4 thoughts on “Who will win the global news race?

  1. Kevin

    Jun 12. 2014

    Interesting article, Colin. However the BBC is NOT “state owned”. This implies that it’s a state broadcaster but in fact it’s a public service broadcaster, a subtle but important difference. It is a statutory corporation independent of government intervention, and governed by a Board of Trustees and is in effect owned by the licence fee payers.

    Moving the funding of the World Service from the Foreign Office to the licence fee earlier this year is nothing to do with its ambitions as a global broadcaster (as you seem to imply) but part of a cost-cutting exercise by the UK government.

    Here in the UK at least, the BBC’s web and mobile services are seen as very good, and despite its recent travails, its overpaid and often incompetent management, its never-ending ability to shoot itself in the foot it and make crises out of dramas and cock-ups; is the trust and affection engendered by the BBC brand both at home and abroad that will be key to its future growth as a global broadcaster, rather than aping BuzzFeed, as Stringer seems to suggest.

    Reply to this comment
  2. Nachikethass

    Jun 12. 2014

    This article dissects as well as represents the reason for ‘traditional’ news companies’ failure. Keep it short – the new generation does not read long-winded articles.

    Reply to this comment
  3. Paul Hem, Jr.

    Jun 12. 2014

    The fact that media convergence was covered very well by this article, makes it even more of an exciting read. A U.K., U.S., Australia news axis would be an exciting development for international news, including tech news. After all, “The sun never sets…”

    Reply to this comment
  4. Vincent

    Jun 19. 2014

    @Nachikethass “traditional news companies failure”… Traditional companies, and not only news media, are morphing, not failing to meet the challenge of digital disruption. Newspapers are worth 170 billion USD revenues annually, before the book and the music industries. This does not take into account an increasing global and combined audience (print-online-mobile). Just look at the revenue stream shift occurring in the US branch in 2014. This is a significant, dramatic change in financial profile of our business in just a few short years, and self explanatory :

    Newspapers revenue stream has changed dramatically in just the past five years. In 2007, advertising of all types accounted for over 81% of revenue, paid circulation 16%, and other forms of revenue 3%.

    Last year, the data show a very different picture. Circulation [including paid digital content] now makes up 29% of total newspaper media revenue, new revenue sources 8%, digital advertising 9%, niche publishing and direct marketing 8%, and newspaper print advertising 46%..

    Revenue from digital channels — advertising, circulation, digital marketing services, and other — rose 5.8% and accounted for 12% of total industry revenue.

    The group of newly-developing and other revenue increased 5% overall. The component of digital agency and marketing services, where newspaper media companies tap into interest among local businesses in the digital environment, increased 43%.

    Digital advertising rose to $3.42 billion and accounted for 19% of advertising revenue; pure-play (digital only) advertising rose 14%. Mobile advertising revenue, though a small portion of overall total revenue (less than 1%), jumped 77%.


    Reply to this comment

What do you think?