Bubble generation paper

Here is a MediaEconomics (PowerPoint :() presentation analysing media argumenting that the CyberneticEconomy is mostly AttentionEconomy?.

Summary of Paper

I thought this powerpoint takes a little bit too long to say what it has to say, so i'm not necessarily recommending it. – BayleShanks

It was interesting to see how he phrases in economic terms some of the things that we (ok, i dont know if you agree with these predictions but i agree with many of them) have already been thinking about the economic effect of cheaper media production & distribution tech.

In summary, he is saying:

Old Media ("Media 1.0")

Invests money into advertising, not production, in order to create blockbusters. hence low quality blockbusters.

Why? Because you get more "bang for your buck" in terms of sales from spending money on advertising, vs. spending on producing better quality.

Why? because a) production is expensive b) there's better economies of scale in advertising and distribution than there is in production.

He points out though that there's a hidden factor here: the consumer's attention. Although total consumer attention is a limited quantity, its scarcity doesn't affect the economics much because consumers dont have too much content to choose from.

New Media ("Media 2.0")

image: %s

Tech makes production and distribution cheaper.

Main effect: Lots more interesting content gets produced. So much, in fact, that consumers' attention becomes much more scarce.

Therefore, the quality of content has a greater effect on sales. Therefore, the quality of the content drives profit more.

Therefore, you get more "bang for the buck" by spending more on producing quality content and less on advertising (compared to old system.)

What Strategies to Pursue in New Media

Old media strategy of advertising a lot for low quality blockbusters is doomed.

Instead of focusing on blockbusters, focus on niche audiences and make content that is really high quality (for that audience.)

Note that since there is so much content to sift through, a lot of value is created by helping consumers find what they want.

Note that when a consumer consumes a piece of content, there is value produced in that you get information on which content is popular, which content is good, etc. use that. Encourages consumers to remix your content and to rate it, etc, b/c that gives you information on which content is good (relative to which niche audiences).



I'm not sure if I agree with his prescriptions for new strategies.

Please let me know if I understand correctly:


Yeah, I think so – as far as I understand it at least.

he also had more stuff to say also (such as what else he thought you should do to make money in 2.0)

You guys are awsome - I posted it yesterday and today we have such a nice summary. A question to you did you understand the diagrams? With whole my math education I could not get them.

Oh, I have no idea; I just went off what Bayle said. I don't know if I'm actually representing the actual argument!

That image looks like the kind of stuff that's on KathySierra's CreatingPassionateUsers? blog :)

(I put it up in the document mode, is there a way of having it float on the right ?)

KathySierra & I agree about a lot of things: PlainTalk, VisualLanguage, HypeAndEnthusiasm. We're also both connected to Santa Cruz. (I grew up there, at any rate; not sure what her story is.) But I've been making diagrams this way for a long time.

Zbigniew: I understood some of the diagrams, but I didn't spend time trying to understand all of them. First of all, as I noted above, I think he was a little more verbose than he had to be to get the basic concept across (but the right pace for explaining it as a formal economic model; since that stuff is math-y, it pays to go slowly and give lots of example graphs; although i suspect that rather than capture his model in equations, his aim is really just to communicate to people with an economics background). Second, some of the "pointing labels" on the graphs didn't render well in OpenOffice?, so it was a strugge to interpret them for me. So I can't distinguish between the following possible reasons for the graphs I didn't understand: maybe i didn't understand because I didn't spend enough time, maybe because they didn't render right, maybe they were too difficult or maybe they were nonsense.

Define external redirect: OpenOffice CategoryEconomics CreatingPassionateUsers AttentionEconomy

EditNearLinks: PowerPoint