______________________________
Alina Gainullina
Do you consider logical the trend of readers moving from print media to internet, whilst the profits aren’t following them?
Jim Chisholm
We aren’t seeing anything new at all, and we shouldn’t be surprised about what’s happening. The profit historically has been in the print product, but so were the costs. Therefore, it must be possible to make good profits in a digital world… and there are some companies that successfully do. Nevertheless, there are some critical concerns. The first one is that the intensity of consumption of digital products is far lower than that of the print products, and that’s why they find it so hard to get revenues. Publishers are successfully getting people to read our products in the digital world, but what they aren’t doing is making them read those products often enough and spend enough time with them.
Alina Gainullina
So, you think there’s a direct connection between the time users spend with media and the profits?
Jim Chisholm
Absolutely. If you look at how each newspaper copy is distributed, about 2.6 people read it in print and about 1.3 read it in digital format… these are the average figures for Europe. Of course, there are the exceptions like The New York Times, The Guardian, and so on. If you look, if you ask yourself how often in a month people visit media, they visit the print papers 16 times, whilst for digital papers, it’s just six. During that time, they look at 36 pages in print and just 3.5 in digital. Over a month, print continues to deliver over 50 times the audience intensity of newspaper digital websites. Therefore, the net result is that people are far more likely to see an advertisement in print than in digital, and they’re far more likely to pay for the content in print than in digital. This is why it’s going to be so difficult… and is difficult now… to make revenues.
Alina Gainullina
Does the major challenge for traditional media lie in the area of social networks, UGC, or anything else?
Jim Chisholm
I think that social networks are a waste of time, a passing fad. When you see the invitation on the top of the homepage to go away from the newspaper immediately and to go to Facebook first… to me, it’s really dumb. What you’re doing is you’re sending your readers off, whilst your biggest problem is to keep them on your website. I have a lot of worries about the social networks. I also personally don’t believe the idea about discovering content on Facebook and getting readers from there really works. UGC’s a completely different world. This content needs to be well-managed, needs to be well-presented. We need far more opportunities in terms of data journalism and getting through the thousands of messages. That’s going to be a real breakthrough, I think. At the same time, it’s going to need editorial resources. There was a feeling during the last couple of years that journalism was under threat because of UGC. However, I think the opposite… UGC isn’t going to replace professional journalism.
Alina Gainullina
Are you going to speak about this at the Future Media Forum? What else are you going to discuss with the participants at this event?
Jim Chisholm
I’ll talk about reading intensity… print purchase and reading frequency, the number of visitors relative to circulation, the number of pages the user visits, and the amount of time he spends there. Small increments in each step have a major effect on the outcome. If Russian digital media specialists want to attract users and consequently to secure profits, they have to deal scientifically with the matter of reading behaviour. For example, many websites are extremely difficult to navigate, and digital editors don’t admit it. Sometimes, you have just to look at the websites to see why some of them work, and some… do not. One of the things I’m working on separately with Moscow is a project where we compare the creative aspects of the website (the way it looks, photographs, navigation) with its statistics. Another thing we need to do is to spend far more on marketing and far more on our customers to be loyal.
Alina Gainullina
Is there a chance for print newspapers to find their way back to readers?
Jim Chisholm
They’re unlikely to make a significant recovery in their current form. We’re likely to see more specialism, so, more papers in the print business. Localisation remains strong. Nevertheless, the chance to attract young readers to new print forms is actually nil, particularly in a country like Russia, where the penetration of newspapers is very low indeed. However, I see huge opportunities in tablets, e-readers, etc. The reading behaviour on these devices is very similar to print products, and here it’s possible to get profits from working similarly. Le Monde reports that reading times of eReader applications are as high as those of printed newspapers. American publishers have found that subscription conversion and retention levels for eReaders are higher than for print products. Finally, a German study found that older people read faster on the iPad than in print. Now, about 1 percent of newspaper digital revenues are from mobile users. The reason is that handheld devices have limitations in terms of navigation, and advertising presentation. Nevertheless, mobile offers dramatic audience and revenue potential, but requires new medium concepts… repurposing current content won’t be enough.
Alina Gainullina
Which trends in media development we will see in the coming five years?
Jim Chisholm
The first trend is an absolute exposure in usage of tablets, e-readers, and other devices. We will also see more meta-forms of navigation, because navigation on mobile substantially differs from on the screen of a desktop PC. That makes a big difference in terms of how one consumes the media. I also think we’ll see a new generation of search, built around the tools of data journalism. It’ll be far more granular and intuitive, than, for example, Google is, and it’ll empower our reading and knowledge experience. Those things will drive the new digital world.
7 June 2012
RIA-Novosti
“The Sentiments Expressed by the Bolotnaya Square Protesters are Different from those Expressed by Other Protesters in Russia”: Natalia Narochnitskaya
Tags: United States, Russia, Russian, mass media, politics, Soviet Union, USSR, USA, Moscow, Natalia Narochnitskaya, European Union, Western world, Russian culture, Western Europe, Corporate Media, journalists, media, EU, Cyprus, political commentary, US media, Western media, Non-governmental organization, West, dissident, Russian dissident, NGO, journalism, Bolotnaya Square, Media bias, intellectuals, intellectual standards, Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Konrad Adenauer Foundation
______________________________
Valdaiclub.com interview with Natalia Narochnitskaya, Director of the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation in Paris and president of the Historical Perspective Foundation in Moscow
VC
Do you think the inspections of NGOs by the Prokuratura discredit these groups in the eyes of society, which is the goal, or do they discredit the government?
Narochnitskaya
It depends. The Western media are sure that these inspections discredit the authorities… that’s how they portray these audits. These NGOs, especially the most-high-profile ones, are their icons and they’ll portray them as heroes. As for Russian society, certain people, mainly in Moscow, share this view, but people in the rest of Russia don’t see these inspections as discrediting the authorities in any way. It’s important to understand that our society doesn’t have a united stand on this issue. The sentiments expressed by the Bolotnaya Square protesters are different from those expressed by other protesters in Russia. That’s my answer.
VC
Will these inspections further strain relations between activists and the authorities?
Narochnitskaya
Again, it depends. I think there are two unequal camps in the activist community. The *liberal Western-oriented camp that calls itself the “non-systemic” opposition is concentrated in Moscow and it’s very small on a national scale. However, this is the only opposition that the West notices, and, as a result, they’ll probably grow even more hysterical in their hatred of the Russian government.
As for the majority of activists in the rest of Russia, they lean more towards left-wing views. They aren’t sad that the 1990s are over, but they feel like the car broke down on the road leading away from the ‘90s. These people are more worried about pensions, re-industrialisation, jobs, fighting corruption, and the decline of Russians as the dominant ethnic group in the country. However, they like Russia’s strong foreign policy and tough response to Western pressure. I don’t think these audits had any effect on their attitudes. They might even welcome them.
VC
Do you think there’s a connection between the audits of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation (KAS) and the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES), during which the auditors removed their computers and papers with Angela Merkel’s position on Cyprus?
Narochnitskaya
Maybe, but I don’t think so. By the way, in the West, many experts believe this, and in private conversation they’ll say that EU leaders probably gave Cyprus an ultimatum… make no agreements with Russia, or you won’t receive any cash and the EU will simply engineer its collapse in one week. I’ve heard this from British and French experts. In a brief statement on Cyprus’s collapse, Viktor Gerashchenko said off-the-cuff that probably this decision was directed against Russia and that Cyprus was being punished for its pro-Russian position and refusal to let the West anywhere near the deposits discovered on the country’s continental shelf. There was a risk that Russia might get a hold in this key strategic area in the Mediterranean. Nevertheless, I still believe that the EU had bigger motives in Cyprus. We can hardly consider the removal of computers as a “retaliatory measure”. They simply caught these NGOs in the same net as all the others.
VC
Do you think that these inspections are a pretext to put off the issue of establishing visa-free travel between Russia and Europe?
Narochnitskaya
For Europe and the EU, this is the pretext they’ve been looking for in order to hold up a process that they’re simply not ready for. No doubt, they’ll use it and cling to it. However, in reality… and experts have long known this… they aren’t ready for visa-free travel with Russia. They’re doing everything to impede the process, saying that they’ll have to deal with a wave of illegal workers from Asia and the Caucasus.
VC
What problems are Russian NGOs facing abroad?
Narochnitskaya
The media speaks ill of Russia or not at all. The French press is in the lead and the European media in general is acting in much the same manner. They welcome only those Russian NGOs that rabidly insist that no country in the world is worse and has fewer rights than post-Yeltsin Russia. They invite such people to speak on television very often. By the way, they’re from NGOs that receive official funds from the US budget. The US Congress is partially-financing institutions of the Republican and Democratic parties, Freedom House, Human Rights Watch, and many Russian NGOs. I shudder to think what they would’ve written about my Institute of Democracy and Cooperation if we’d received a penny from the Russian budget.
By the way, I’ve just come back from America where I had a conversation with a prominent banking analyst. I asked him directly what he thinks about the campaign in the press against the new law requiring that NGOs funded from abroad must declare this if they conduct political activities in Russia. He laughed and said that in the USA foreign funding of political activities carries criminal penalties. He said a man from China contributed to a local election campaign in one city and received a 10-year prison term.
No matter what we do and what important events with distinguished people we hold, there’ll be little or no coverage. Sometimes, they invite us to be on television. If a Russian NGO in a foreign country doesn’t spew hatred for the government, even if it readily discusses our sins, they’ll always describe it as a Kremlin agency funded by the budget, even though this is a total lie. This is the constant insinuation you hear, based on some blogs. The academic community in Europe is much fairer and more objective, and it’s easier to work with them. We’re trying to involve them in serious roundtables where we always criticise corruption and other vices in Russian politics or the economy. Three years ago, our office in Paris opened with a seminar offering a comparative analysis of anti-corruption laws in France and Russia, which put Russia in an unfavourable light. We had interesting speakers on our side, and we acknowledged that corruption is a systemic problem that can’t be resolved quickly. However, nobody cares about this.
Here’s another example of what often happens. When my name came up in connection with the establishment of my institute’s office in Paris, many newspapers asked me for an interview… l’Express, Le Figaro, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, and The Chicago Tribune {did Sophia Kishkovsky or Serge Schmemann interview Professor Narochnitskaya? Perspirin’ minds wanna know…: editor}. I talked with all of them at least for an hour about everything, including culture, insight into life in each other’s countries, and the desire to break the glass wall of misunderstanding that separates us. A French woman from l’Express and I even got to talking about Baudelaire’s poetry and hugged each other goodbye. You should’ve seen what her newspaper wrote! I regretted that I was so naïve and didn’t switch on the recorder. I could’ve published it online so that everyone could see that they clearly instructed her to write a negative story. Nevertheless, I didn’t say anything negative and she published in her newspaper three routine anti-Putin paragraphs that had nothing to do with our conversation and one sentence about our meeting… “This is the aim of the agency that will be headed by Natalia Narochnitskaya, whom I had a chance to meet”.
Frankfurter Allgemeine was the only newspaper to report what I said without sneering and in good faith. Its coverage reflected their understanding of what I said. An article in Le Figaro read, “Oh what a fierce debater they’ve sent from Russia!” I take pride in this! Speaking about freedom of the press in the West, the press is so subordinated to editorial policy that it’s long ceased to reflect the diversity of public thinking and public opinion in its own countries. Public opinion in these countries is much more complex, and many more people are quite fair in their views of Russia. I won’t say they’re fond of Russia, but they’re willing to listen calmly to positive information about the country. My European friends and partners tell me they’re sick and tired of hysterical Russophobia in the press. Incidentally, already, Russophobia has become marginal. The articles by André Glucksman have become so grotesque that they remind me of our incomparable Valeria Novodvorskaya {a pro-Western Quisling… she writes for the New York Times… did this traitor mentor Sophia Kishkovsky? Interesting angle, no?: editor}. The press has taken it so far that soon its coverage will have the opposite effect. This is what happened with anti-capitalist propaganda in the Khrushchyov era. We’ll discuss this problem… the origins of Russophobia… at a conference at Sapienza University of Rome in Italy in May, which I’m attending. The Italian side, not us, suggested the idea. This is already a good sign.
8 May 2013
Valdai Discussion Club
http://valdaiclub.com/politics/58200.html