Media predictions 2016 – what was right and what was wrong?

Time for me to mark my own homework again. 12 months ago I made some predictions for 2016.

How on point do they look at the end of the year?

1. Ad-blockers will go mainstream

If you’re under 25 you are almost as likely to use an ad-blocker as not.

And the numbers are rising.

This year’s Reuters Digital News Report made the same point:

Ad blockers age

One report, published in the summer, suggests a 90% jump in ad-blocking on mobile devices in the past year alone.

That said, mobile network Three seems to have gone luke-warm on its plan to introduce automatic ad-blocking for all consumers.

As I argued last year, this is all about user experience.

If users feel ad blockers cut data usage, improve page delivery speeds and kill off ultra-intrusive formats such as splash screens, they will vote with their feet.

There are some signs of progress in the ad industry.

But companies need to move faster to tackle what is a potentially existential threat.

Once an ad-blocker is installed, what incentive is there to remove it?

Appeals to logic are not sufficient.

I teach undergraduate journalism students.

Rough in class surveys suggest that most of them use ad-blockers and none of them pay for news, but they still want to work in an industry being strangled by a lack of digital revenues.

I’d say this prediction was correct.

2. A choice to make: destination vs distribution 

Would it be distribution or destination in 2016?

Not much doubt the resounding answer was distribution.

The old adage that you should be where you customers are, held true again.

But the underlying financial weakness of this as a business strategy has been shown again and again.

Buzzfeed and NowThis are both heavily invested in a distributed content strategy.

They’re both huge content farms that appear to make essentially no money from distributed content but use it as an advert for their branded content businesses.

Both companies also continue to attract significant VC investment.

But is this a sustainable business strategy or are the disrupters at risk of being disrupted?

It’s not yet clear but should the financial outlook turn chilly in 2017, things may come more sharply into focus.

The question in the prediction was right – whether it was the right answer though is debatable.

Let’s call it a half.

3. Innovation will move to the heart of the newsroom

More innovation was on show in 2016.

The Washington Post demonstrated there’s still some life in newspapers.

And there was a lot of talk about VR and immersive video. Not least at The Guardian.

But there’s still a long way to go to make it deliver as a story-telling medium.

Have newsrooms really embraced innovation? There are some examples of progress.

For the most part, though, the answer seems to be to keep doing what they’ve always done while incrementally changing.

That’s hardly a surprise. But disappointing nonetheless.

4. Twitter will face an existential crisis

Boy, did it ever.

It’s been a tough year for Twitter.

Shares tanked after a failed sale over the summer.

And costs are running so high it’s losing $500 million a year on revenues of $2 billion.

Its active monthly user base appears maxed out at circa 300 million.

And it has a terrible reputation for trolling, misogyny, and racist abuse.

Twitter is going to have to change to continue to exist – there can’t be a standstill point here – without change it will decline and die.

No company can survive for long on flatline growth and losses of hundreds of millions.

And those of us who love it will have to hope that its charm and vibrancy isn’t destroyed in the process.

5. Managing decline in TV news

It has been another great year for TV news content.

Huge stories and amazing, brave and fascinating reporting.

But the slow decline of the medium continues.

As a fascinating report for the Reuters Institute for Journalism by Professor Richard Sambrook showed, a sustained decline of 3-4% in audience per year is comparable to those seen by newspapers a decade ago.

And the inexorable rise of on-demand programming shows that linear programming is, at least in the long-run, dead.

The BBC News Channel may have survived the latest cuts – at least for now – but TV news is in long term decline.

That doesn’t mean everything ends tomorrow.

But editors need to think hard about what the netflix of TV news looks like, even as disruptors like Vice move into the linear space.

We know that traditional TV packaging doesn’t work well in social news.

Can a lean-back experience deliver where a smartphone based approach won’t?

A tough nut to crack but one that I hope will be solved in the coming years.

So I make that three and a half out of five. Thoughts for 2017 will be coming shortly.

Advertisements

Author: Matt Walsh

Journalist

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s