A lot of the most reliable data on web use and social media comes from the World Internet Project. Most of the findings from the project derive from rigorous quantitative research, and unlike a lot of what purports to be analysis of the web and social media is therefore free of commercial or ideological and boosterish agendas.
WIP’s founder, Professor Jeffrey Cole, is currently in Australia.
Margaret Simons observed in today’s Crikey email that he’d given a briefing to a Fairfax strategy meeting on Monday:
So when Cole speaks, media executives tend to listen, even if they don’t like what they hear. Cole told me yesterday that Fairfax’s Melbourne chief executive, Don Churchill, was “at one with me” on the future of print newspapers, but that some other members of management seemed to think, or at least hope, that the bad times for Fairfax papers would fade with the end of the global financial crisis.
Yesterday afternoon Cole expanded on his views at a public lecture at Swinburne University. He said that print newspapers will cease to exist in the United States within 3-6 years. The rate of decline in Australia is more gradual, but he gives us a maximum of 10 years, with the only possible bright spot being weekend newspapers, because they are more like magazines, some of which will continue to do well.
Simons has posted a longer summary of Cole’s thoughts at her blog, Content Makers.
For me, this the most important trend of those to which Cole refers:
The internet, he said, is now so all pervasive that in the developed world just about anyone who wants to be online is online.
As I’ve been arguing recently, the crucial implication of the massification of the web is that it has become part of everyday life, and therefore ‘internet traditions’ (which in many cases predate the web itself) are now the province of a small minority of users. Not everyone is, or wants to be, a ‘content creator’, or – in the case of the vast majority of those online – interacts with content and with other users in the ways in which the ‘digital pioneers’ did. In other words, for most people, the web, and social media, are just there – part of everyday culture, and not a particular practice which has its own folkways and norms.
In terms of the social uses of technology, reaching something close to saturation point implies a future which is likely to be more stable in terms of uses, and the way users interact. The era when new frontiers seemed ever open is probably over. As Cole observes, particular social networking sites such as Myspace and Facebook may come and go, but the practices which take place on them are here to stay.
Cole also implies that the shape of things to come might be more perceptible now than it has been for quite some time; essentially, content has been radically disaggregated. However, the business models which will put the pieces together will look far more like social networks than media organisations (and will be far more user driven in terms of their niche reaches than publisher centred). My take from his analysis is that there are very few players who’ve picked up on this, and that a few more boats may be missed before the economics of the creation, distribution and social sharing of content reform a pattern.
So true, Mark. However, I would argue that while “the internet” as a culture has largely ceased existence, the norms and folkways you mention are if anything more prolific, albeit disaggregated and thus harder to map.
Take, for example, the humble lol.
Hmmm having read Simons piece now, I think Cole is somewhat cherry-picking his examples.
For example, he talks about the decline of ownership and the rise of services, but if furors over DRM have shown us anything, it’s that people really, really want to own things. Streaming is only a part of the future.
I would argue the internet has exacerbated this from a cultural rather than technological perspective. It’s far easier to find enthusiasts who share the same interests (and objects with you): both knowledge of potential possessions and status anxiety to keep up with your virtual Jones’s can increase very quickly, as can avenues of purchase.
That’s just one example, but I do feel he’s only seeing half the story.
Not sure what DRMs are, Patrick?
Re – lol – true, true, though there’s some evidence its use in texting is on the decline now that character limits are less ubiquitous. You also might be a tad surprised at how many first year university students don’t know what it means! But I think linguistic shifts (which are somewhat broader than net cultures) and the whole panoply of internetty stuff that some might have assumed would become ubiquitous are two different (if overlapping) kettles of fish.
There is one area where it would be nice to see a good internet service – reviews of renovation tradespeople and renovation companies. Presumably there are other services which could do with an internet review site?
We already have some good travel advisory sites, where you can pick practically any spot on the globe and check what people say about its accomodation and various tourist activities. This provides a useful counterpoint to the glossy, overstated websites of the accomodation and tourism providers.
One of the difficulties with both renovation and holidays, is that you typically only do that particular activity once or at most a few times in your life. How many times does one renovate a kitchen? How many times does one visit South America, or Tasmania for that matter? How many acquaintances have done it recently, such that you can get recommendations?
The travel advisory sites are hugely helpful when planning a holiday. There do not appear to be equivalently searchable sites for renovation activities.
A large pool of ignorant customers, negligible repeat business and an inability to share information with future potential customers, is a perfect environment for rip-off prices, poor quality workmanship and unreasonable behaviour. Conversely, the good quality offerings do not get the advertisement and extra patronage that they deserve.
Perhaps the internet has a massive untapped potential to reduce the competitive advantage to poor services from information deficit? Perhaps it also has the potential to drive some improvements in overall standards?
DRM = digital rights management, aka, things that stop you from owning cds, licences to videos etc etc.
Ah ok, gotcha. Fair point!
Anyone who comments on a blog or news site is a content creator. Anyone who has a facebook or myspace account is a content creator. Wouldn’t the majority of internet users be content creators even if some in only a minor way?
The original internet pioneers saw content creation differently (say running a website), but technology supporting wikis, commenting on blogs, web 2.0 etc has significantly changed what is necessary for people to actively participate.
I also agree with patrickg – having things like music/videos you buy hosted by a single company you deal with is pretty risky. There have already been cases of people losing their digital music collections because the companies they have bought their music through have shut down their service.
Yes, Chris – but the thing is most people who are don’t see themselves in that way.
Not rocket science this but still seems to mystify the “brains” who run media companies. Still puzzled by Churchill reference she says Cole claims he was at one with me. Surely she means as one