Nike’s “Dream Crazy” commercial wins an Emmy for “Outstanding Commercial” at the Creative Arts Emmy Awards Ceremony. This is the first time since 2002 that a Nike commercial has won this award. There is much debate regarding Colin Kaepernick’s relationship with Nike. Many people fully support their collaborations because Kaepernick has become a symbol of justice and equal rights. While others, like President Trump, view him as an overdramatic, sub-par athlete. When this commercial came out the mixed reactions showed in Nike’s stock. According to CNBC, Nike’s stock closed the day after the ad’s release after dropping roughly 3.2%. Despite the drop in the stock market, Nike’s online sales saw a major spike. According to Edison Trends, a digital-commerce researcher, Nike product orders rose 27 percent a few days after the ad’s release. Many contribute this spike to the fact that many customers want to support a brand that speaks on political and social issues. Nike does just that and has made this image a key piece of their brand. They recently announced a pro-hijab campaign with dri-fit hijabs to wear while exercising. They have also been known to toss ideas if they are racially triggering. Nike has successfully branded themselves as trend setters and social innovators. Hopefully, Nike will continue this going forward as they continue to receive support from people of many different backgrounds across the world.
At a recent conference in Sun Valley, the heads of top sports league gathered and discussed the potential ways they could use innovative technologies to draw more fans and excite their current supporters.
The issue at hand is that streaming services are becoming so largely popular, and these sports networks such as NFL are not included with all these packages offered. NBA Commissioner Adam Silver told CNBC that the forces they are competing with include every other activity a fan could be doing other than watching the game: being outside in nice weather, work, school, and so many other options. The solution is to make the fan experience more interactive and “more of a lean-in experience” as Silverman coined it. Some ways this is possible include a virtual reality experience which the NBA is experimenting with currently.
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell says tech will be crucial for getting the fans into the stadiums- maintaining ticket sales, fan experience, and even offering WiFi while in the stadium could bring this ordeal to a new level.
I found this article interesting because I’ve always been a sports fan, especially of the NFL. I grew up watching Sunday Night Football and I continue to do so as I cheer on the Ravens each week. However, I also found it interesting to see how the intersection between sports and tech. This article shows me that we are at a point in our society where the use of evolving technology can no longer be avoided. If you chose not to innovate your experience, you will be left behind.
The streaming wars have begun, and HBO Max just became a major contender. With every major media company launching a new streaming service, the battle to obtain IP has commenced. Just recently, Time Warner’s streaming service, HBO Max, announced it will feature all 279 episodes of The Big Bang Theory at its launch in the Spring of 2020. The streaming service will have a rumored starting price of $15.00 a month. However, TBS has confirmed it will continue to air the show until 2028.
While all the services are in a bidding war, Robert Greenblatt,
the chairman of Warner Media, is very excited since The Big Bang Theory
is one of the biggest show on broadcast television in the in the last decade
globally. HBO Wow has also confirmed it will have Friends available to
stream.
In the last week, many shows have been sold to a variety of
streaming services. The Office, which was previously on Netflix, will be
switch to Peacock, NBC Universal’s streaming service, while Netflix snagged Seinfeld,
which was previously on Hulu.
I find this so interesting how all the streaming services are in a fight to gather as much IP as possible. The only frustrating thing for me is how much money all of these services are going to cost. While some argue that being able to pick and choose which streaming service to subscribe to is beneficial, I find it to be a burden. These services just feel like cable with less steps. With all that being said, I am excited to see who buys what and which streaming services will survive the war.
Ever since Facebook introduced live streaming to its social media platform, the company has struggled with violent streams going viral. In light of serious talks on gun violence and mass shootings in the United States, the company hopes to combat the live streaming of shootings posted to their platform by utilizing artificial intelligence. The company has partnered with law enforcement in the US and UK, who will send Facebook first-person shooter videos from their training seminars. The footage will come from police wearing body cameras during these training seminars. Once Facebook receives the videos, they plan to develop an algorithm that can detect live-streams being broadcast by active shooters. Facebook’s Vice President of Product Management said, “We will need to provide our systems with large volumes of data of this specific kind of content, something which is difficult as these events are thankfully rare.” Facebook also released a statement that said, “With this initiative, we aim to improve our detection of real-world, first-person footage of violent events and avoid incorrectly detecting other types of footage such as fictional content from movies or video games.” Facebook will receive the footage sometime in late October and will start to build the algorithm from there.
In my opinion, I think it is great that the company is trying to do something to combat this issue. With several events being broadcast on Facebook Live including the Christchurch Mass Shooting, it is nice that Facebook is developing an algorithm to block this content. It will benefit Facebook users who don’t want to see this content blasted on their social feeds, and will also aid in decreasing the attention and recognition the shooters are looking to gain from the stream. If the algorithm is actually effective, it will be interesting to see what companies can do with it in the future and how artificial intelligence will progress.
As many PC players know, the Valve operated storefront Steam is widely regarded as the definitive place for acquiring PC games. It could be argued that Valve has essentially created a monopoly on the purchasing and owning of computer games. However, recently Some Developers have tried to combat this by creating their own Virtual Storefronts. Of these contenders Epic Game’s Epic Games Store is one that may offer the most challenge. To bolster traffic to their site, Epic Games has decided to make several of their upcoming titles exclusive to the Epic Games Store, negating Steams access to them. This has sparked outrage among many consumers many of whom hold a fondness for Steam as their preferred storefront of choice and have a dislike for Epic Games due to several mistakes the company has made in the past.
Many people believed that this would result in a disaster for Epic Games, hurting both their Storefront and the sales of their games. However, despite what someone listening to what the consumers would believe, it appears the anger toward the Epic Store has not been backed up with action. Both Metro: Exodus and the newly released Borderlands 3 have made more than their Steam hosted predecessors by a wide margin. This could be a worrying development for Valve, showing signs that their era of PC industry domination may be in its twilight years.
Though this success may cause Epic Games to feel more confident in their mission, it is important that they remain cautious. They already have a poor reputation among many consumers, and though it appears they are one the rise, all it will take is one misstep and Valve will reassert its place atop the PC industry pile.
MoviePass is going out of business and it looks like for good. If you’re not familiar, MoviePass is a company that provides a service that allows users to pay a monthly fee and purchase up to 3 movie tickets per month, saving movie goers a whole lot of money. The company has been around for years, but didn’t get much attention until the summer of 2017, where MoviePass announced their too good to be true monthly fee of $9.95.
Imagine that. Less than $10 for three showings a month, where nowadays just one show costs over $12 per ticket, especially if you’re purchasing online (which seems to be the norm as reserved seating makes a greater presence).
Unfortunately, the competitive market ate this company alive. Instead of theaters such as AMC and Regal partnering with MoviePass–as their mission intended–the theaters created their own subscription services, leaving MoviePass scrambling for financial support.
Come summer of 2018, only a year after gaining public attention, the company runs out of money. In efforts to save their demise, MoviePass mustered up as many new pricing schemes as possible, which only landed them with morally suspicious business practices.
Though, hope is not lost. Reports today are saying that former MoviePass chairman, Ted Farnsworth, is trying to purchase the company. He stepped down from his role to avoid any conflict of interest and had this to say to justify his decision:
“‘I believe there is great unrealized value in MoviePass, and we want to rebuild and make sure it reaches its full potential,’ Farnsworth said in a statement. ‘I have always believed in the business model and the brand [former MoviePass CEO] Mitch Lowe and I built at MoviePass. There’s tremendous appetite for movie theater ticket subscription.’”
Which I agree with. Yes, he was part of the team that executed the company’s underwhelming arrival, which led to their predictable end, but I respect how much it changed the game.
We know streaming services are the mainstream now, people are cutting out cable and sticking to online monthly subscriptions. Naturally, this affects cable television networks/companies/investors, but the ease of watching thousands of content options from your couch concurrently affects the box office. There’s less of a reason for people to go out to the movies. With endless options that services like Netflix and Hulu provide, why drive a half hour to see a movie that will eventually end up online anyway?
I love going to the movies with my friends, it’s about the whole experience: Traveling there, sharing predictions, concessions, the act of enjoying an experience with dozens of others, and then, of course, discussing our verdict. MoviePass, and companies alike, aim to keep this culture alive. Who knows what will happen now, but I think this service’s history served as a stepping stone to a greater evolution. Movie theaters need to consider how they will progress if they are ever going to save the box office.
Time spent watching online video is predicted to expand more than 20% over the next 2 years. The time spent watching online video has been growing at an average rate of 32% a year between 2013 and 2018. The amount of time watching these videos online has continiously increased due to the improvements in the media devices that displays them. Marshall McLuhan coined the phrase, “The medium is the massage ” meaning that the channel that the message is transmitted is more important than the content/message. The power of computers increase every 2 years according to Moore’s Law, so the devices to indulge in media will continue to get better.
The content creators like Netflix, Hulu, Premium cable channel’s, put a lot of money and time into original content designed to keep you hooked. In the ending season of Game of Thrones, HBO spent upwards to $15 million in each episode. I’d assume that if a company is willing to put that much money into one episode they are pretty confident that they will make that money back and then some. It is going to be interesting to see who is at the top of the streaming charts in about 5-10 years. Netflix has been the king for the past couple of years, and has created serious buzz with their original content. However, a lot of their subscribers use the service for network TV shows like The Office, Friends, Breaking Bad, Marvel shows and movies. If those networks, and companies were to take their content back like Marvel started to, will Netflix still be at the top of the list. Media giants like Apple, and Disney are coming out with their own streaming service in the near future so it will be interesting to see how things shake up.
As the largest online retailer and one of the wealthiest companies in the world, Amazon seems to have their hand in a bit of everything. They own a variety of successful business, including the popular grocery chain Whole Foods, online companies such as Zappos and Internet Movie Database, IMDb.
To accompany their other business ventures, the rise of streaming is a trend Amazon definitely did not sleep on, either. Amazon Prime Video is one of the top movie and TV streaming services, alongside popular services such as Netflix, Hulu, HBO Now/Go, and PlayStation Vue.
So far, we chart Amazon in the online retail business, health-food grocer business, TV and movie streaming business, and more. They are a multimedia company and an advanced technology company. What else is left for Amazon to take on? Answer: the music industry.
Amazon just launched Amazon Music HD, which competes with popular music streaming services such as Spotify, Apple Music, and Tidal. Prior to launching their HD music streaming service, Amazon already had Amazon Prime Music which was available for free to Prime subscribers. Their new, high definition service claims to offer lossless audio at up to 850 kbps (more than double the bit-rate of Spotify and Apple Music). Their main competetor for this kind of advanced audio is Jay-Z’s Hi-Fi Tidal plan, which can be purchased at $19.99 per month. Amazon’s new HD music streaming service charges $14.99 per month, and offers a $2 discount if you are a Prime subscriber.
According to Amazon’s Vice President of Music, Steve Boom, Amazon is not going for a “niche player” type service, but rather aim to disrupt the current top dogs, Apple and Spotify. I find myself wondering if their proclaimed advanced audio will hit the average ear in a way that makes consumers want to switch from their trusted streaming services. In Amazons recent press release, Neil Young spoke to the topic saying that Amazon’s new high quality streaming service “will be the biggest thing to happen in music since the introduction of digital audio 40 years ago”. A bold statement from a true music legend.
Amazon Music HD and Ultra HD launches September 17th, 2019.
With the recent expansion of streaming services available, competition for content is at an all time high. NBCU and Apple Streaming are just two of the many streaming services challenging Netflix, and threatening the content available to subscribers. One of the more recent headlines, as explored in a MediaPost.com article, is the acquisition of the legendary series Seinfeld. Netflix is losing two of their most popular series, Friends and The Office to alternate services, so they secured Seinfeld for an approximate $500 million dollar 5 year deal starting in 2021. The sitcom was previously available on Hulu, and is expected to compensate for the losses, despite Netflix’s overall subscriber rate slowing.
A recent survey also reports 45% of Netflix users would reconsider their subscriptions if alternate sources pull their favorite content from the renowned watching application. In the same breath, 45% of people associate Netflix with the streaming brand, showing its dominance in the scene. In the future, it will be interesting to see how other brands develop, and reclaim their content, and the affects that has on the original streaming services.
This article struck my interest because streaming media content has become a regular part of my daily routine, and the scene is currently changing. The Office is among my favorite shows of all time, and it is upsetting to me it will no longer be available on Netflix. The expansion of streaming services is inconvenient as a consumer, because if I want to be able to access specific shows, I will have to consider paying for yet another subscription. Netflix Original movies are entertaining, but the series can not compare to the iconic staples that have been available on the platform. I, among other users, would consider cancelling the subscriptions if too many of the quality series are removed. If another platform presents itself to be superior, I would definitely consider paying for that instead. I am also curious as to what Apple’s content will consist of on their new streaming platform, and how successful it will be.
The scene for television and movie consumption has certainly changed in the last decade, and continues to adapt and provide the consumers with more options. It will be interesting to see the future potential for these companies.
Google, who has been one of the main drivers behind the constantly changing methods to search engines, announced Sunday that they will be implementing a big change when it comes to searching for information online. Google Search will now allow users to have access to links that will bring them to specific moments in videos that match what they typed in the search bar. Essentially, Google’s search engine will be able to give online users the power to scan and find the exact moments in videos that addresses what they typed in.
Innovation such as this has left many individuals shocked and excited to try it out for themselves. Before, Google’s search engines were only capable of displaying links to entire videos that matched what was entered in the search bar. By allowing users to access specific moments in videos that relate to their searches, Google employees believe individuals will be able to save countless amounts of time when browsing the web.
“People can now search for content and scan a video to determine whether a video has specific content. This change also makes video content more accessible for those using screen readers” (Laurie Sullivan).
According to an updated forecast released by Publicis Media, time spent watching online video is expected to expand more than 20% in the next two years reaching a peak average of 100 minutes daily. Google appears to be recognizing this trend and moving towards making video content much more accessible and easy to find for all of its users.
YouTube creators have also been working in parallel with this innovation movement in search engines by having the ability to add time-stamp information to link important areas/points in the description section of their videos. Google’s new search technology will be able to recognize the text and time-stamp YouTube creators have put in their description therefore bringing users to that specific point in the video.
This is just another clear example of the increasing processing power and ability of online search engines that we use every single day. Clearly, there is a large amount of benefit from these improvements such as researchers being able to find specific video content they are looking for much easier or even marketers gaining the ability to show users their important content in different points of videos. Yet, I believe a critical eye/analysis should be cast on these changes to consider the consequences that may come. With online users expecting to increase as well as the time spent on these platforms, “internet addiction” could spike drastically. Our generation is moving towards this kind of hyper-reality where the power to access information and data through stronger technology is rising. At what point will this ability be too much or rather too dangerous in a sense? Technology will never stop improving so we must be prepared for the pros and cons that will most certainly come with it.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/63005448/moviepass_future_andrew_ringer_illo.0.jpg)
Current Issues In Media Management 