ESPN

Please tell me why I should stay with Sky

cablecordcut-100155124-large

So can anyone give me a single reason why I should still have a Sky account?

Don’t say sport, I can stream whatever I want…plus there are multiple sports channels with far more sport than most could consume available on multiple systems including Apple TV, Amazon Fire TV (I have both) plus other systems. ESPN boxing and MMA coverage is superb, plus other sports that are never aired on NZ television, without paying extortionate fees to Sky TV for channels I barely watch.

Don’t say Movies, I can get whatever I want through Netflix, Hulu, HBO and a myriad of other services that in total don’t add up to the cost of even Sky Basic. ? Read more »

News IS Entertainment

Much was made about John Key describing Campbell Live as “entertainment”…failing entertainment but entertainment nonetheless.

The left-wing were agog…how dare they call Saint John’s show entertainment…yet that is precisely how people consume news these days.

A recent article at Baekdal on wider media trends explains why. But the news segment is fascinating:

What about TV news? Is that dead? Well, this one is tricky.

Dedicated news channels like CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News are not really something people watch because of the news. They are more a form of entertainment and as such fit perfectly with the 2.8 hours of leisure TV per day.

As such, neither of these (nor their European counterparts) are in any real trouble. There will be changes commanded by the nature of on-demand TV (and the internet in general), but no real ‘disruption’. ?? Read more »

Tagged:

Journalists relying on criminals to do their reporting for them

http://youtu.be/Ot1gIsrL9T0

While Matt Nippert and David ‘Tainted’ Fisher are lapping up the adulation of the script kiddies in Wellington there is yet another article about the failure of journalistic ethics, where it appears that journalists are quite happy to rely on criminals to their reporting for them.

These so-called investigative journalists are even still in touch with the hacker of my emails (if tweets from the Kiwicon are accurate)…so much for their journalistic integrity and they claims at being investigative journalists.

Ryan Holiday, someone knows a thing or two about manipulating the media, writes?about the media’s strategy of relying on criminals to do their reporting for them.

At first, I thought the media response to the celebrity hacking scandal was sanctimonious. Now I realize it was rank hypocrisy. Just shameless, awful hypocrisy from a group hardly better than the criminals they enable.

Because after every outlet, from Perez Hilton to Jezebel, called the hack, leak and publishing of nude photos of celebrities, including Kate Upton and Jennifer Lawrence, a crime, none of them seem to have any problem publishing the spoils of the Sony hack, particularly the many private conversations of its co-chairman Amy Pascal.

As Marc Andreessen put it on Twitter last week: ?Hackers steal a company?s email files. No bad acts by company revealed. Press prints emails. Journalism, or federal crime??

That?s exactly right. It?s the question we should be asking here.

How on earth do all these outlets?including The New York Times no less?justify printing or covering the contents of private emails obtained through clearly criminal acts? And not only that, but many in the media consider it real journalism and, in one case, criticize Sony for ?choosing to stay silent? for months before telling anyone they?d been a victim?

?There?s really no other way to explain the horrifying lack of empathy so many of them show, time and time again, when women of all levels of fame are treated like they exist to be bullied and mocked.?

Well put, Jezebel. It makes it extra ironic that your boss, Nick Denton actually wrote a memo to Gawker?s staff in which he lauded the publishing of the Sony emails and said ?that?s how good our editorial can be every day.? Really? That?s how good? Not: That?s how low we?re willing to stoop. This is the same guy who spoke last year about wanting to have a company people were proud to work at. These are the same people who criticized the supposed bullying tactics of #GamerGate, even though what they do is just as bad.

Read more »

What Nate Silver leaving means for NY Times and why he left

I blogged about the news that Nate Silver was leaving NY Times and moving to ESPN.

Tech Republic writer Marc Tracy looks at what this all means…for the NY Times and for ESPN. The NY Times loses traffic…eyeballs, that came for Nate and stayed.

Silver was the?Times?news section?s most recognizable politics writer. As I?reported?last November, in the run-up to Election Day, one-fifth of visits to nytimes.com included stops at Silver?s 538 blog. In many cases, visitors arrived at the site by searching for him. ?He has been a journalist of great value to the?Times?in this election,? executive editor Jill Abramson told me at the time. ?What?s interesting is a lot of the traffic is coming just for Nate.? (Abramson declined to comment Saturday.)

So of course it is a ?blow.? But it is at least worth noting that what Silver did was never the?Times? core competency when it comes to politics. And the sort of thing that Silver grew famous for condemning, in which cable-news prognosticators discuss ?narratives? while disregarding the polls that sit right in front of them, is also not a good description of what?Times?politics coverage does best. ?? Read more »

×