Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Lesson 142 Achieving Media Literacy

December 7, 2012 by larrylauer

The consequence of the digital revolution has been an explosion of information, much of which is not checked for accuracy or objectivity.  24/7 news channels, bloggers, and websites that bring information together with various motivations all require consumers to become their own editors. Is it therefore possible to teach consumers how to be selective editors, and to understand the importance of consuming a wide range of viewpoints? If so, where and how can this education take place? And who should be responsible for making it happen?

For example, is it possible for the news media themselves to assume some responsibility for generating a greater awareness of the situation? Certainly traditional news networks and newspapers could offer ongoing public service messages that point out the need to regulate one’s own information consumption. 

With greater public awareness it should be possible to get other initiatives noticed as well. For example, parent-teacher organizations could offer programs on media literacy. I know from experience that these are eager audiences for programs about the effects of media. Other service and religious organizations are also likely to take notice and find such programs to be of interest to their constituents.

Public awareness should also make it easier for schools to offer various types of study units. Elementary teachers  can offer activities that show children how to select the media they use. Social studies and english teachers can incorporate study units into more comprehensive courses. Complete courses on media literacy can be offered for the more highly motivated students.

Think tanks, foundations and associations could be asked to sponsor many of these school and community projects. And some of them might even want to launch projects of their own. Books, articles, study materials, and videos can be produced to support the cause. Websites can act as portals leading to even more information. Blogs can offer ongoing media criticism. And social media campaigns can generate ongoing conversations. All of this has the potential to produce widespread public awareness, and even behavior change.

Experience suggests that the key to increased media literacy is therefore a multi-faceted effort, i.e. combining media messages with more comprehensive courses and public programs. This simultaneous mixture of initiatives could  reach large numbers of people. And even minimal knowledge can make a significant difference. It does not take long to convey how important it is to have an accurate account of what is actually happening in the world, and how to get it. It’s just a matter of getting started.

Posted in Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 141 Politics and Media Revolutions

November 30, 2012 by larrylauer

When television became the dominant medium during the 1950’s it pretty much set the criteria for who could be successful in politics. Today, the digital Internet revolution has added still more criteria.

Performing well on television is important to winning elections and maintaining a leadership persona in the legislature. But it is more than being physically attractive.  This is why film directors do screen tests. Some people actually look better on television. But looking good is only part of being comfortable talking to a camera. Even effective speakers can become awkward when there is no audience there to respond.

Once elected, standing out in the legislative crowd requires knowing the issues currently in the news, having the ability to address them simply and confidently, and knowing the right audiences to please. In other words, strategic communication expertise becomes essential.  It is no longer only about having political convictions. Now, it is also about knowing how and when to perform. And all of this has been shaped by television.

Television has also become a major cost factor. The success of political advertising in various media, especially television, has made it even more so. Consultants discovered sometime ago that finding out something negative about the opponent, making a fast-paced and emotional TV ad, and then repeating it over and over, can be a very effective political tool. And so the ever escalating use of these ads inflates overall costs enormously. 

In addition to television, the digital revolution has added new complexity to the campaign horserace.  Websites are used as portals to more information about the candidate. Position papers appear on them to address the issues. And they also become on-line interactive vehicles for raising money.  Twitter keeps followers informed about the candidates’ minute-to-minute activities, and urges attendance at staged political events.  Facebook is a way the campaign can request individuals to influence the behavior of their “friends.” And electronic zip code analysis provides campaigns with consumer preference information that allows them to match buying behavior with political interests. Analysts also help determine the most popular retail and other locations for events and promotions.

As in other situations, what works best on television and digital technology influences the nature and complexity of the messages.  For the most part that means messaging is simple and focused on broad emotional themes, such as jobs and the economy. Polls are used to determine those themes and preferences, and often result in making extreme statements, each one customized for each zip code.

Political reporting is effected too. Characterizing candidates in this kind of environment usually will lead to reinforcing polarization and extreme rhetoric. This makes great news copy, and  24/7 cable channels, talk radio hosts, and bloggers with a political bias, thrive on it.  All of  this, however, is creating an ongoing, ever polarizing, political dynamic with few clues about how to do better.

And so proficiency with media in many ways determines who can be successful in politics today, and there are both good and alarming consequences.

Posted in Leadership, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 140 Higher Education and the Internet

November 23, 2012 by larrylauer

Writing in the Boston Globe, Joseph E. Aoun, President of Northeastern University, recently asserted that massive open online courses, referred to as MOOCs, could mean “the end of higher education as we know it.” Start-up companies such as Coursera and Udacity are aggregating courses from various universities and offering them online. Some of the top universities in the U.S. are contributing courses. Anyone can enroll. Most courses are free. Millions have already signed up.

MOOCs promise greater access to large numbers of people, many of whom have no other way to enroll in college. The best professors and the most sophisticated technology can be featured, and so the American Council on Education (ACE) is investigating the feasibility of offering credit. For many pioneering universities it can also be a brilliant international marketing initiative. Offering these courses tells the world that no matter where you are you can have access to the most prestigious institutions in the world, and you can have it for free!  In an industry that is rapidly becoming global this kind of visibility and recognition is priceless worldwide brand reinforcement.

Some see these new organizations, or aggregators, eventually becoming degree granting organizations. They also view this development as primarily opening up various types of credentialing, from degrees to certificates, not just to aggregators, but to associations and governments as well. But others still persist in thinking that these courses will merely function as easy entry points into more traditional institutions. These people continue to believe that a complete education requires a signficant amount of actual face-to-face interaction. But whatever the result, MOOCs are likely to be significant game-changers for traditional universities.

Up to now on-line education has had somewhat of a different focus. Both for-profit companies and universities have been developing online degrees and certificates, but mostly for adults and nontraditional students, and mostly part-time.  This market has been largely driven by the need for convenience. For many people work and family obligations make enrolling in traditional residential or commuter institutions very difficult. 

But a large drop-out rate has been seen in almost all on-line programs. Analysts cite the lack of social and face-to-face interaction as one big reason. So digital specialists are working on innovative ways of addressing this problem online. But the lack of  real life interaction is partly why my university has gone ahead and made a big investment in the belief that there will always be a significant market for a collegiate, residential, total university experience.  Online at TCU will function mostly as a supplement. Digital media will certainly change the way professors teach. It will enhance the efficiency and quality of many subjects. And it will bring in experts and experiences from all parts the world, and keep students and faculty interconnected no matter where they travel.

Google searches alone have already transformed research, student preparation, and even term paper writing. We are indeed in the early stages of a dramatic sea change in all of education. President’s Aoun’s suggestion that all this in the end will “change higher education as we know it” is no doubt accurate. Not only is this industry rapidly becoming global, but new media will also continue to change every aspect of the game. 

In the final analysis, media technology will bring many more revolutionary improvements to education than we can envision. And it’s indeed exciting to imagine all the possibilities. But, also experiencing the world of discovery face-to-face with inspired  teachers and committed fellow students will always be at the heart of a truly meaningful education for many of us. To know people only online is not to really know them at all. That special connection between teacher and student is what makes the real difference. And that’s what you remember for a lifetime.

Posted in Branding, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 139 Media and Religion

November 17, 2012 by larrylauer

It’s interesting to explore the reasons why one denomination or religion might use media more effectively than another.  Is it a matter money?  Or is it a matter of the skills and interests of those in charge?  Or is it something more illusive?  In short, why does one group use television to spread the word far and wide, and another continue to worship almost exclusively in buildings.

I explored these questions many years ago when television was new. But today the media landscape has broadened to include the Internet, websites, email, cell phones, texting, Facebook, Twitter, and more. 

So what does determine which groups choose to use media, and which ones don’t?  I have found that looking at the basic nature of each medium, and comparing  those characteristics to how each group approaches its fundamental religious  subject matter, can give us very important clues, if not answers.

Electronic media tend to favor very simple content. Its use normally requires reducing complex ideas to simple message points. For example, too much factual information on television can quickly become boring. Facebook is a vehicle primarily for maintaining relationships and is not an effective communicator of complex ideas.  Twitter requires messages to be conveyed in only 140 characters and is a tool that is mostly effective when mobilizing action. Email can inform in short paragraphs. Texting is best at connecting. Cell phones allow talking on the go.  

Television is especially interesting because it effectively combines simple messaging with dramatic and emotional experiences. Cameras, editing, scenery, music, pacing and impassioned performance are naturals for television, and denominations and churches that can combine a simple message with these to produce a religious experience find it a natural, and in some cases a primary, medium.

So denominations that see their content in terms of simple clear messages, and find it natural to translate that into more emotional religious experiences, seem to be much more at home with television and other forms of new media.  On the other hand, those that see their content as requiring  study and interpretation are more likely to find  television unsuited to their fundamental nature and approach.

So how does all this relate to extremist religions? Many of these movements use the emotional power of satellite television effectively. All use Facebook and Twitter to build and sustain relationships, and to mobilize action across borders.  These are really communities of interests, or subcultures, and they are effectively held together across the globe using social media. And for the most part their content is simple and uncomplicated.

TCU has a religion department and is also affiliated with a divinity school with scholars who study these issues. Recently the divinity school launched a strategic planning process with the underlying theme that the seminary of tomorrow will not look like the seminary today. It will be interesting to see  how the use of new media will influence the plan and the future of seminary education.  

Religion and media is also a topic for our Honors College Colloquium this fall.  We all know that in one way or another our religious beliefs influence everything we think and do.  Even though church and state in our country are constitutionally separated, religion  finds its way into virtually all matters of our politics and society, and it certainly is at the heart of much international conflict. What role media plays in all this is clearly a central concern for society, and is worthy of our ongoing consideration.

Posted in International, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 138 The “Idea” of America

November 9, 2012 by larrylauer

I often recall a dinner conversation I had in Rome some years ago with the travel agent that helped one of my colleagues with study abroad logistics. He said bluntly, “Everyone I know loves their ‘idea of America,” but they don’t understand much of what your government does.”  Ever since then I have been grappling with the issue of communicating government administrative policy to many complicated domestic and foreign audiences vs. just getting a simple “idea of America” understood.

Last week’s blog addressed the challenges faced by the White House as new and returning presidents face communicating their policies to audiences that will hear what they want to hear no matter what is said. The reality is that communication will be breaking down all the time.  Audiences must be prioritized, traditional and new media tactics selected for each, and many separate initiatives must be undertaken over time in order to achieve minimal progress.  And no matter what is said, enemies and competitors will fire back with their own set of strategically planned initiatives. 

Is it possible for a government to articulate a simple idea about values and culture with credibility?  Can the simple  “idea of America” come through in the same way that the travel agent in Rome described?

Some have concluded that government policy always must be shaped around economic and security realities, and that a government’s communication will always be with mixed and uncertain success.  Those people and countries threatened by this will always retaliate in some way. There will be allies and enemies, advocates and critics. And so many strategic communicators have come to think that the best way to get the fundamental “idea of America” across is to organize ordinary Americans to meet with people in other cultures. This way our basic values of individual freedom and justice can be experienced first hand.

And so several efforts have been made in recent years to explore the feasibility of establishing a non-governmental, or in some cases a quasi-governmental, organization to operate totally independent of government to establish citizen-to-citizen exchanges and programs with the simple purpose of demonstrating how ordinary free and independent Americans look and act. One of these was undertaken by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.  Known as the SAGE project, the result was a business plan to establish a non-profit, non-governmental organization to stimulate and finance projects that will bring about a better understanding of Americans of all types.  Currently, a former assistant secretary of state for public diplomacy is seeking the funding and other support necessary to bring this organization into existence.

My TCU Honors College students are discussing these issues.  Last week we imagined what a new or second term president faces on “day one” trying to communicate administrative policy in light of what was said during the campaign and the realities of the existing friendly and hostile audiences all over the world!  This week we will look at the potential of citizen-to-citizen public diplomacy, and the role international higher education and new media might play in it. 

On a given day communication is breaking down all around us.  But then each day is a new day, and the determined among us keep trying.  One step at a time is the name of the game.

Posted in International, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 137 Communicating Government Policy

November 2, 2012 by larrylauer

During every presidential election I think about the communication challenge ahead for either winner.  During the campaign, candidates tend to talk about what they will do on “day one.” And when you think about it, the communication challenges for either one will be enormous: How can all those varied “publics,” domestic and foreign, be reached efficiently, effectively and positively?

Basically I am a free enterprize advocate and believe in maximum freedom for individuals. However, my writings also reveal that I see a strong role for government in curbing mindless greed and maintaining a fair, just and safe society. But from a communication perspective, I wonder if even the kind of lean and focused government I support can ever effectively communicate clear policy and plans? Just think about the challenges ahead for our president.

When it comes to domestic issues, how does a president communicate his or her policies effectively to extremely polarized audiences?  No matter who wins, “here is how I am going to work with you,” might be the most  important message of all.

When it comes to foreign policy the communication challenge can even be more difficult because there are several departments of government that need to be engaged and coordinated.  For example, the White House will be sending messages. The state department will be addressing foreign governments and their publics. The defense department will do the same from their perspective. The commerce department will too. The CIA, the FBI, and so on… all have communication responsibilities.  And each will interpret revised and/or completely new messages to its audiences. With all this organizational complexity, here again the most important message might be one of a clear leadership style and approach.

All of these entities will certainly have a huge tool box full of communication tactics. They range from face-to-face contact and meetings, to traditional print media, to mass media, to new digital and social media.  And when they all converge, and the messages are complex, the result can be more mass confusion than enlightenment.  People get frustrated and confused in an information cluttered world. “We no longer know what we know, and we don’t like that feeling!” 

In today’s polarized climate, it could be that people will mostly just want to know simply what kind of person will be leading this country, and how serious problem-solving will be approached.  It seems that more and more people and governments are not responding to ideology-driven initiatives, threats and arguments. Rather, many seem to be longing for a more pragmatic-minded world. Certainly there are many individual and government exceptions. But a world based on integrated strategic communication tactics… that is a single voice with simple messages about practical objectives and effective problem-solving processes… just might win the day with what might actually turn out to be a truly vast silent majority!

Posted in International, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 136 Living in a Virtual World

October 25, 2012 by larrylauer

The amazing influences of social and mobile media are becoming more clear every day.  They establish and maintain social and professional relationships, and those relationships  number in the thousands for many. They  facilitate the instant exchange of brief messages and have the potential to move masses of people to action. Thus, these are extremely effective relationship building and marketing tools.

For example, universities establish contact, foster interactive relationships, and drive responders to a website for more information. These tools also motivate desires to visit campuses and attend events. Likewise, special interest groups are able to stimulate followers to assemble, and oppressed people can connect across closed borders. Examples of success in relationship building and motivating to action are endless.

But MIT professor of “the social science of science,” Sherry Turkle, raises a different kind of concern. Her concern is the longterm psychic and social effects on individuals who live day-to-day in this virtual world.  In her book Alone Together, Turkle  explains  how her research is indicating that young people are using on-line relationships to avoid the difficulties of real human interaction.

Turkle reports that many of her interviewees are choosing texting over actually making a phone call and talking to someone. Instead of writing a letter or having a real conversation, an instant short message posted or tweeted is preferred. In the final analysis, Turkle’s fundamental concern is that those who spend much of their lives in this digital world are losing their capacity for sophisticated problem-solving conversation, and for genuine human intimacy.

It’s only fair to also mention here that many of my students and colleagues disagree with Turkle and feel that the opposite just might be the case. Their argument is that relationships are only begun on-line, or by using social media tools, and that they can be the beginning of a meaningful social, and even intimate, relationship.

These questions therefore are important to ponder: What do these new tools do well, and what do they not do? It continues to look like they build relationships and stimulate action extremely well. But they do not deal with sophisticated problem solving, and they do not achieve a deeper understanding of complex issues. For these outcomes, other media and face-to-face human interaction are required.

Posted in Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 135 Media, Families and Children

October 19, 2012 by larrylauer

When I first began my studies of media the television set was just coming into our homes.  As we rearranged our furniture and our family communication patterns changed, it was impossible to miss seeing just how dramatically a new technology changes how we live. 

For many of us in middle and upper class homes in the US, the TV set came into the most used living room or den in our home.  It was placed where all the comfortable furniture could be arranged around it.  And from that moment on, when in that room it would be impossible to ignore that screen. It would also be nearly impossible to carry on a conversation. In fact, when walking into that room everyone in the family quickly developed the habit of immediately turning on the TV set, then sitting and staring at the screen for hours… and rarely talking with anyone.

Some speculated that TV actually contributed to families falling apart.  Prior to television many of these families shared dinner conversation together, gathered in “sitting rooms” to read and discuss the issues of the day, and many times even solved basic survival problems. Those that communicated in this way tended to develop a sense of unity, and when they actually faced survival together they developed extremely strong bonds.  But with advances in transportation more people were working some distance from the home, and with the advent of television there was little or no interaction in the evening.  In fact, there often would be more interaction and problem-solving at work than at home! 

And so TV actually became a new problem for many families. And it had nothing to do with its content. People were watching whatever was there, and were watching it all night long. They were using it more for escape than for educational enlightenment.  They would sometimes ask for better programs, but then they still mostly watched action adventure, mindless comedy, and sports. They were using it for escape.

With experience, it became clear to producers that television was a very different medium with its own unique characteristics. It was most powerful when it contained less information and more drama. And when the drama was set in the context of suspense or conflict, it became even more gripping.  So in order to attract larger audiences even news programs would have to contain less detail and more emotion. Producers would soon find new ways to accentuate drama and conflict with camera framing, camera movement, editing, special effects, and scripting.  Now with almost all of TV content favoring drama and violence the question became: What impact will all this violence have on our children?

Was violence on TV going to make children more violent?  Would constant diets of emotion make them more emotional?  Television was now becoming a kind of baby sitter for many parents, taking pressures off them for hours each day. But with what consequences?  Soon there would also be an ever-growing amount of sex on television. Would this make children more promiscuous?   Some journalists reported that by the time a child becomes 18 he or she will have spent more time with TV than in school!

Looking back one might conclude that the world did not come apart as a consequence of  TV.  But most would agree that the world did change in significant ways. Now, how do we yet again deal with the consequences of  even newer technology, i.e. the Internet, websites, social media, blogs, camera phones, and more?  Can we now get even more lost in a virtual world of bits and games?  Do families do anything meaningful as a group any more? Can hours in a digital world reduce our capacity to think or concentrate?   In the final analysis, will “digital children” be able to deal with the incredibly complex problems we face in the world?

It must be noted here that there are many kinds of family settings in the world, and assumptions made for the purpose of this analysis will not apply universally. Some families are in severely challenged urban neighborhoods,  some in primitive rural villages, some in middle class and affluent suburbs, and others are in cultural and religious settings with different values and priorities. But in each of these settings, technology is having its influence on families.  How are all these children being affected? Where children were already at risk, are they now at greater risk? Or will they be connected to better ways of growing and surviving?

Our challenge continues: We must come to know the good and bad of new technology. It is an inevitable and continuous global game-changer. Then, we must learn yet again how to make the most of the good.

Posted in Lessons Learned, Media Literacy, Strategic Communication | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 134 The Media Revolution and International News

October 13, 2012 by larrylauer

The speed and need of 24/7 cable for constant breaking news, the tendency of television to dramatize, the rapid growth of social media, the financial troubles of newspapers, and overall austerity cutbacks all over the world, collectively have changed the landscape of international news gathering and reporting. The fundamental question is: Are we getting the information we need to function as intelligent citizens?

In the past, large Newspapers maintained bureaus in many places all over the world. But recently many have been closing them.  Mainstream broadcast news organizations have done so as well.  For example, CBS had a number of bureaus strategically placed in cities around the world. Now it covers international events completely from its bureau in London. All news organizations today rely to some extent on freelancers, and local journalists, who compete for space and airtime in order to get paid.  As a result, traditional outlets also depend more than ever on three basic international news services.

Associated Press (AP) still covers the world, and also has an international video news service.  Reuters has traditionally been strong in business coverage, and continues to provide international coverage. And Agence France-Presse (AFP) does as well. All of these services work on some kind of fee basis and provide news coverage for both television and newspapers. But with each individual news outlet reducing its fulltime international reporting staff, it has become more difficult to achieve distinction.  

In addition, many new networks have appeared all over the world. For example, Al Jazeera covers the Arab world with both an English and Arabic channel, which are managed separately. The english channel boasts objectivity in its coverage, with its selection of stories based on the interests of its audiences. The Arabic channel is more Arab centric and has a reputation for being critical of Western and US influences. Al Arabiya broadcasts only in Arabic, but has an English website.  It prides itself in its objectivity.  But there are many other channels in the Middle East and all over the world that compete for audience, and specialize in everything from news to music to religion.  CNN has both domestic and international networks,and may have the most bureaus and reporters around the world.  But many see a self-serving commercial spin to their tone and style, and see this tone also as a form of bias. All of these news organizations have websites, and now refer readers, listeners, and viewers to them for more information.

Governments too are in the business of news.  Most brag of objectivity, but clearly reflect cultural biases and varied definitions of what it means to be democratic. The BBC World Service in the United Kingdom prides itself in its objectivity, but has been accused by conservatives as being too liberal.   The Voice of America (VOA) strives for news objectivity, but many in other parts of the world say its Western perspective is indeed a bias.  In Russia the media is controlled by a more authoritarian government, but that government wants to argue that it’s democratic and fair. China is launching new initiatives in targeted parts of the world, including the US. It admits that it hopes to achieve a better public understanding of its culture, but it also asserts that its policy is to be objective in reporting the news. The fact is, there are competing international newspapers and media networks all over the world, with most asserting that they are objective. But they clearly exist to advance a better understanding of their cultures and perspectives.

Add social media, and the situation becomes even more complicated. Citizens not only talk across borders, but they actually can file stories from cell phones. News organizations are now soliciting social media responses and posting  some of it as news, including video from cell phones.   How can consumers in this kind of situation know what they are getting?  Is it factual?  Is it exaggerated? Is it substantive enough to understand?

Indeed the speed of the media world today tends to short-cut all stories, including the important ones. The intensity of breaking news competition often results in reporting errors that have to be corrected later.  With fewer bureaus, every reporter flocks to where news is breaking, leaving the rest of the world virtually uncovered for long periods of time. Enhancing dramatic values is competitively enticing, so using the camera to make small crowds look large, and editing to make events more exciting, becomes common place. So with this daily barrage of information, do we ever really come to know what actually happened, or understand the context necessary for really understanding the situation?

The adventure in media ideas I am currently sharing with honors students at TCU is dealing with these very complex issues. In the end, the challenge will be to find a way to make sure every citizen understands how media actually work, and how to become fully and accurately informed on their own.

Posted in International, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy | Leave a Comment »

Lesson 133 “The Economist” in a New Media World.

October 5, 2012 by larrylauer

Most of the government, education, and business leaders I meet think The Economist is the most influential news magazine in the world. And when examined closely, it turns out to be a great example of how the editors of a primarily print publication are using new technology to make certain they are prepared for inevitable changes in media consumer behavior. And instead of contributing to information clutter, they see it as an opportunity to each week cut through that clutter with a concise, well-organized, look at the entire globe.

To be certain we are currently in the midst of a digital revolution and no one can be certain just how and when it will end. The Economist is a weekly publication, and so each Monday morning the editors gather to plan the content for the following week. Reporters send stories for consideration from all over the world, and by Wednesday the magazine’s many components are coming together.  It is then printed in many international locations, circulated there, and therefore can be in most subscriber’s homes each Monday.

But the magazine is also offered in an i-Pad version which can function as a total magazine substitute. Social media are also used to let subscribers know what is happening more immediately, and the Website is managed so as to stay on top of late breaking news.  And so The Economist is gaining experience in all media and stands ready to adjust to trends as they unfold.  The thinking is that the tablet format, containing almost the entire publication, is likely to be the future. So the business plan is to keep the subscription price the same in all platforms and allow subscribing to all of them by paying a small premium.  In other words, unlike many other publications, the editors intend to charge the same for their content no matter how you get it.

Interestingly enough they also have a new feature print magazine designed to be a cultural lifestyle publication, but there is an i-Pad app for it.  They also have an economic and trade data service  for businesses. And they produce conferences and seminars on hot topics with star participants from business, government and media. All of this is very high quality and aimed at diversifying revenue sources. In this way, financial security is maintained while media roles and consumer behaviors change.

In summary, The Economist’s editors see each medium they use, along with the fact that they cover the entire world each week, as opportunities to concisely cut through information clutter and give a more organized and focused report on what actually happened around the world. And they are betting on media diversity… combining digital media, print, data services, live events, and more… to protect their competitive advantage in the midst of still another uncertain media revolution.

Posted in International, Lessons Learned, Media Literacy | Leave a Comment »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »