyright “protection” well beyond
the already-generous boundaries established by the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act (a.k.a. The Mickey Mouse Protection Act) more than a
decade ago.
The Mickey Mouse law was bad enough, but this pair were plain crazy. They would have introduced the principle of “guilty by accusation,” allowing big media companies to run crying to the federal government and get entire sites shut down based on a simple claim of copyright violation. The edges of the law’s protection are fuzzy enough – particularly in the realm of the fair use exception – to require proper adjudication, not censorship based on mere suspicion.
But more interesting than the proposals themselves was the reaction to them. Big Media (with Disney and Time Warner in the lead) lobbied hard, but they found themselves up against Big Internet (particularly Google). And worse, they faced a sudden groundswell of grassroots opposition from Internet users. After a 24-hour protest that blacked out Wikipedia and several other popular sites, legislators turned tail and removed the bills from consideration.
That alone made it a big moment. How often do you see Congress pay attention to anyone other than lobbyists?
The Mickey Mouse law was bad enough, but this pair were plain crazy. They would have introduced the principle of “guilty by accusation,” allowing big media companies to run crying to the federal government and get entire sites shut down based on a simple claim of copyright violation. The edges of the law’s protection are fuzzy enough – particularly in the realm of the fair use exception – to require proper adjudication, not censorship based on mere suspicion.
But more interesting than the proposals themselves was the reaction to them. Big Media (with Disney and Time Warner in the lead) lobbied hard, but they found themselves up against Big Internet (particularly Google). And worse, they faced a sudden groundswell of grassroots opposition from Internet users. After a 24-hour protest that blacked out Wikipedia and several other popular sites, legislators turned tail and removed the bills from consideration.
That alone made it a big moment. How often do you see Congress pay attention to anyone other than lobbyists?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)