24 March 2015

MORE ON THE SLOW BUT STEADY DECLINE OF NEWSPAPERS DUE TO FALLING ADVERTISING REVENUE

I started this blog IT.Scheiss in 2012 to counter the lies and half-truths about the how the inevitable move of readership from print to online was the "next big thing for media" and yes its is and is still ongoing but something which the self-styled new media "consultants" failed to highlight or knowingly suppressed the fact that the amount and growth of online advertising revenue was far from making up for the amount and decline of print and online advertising revenue without which newspapers (including print, online and digital editions) find it hard to survive.



I recently heard through the grapevine that as a further cost cutting measure, a major Malaysian media organisation (not Media Prima) will be holding another round of voluntary separation scheme within the coming second quarter of 2015 or in the third quarter.

Below are two articles, one a bit old by The Ant online publication and another a recent one by The Guardian in the U.K.

Yours trully

IT.Scheiss
http://itsheiss.blogspot.com/

=================================

Media groups squeezed by falling ad spend


by Ng Wai Mun KUALA LUMPUR: Rising newsprint prices resulting from the weakening ringgit appear to be the least of the media sector’s problems as falling circulation and advertising expenditure (adex) threaten a shakeup in some listed press groups.

Compared to a year ago, newsprint prices, denominated in the US dollar, have contracted by 3%. However in ring­git terms, newsprint prices have risen by almost 6% and currently hover at around the US$570 per metric tonne level. One media analyst says the direction of the price from here is anyone’s guess.

Compared to a year ago, the ringgit has fallen about 7.5% to the dollar. Year-to-date, the ringgit is the worst-per­forming currency in Asia. Analysts expect it to weaken further against the greenback as investors continue to scale down their exposure to Malaysian assets, with some analysts saying the ringgit could hit 3.70 against the greenback in the near term. The ringgit traded at 3.6185 to the dollar on Jan 28, according to Bloomberg.

Representatives of related industries appear unperturbed when contacted by FocusM about rising newsprint costs, despite it being a primary cost compo­nent for the printing sector. A proprietor of a printing business explains: “Firstly, the increase is marginal and will cause a mere 1-2% increase in overall operating costs. Secondly, commodity prices have always been cyclical. What goes up must come down – sooner or later.

“Fluctuating prices have always been the name of the game for the print industry. There are times operating costs are hit by a double whammy, depending on the direction of the ringgit. In better days, a stronger local currency buffers spikes in the newsprint price and vice versa,” says the proprietor.

Newsprint appears to have a seven- or eight-year cycle. The owner of a small publishing company says she would be more worried if she weren’t using “loads of newsprint, as higher use translates to higher sales and profits”. She is more concerned about talk of an economic slowdown this year.

An analyst points out while newsprint accounts for 20-25% of operating costs, most big companies have anything from six to nine months of newsprint inven­tory. The full impact of the current price will kick in about a year down the road.

A media analyst with a local research house tells FocusM the media sector has more important concerns. The New Straits Times Press increased the cover price of its three newspapers – New Straits Times, Berita Harian and Harian Metro – by 30 sen from Jan 1. The com­pany says prices have not been adjusted for years and the increase is also in view of “rising cost pressures”.

The increase has caught some market analysts off-guard. “Unlike the scenario experienced by the print-media sector over 10 years ago, emerging social media and online news portals have made the demand for physical newspapers very volatile and challenging,” says one.

“The trend of the Chinese newspaper segment’s circulation growth exemplifies this – changes in circulation can swing from positive to negative and back,” she explains.

Another analyst says the New Straits Times’ circulation has already plunged from 100,000 in mid-2012 to only 74,000 for the first half of 2014, based on audited figures released by the Audit Bureau of Circulations. He wasn’t sure as how its price increase will affect future circula­tion numbers.

Media Chinese International Ltd, Malaysia’s largest Chinese-language media group, was forced to clarify it is not undergoing consolidation plans involving its four daily newspapers – Sin Chew Daily, Nanyang Siang Pau, China Press and Guang Ming Daily.

However, the company expressed concern and warned the local media sector will be faced with “softer adver­tising as local businesses will remain sluggish in their spending”. It also expects business sentiment this year to be challenging.

At the end of last year, Media Prima Bhd, the country’s leading integrated media investment group, implemented a mutual separation scheme as part of its consolidation plan. Over 4,600 employees were offered separation with the company aiming for 10% of its workforce to accept the offer. “It would be interesting to see if the scheme leads to higher profits and margins for Media Prima,” says an analyst.

For full story, go to www.focusmalaysia.my, which also targets other Malaysian businesses.

http://www.theantdaily.com/Main/Media-groups-squeezed-by-falling-ad-spend

=========================

And The Guardian article.

========================


The slow death of the great American newsroom

The newspaper industry in the US is in freefall as the shift to digital news accelerates. One photojournalist has spent five years lamenting the decline, and charting what has been lost



In the past decade, as a percentage, more print journalists have lost their jobs than workers in any other significant American industry. (That bad news is felt just as keenly in Britain where a third of editorial jobs in newspapers have been lost since 2001.) The worst of the cuts, on both sides of the Atlantic, have fallen on larger local daily papers at what Americans call metro titles. A dozen historic papers have disappeared entirely in the US since 2007, and many more are ghost versions of what they used to be, weekly rather than daily, freesheets rather than broadsheets, without the resources required to hold city halls to account or give citizens a trusted vantage on their community and the world.

The reasons for this decline are familiar – the abrupt shift from print to pixels, the exponential rise in alternative sources of information, changes in lifestyle and reading habits, and, above all, the disastrous collapse of the city paper’s lifeblood – classified advertising – with the emergence of websites such as Craigslist and Gumtree. The implications are less often noted.

Stephan Salisbury, a prize-winning culture writer at the Philadelphia Inquirer for the past 36 years, puts them like this: “Newspapers stitch people together, weaving community with threads of information, and literally standing physically on the street, reminding people where they are and what they need to know. What happens to a community when community no longer matters and when information is simply an opportunity for niche marketing and branding in virtual space? Who covers the mayor? City council? Executive agencies? Courts?… It is this unravelling of our civic fabric that is the most grievous result of the decline of our newspapers. And it is the ordinary people struggling in the city who have lost the most, knowing less and less about where they are – even as the amount of information bombarding them grows daily at an astounding rate.”

Salisbury is among the contributors to a project by a photojournalist named Will Steacy. For five years from 2009, Steacy documented the struggle and decline of Salisbury’s paper, the Inquirer, the third oldest survivor in America, as it was hit by falling sales, bankruptcy, five changes of ownership, and round upon round of staff cuts. Steacy had seen the impact of this at first hand. His father, Tom, was an editor at the Inquirer, on the news desk, then foreign, for 29 years until he was laid off while recovering from heart surgery in 2011. Steacy’s pictures bear witness not only to the quick demise of a fabled kind of newsroom culture but also to the bitter ending to a century-and-a-half in his own family history – his great-great grandfather was the founding editor of Pennsylvania’s York Dispatch in 1876; his grandfather was editor of Allentown’s Call-Chronicle in the 1960s. Will Steacy was the last of a line, as he says, with ink in his blood.

His photographs and the essays from journalists that accompany them will be published as a book next month, but first as a tribute newspaper with the Inquirer’s distinctive masthead. Journalists, as a group, rarely shy away from the elegiac, or the expression of dismay at the way things have turned out, the unfairnesses of life, but on this occasion the emotions seem justified. Steacy’s photos capture the very last knockings of a messy, creative, urgent way of life that served the population of Philadelphia with particular distinction – the Inquirer has won 20 Pulitzer prizes for its journalism in the period since 1972 when, in a move hard to imagine now, legendary newspaperman Gene Roberts resigned his job as national editor of the New York Times to become the Inquirer’s editor.

When Roberts left in 1990 the paper had 700 staff with a reputation for, as well as holding local government to account, also breaking big foreign stories – it was the Inquirer that uncovered, for example, the full truth behind the Opec oil blockade of 1973 that was causing panic in Philadelphia and beyond, by dispatching its reporters to examine the shipping lists of Lloyd’s of London and to interrogate dock workers in Rotterdam and Genoa.

The paper was housed in a grand art deco building – like Clark Kent’s Daily Planet – at the heart of Philadelphia known, with some justification, as the Tower of Truth. The presses were in the basement, and every night, it was said, their rumble would keep the powers that be on restless alert.


By the time Steacy started taking pictures in 2009 the Inquirer staff was shrinking to its current level of 210. “The Inquirer used to send reporters and photographers to South America and Africa,” he says. “They once sent a guy off to study the fate of the black rhino for six months. Now no story gets done that involves much more than a half-hour drive from the city. Otherwise it is mostly wire stories.”

In 2012, as part of the terms of its sale from a hedge fund that had saved the paper from the receiver, the Tower of Truth was sold to a developer with plans for a casino, and the paper moved into the third floor of a former department store on the periphery of the city centre.

Steacy’s camera finds symbols of that era-ending shift everywhere it looks. He approaches the old newsroom, partly designed by his father, with an anthropologist’s eye, looking for the human traces of a stubborn civilisation in retreat. These are small gestures of defiance, the pinned up cuttings and cartoons that reflect on the consequences of a revolution of “news” to “content”; there are poignant observations of defeat, note-strewn reporters’ desks quietly become sanitised and paper-free in his pictures and then disappear entirely. In the heart of the city in which the constitution was written Steacy prefaces his project with a quote from Thomas Jefferson: “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government I should not hesitate for a moment to prefer the latter…”


Steacy talks to me about his work as a kind of inherited compulsion. “There is, strangely, this humble nature of the best people who work in newspapers to not want to make themselves the story,” he says. “So, ironically, it is a story that has largely gone untold.”

He embarked upon it partly to get to know something more of the world his father and grandfather knew, and which he would not know. As a boy he would occasionally come in to the Tower of Truth to meet his father after school and “run through the newsroom among these huge piles of paper like nothing I have ever seen”.

Apart from those memories, Steacy does not recall his father bringing much of his work home – allowing the mystery and mythology of what the old man did to stack up in his head. Only since his father had to clear his own desk have they talked freely about the “family business”.

“Dad was laid off before the 2012 change of ownership,” he says. “He had just had open-heart surgery. No doubt some CFO saw him as a very expensive employee in terms of health insurance. He had been there 29 years. It was incredibly painful, and that pain shifted for him toward bitterness and anger. It was me doing this project, I think, that helped him finally get through that. I found all these archives – my grandfather’s journals and so on – in the attic, and from that he opened up and was eventually comfortable talking about it.”

Steacy believes the story of metro newspapers has been a canary in the coalmine for other parts of society. “Technology can allow us to do things with greater efficiency and productivity, labour costs are reduced, but what I wanted to show is that there is a human element lost in that. We are in the middle of this huge transition, and the newspaper industry itself is very much at the front of this process that will happen in every other industry. The beneficiaries of this are a privileged and extremely wealthy few, but a broad spectrum of highly skilled workers are going to be displaced and out of luck for a very long time.”

One thing that is lost in a city like Philadelphia is another public space where people can rub shoulders on equal terms. In the Roberts era the paper sold nearly 700,000 copies in the city, it now sells just over 150,000. Advertising revenue has fallen three-quarters from $460m in the past decade. “The thing was,” Steacy says, “in Philadelphia the whole range of ethnic backgrounds, economic backgrounds, read the paper. It was the place where poor people read about rich people and rich people read about poor people. Black people read about white people and so on. It represented everyone in the city and gave them information and a voice they could trust. There was a time when dozens of eyes would read every story before it went to print. That kind of institutional integrity is in jeopardy.”

In a previous life Steacy would have wanted to be a staff photographer on a paper like the Inquirer but that job hardly now exists. He supports his wife and baby son on art projects, print sales and bits of editorial work. “Rates are what they were 30 years ago,” he says. “A photograph in my eyes is no longer worth a thousand words. Since 2000, 43 per cent of American staff newspaper photographers have been laid off. And we are in an era when 400m photographs are uploaded to Snapchat a day.”

I wonder what kinds of stories the Inquirer trades most successfully in these days?

“The stories that receive the most clicks on philly.com,” Steacy suggests “are weather stories, celebrity stories, sex stories. I guess best of all is a celebrity sex story with a good weather angle…”

Details of how to pre-order Will Steacy’s newspaper and book are available at his website, willsteacy.com

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/mar/21/philadelphia-inquirer-american-newspaper-will-steacy





28 January 2015

SORRY BUT ICT WILL ONLY INTENSIFY THE RAT RACE

Following below is my comment to Ace Emerson's article "Living in a big rat race and running on empty" in The Ant Daily.

I fully agree with Ace's main point that employees today are working that much harder today and often do not have enough but rather the belief expressed in the article that work would be more greatly eased if more companies embraced  facilities enabled by "technology" or more precisely information and communications technology (ICT).

This is my comment starting with an excerpt from Ace's article:-
=======================================

"With all the technology such as the Internet and smartphones that exist today, companies should really leave the “old” way of running things and embrace the new way of doing things with the help of the technologies that are readily available to us today because it can truly benefit both parties."

Please do not believe the rhetorical BS (bull shit) touted by the information and communication technology (ICT) industry marketers and the ICT media.

Whilst on the one hand, more use of ICT for online meetings will certainly help save employees from having to travel to office for face-to-face meetings, online banking saves us from having to go pay bills over the counter at the post office, e-payment saves us from having to cash cheques at banks and online shopping saves us from having to go to te shop - otherwise all these "wonderful" online ICT facilities intrude into our lives 24 X 7 and we find ourselves working wherever we are at any time of the day whatever situation we may be in.

I have been writing about the ICT industry since September 1994 and mostly went for assignments and media interviews then returned to by newspapers' office five days a week to write my stories and whilst I worked much longer that the regular 9 to 5, I still had some time for myself. Back then I had a mobile phone and e-mail but I still could have separate work and personal lives.

Then in May 2006, I joined a magazine and was allowed to work from home, which seemed cool at first but I soon found myself glued to the seat in front of the PC day and night, weekends and public holidays and had almost no time for any personal life.

It was only when I made the decision to become semi-retired at 60 that I now have more time to attend to long neglected personal matters such as tidying up my home and clearing out all the accumulated press releases, documents, premium door gifts and so forth which I had accumulated in my home over the years and I am still clearing things out or giving them away.

(And may I add here - many long-neglected matters related to my wider family circle)

In my first job as a process engineer with a semiconductor assembly plant in Senawang, Negeri Sembilan, we started work at 8.00 am and normally worked till around 7.00pm to get work finished and after that, I had time to myself until the next morning. Back then we worked a five and a half day week, with half day work on Saturdays. (That was in 1980 and my "initiation" ceremony soon after I joined was that I was gotten really drunk at my first dinner with colleagues)

I then joined a firm which was a contractor laying cables along the streets and underground for Telekom Malaysia (in Seremban and surrounding areas), and we worked the regular 9 to 5 plus half day on Saturday but whilst work was outdoors under the hot sun but I had plenty of time for myself after work hours. (How I remember going to the toddy (fermented coconut palm wine) shop with our mandore (foreman) Rayapan)

When I got a job as a computer service engineer (in 1982) , I had to commute to work in Kuala Lumpur from Petaling Jaya daily, including Saturdays and unlike my colleagues in other departments, we in the IT department worked way beyond normal work hours but still I had much more time for myself than when I started to work from home in 2006.

Thankfully, I never had a BlackBerry Messenger account nor WhatsApp or I would be working like my friend who has one eye on the smartphone and one eye on the road whilst driving and whilst having tea with me at night.

Whilst I am tech-savvy enough to operate any of these gee whiz devices (I have conducted product reviews of more smartphones than I can count) and can easily afford them, I have made the decision to stick to a basic feature phone which still serves me well, even though it is pretty obsolete by now.

The fact of the matter is that with fiercer competition and the need to cut costs, employers see these technologies as a means to get more done for less with fewer employees who are increasingly required to be able to do multiple tasks.

For example, in many media organisations, journalists and editors are not only expected to focus on their editorial duties but are also required to do marketing to try and get advertisements and advertorial deals as well.

Also, IT and telecommunications companies tout these technologies as a means for employers to get more with fewer employees, though many Malaysian companies in industries beside ICT and media have not yet embraced such technologies as much as the IT and telecommunications companies would like them to, since for them it would mean more devices and broadband subscriptions sold.

I am quite sure that if you got a job as a bank officer you would be able to work more regular hours and have more time for yourself and your family, even though you would still have to commute to and from work daily.

If you worked as marketing executive or manager who has to travel in line of work, you may have to fight through traffic more and return home later and yes, you may find yourself more stressed out.

If you want plenty of time to yourself then join the civil service.

So don't buy into the blatant lies the ICT industry and publications tell you about how ICT facilities enable you to have a "better work-life balance", since if you were unfortunate enough to work for a company which readily embraces such technologies, you could well find yourself working whilst sitting on the toilet.

That is one of the reasons why I - a computer service engineer and an award winning ICT journalist - dub myself "IT.Scheiss" (IT shit).

Meanwhile, my friend, a former fellow ICT writer who recently took VSS (voluntary separation scheme) by his publication, is trying to interest me in flying quad copters.


============================================================

Ace Emerson's original article follows below.

IT.Scheiss


===========================
Living in a big rat race and running on empty


by Ace Emerson FEATURE: If you live in 21st century Malaysia, you’ve probably noticed a lot of people grumble about how busy they are to the point that it has become an automatic reply when you ask anyone, “How have you been?”

Even the children today are busy. They are busy just trying to keep up with their schedule such as school, after-school classes, as well as extracurricular activities.

By the time they come home, these children are as exhausted as the grown-ups.

The expression “busy” today has been replaced by the word “tired”. Because that is actually what most of us feel like most of the time. Worn out. Mentally used up and physically sore.

If we had a choice, none of us would choose this any more than any one person wants to be part of a traffic jam; it’s something that we are compelled to do.

Unfortunately, we got to work in order to meet our basic human needs which are shelter, food, love, and family.

Here’s a typical scenario:

While much of Malaysia is at home curled up in front of the TV or getting ready for bed, you're just stumbling out of the office to get into your car and face the drive home from work traffic.

Once home, you make yourself a hot cup of coffee to calm the nerves from driving so long, stuff some leftovers into your body, have a hot shower then finally collapse into bed beside your sleeping spouse.

Just as your head touches the pillow, the alarm rings. You crawl out of bed reluctantly and drag yourself to the shower, throw on a clean outfit, pour some coffee down your throat, maybe drop a kid or two at school, and jump back onto the frenetic work treadmill that you can't turn off.

We all work so hard, yet our wages are basically paying for nothing these days, and prices keep rising while the value of the ringgit keeps dropping. How can we ever catch up?

In today’s world of innovation and technology, shouldn't these modern inventions be making our lives a little better?

But no, most companies in this country still hold on to the "old" system of things, leaving our people to be continuously on the go and pretty much working themselves to death. Running as fast as they can but not going anywhere.

Our vehicles that have been taking us around accomplishing things in life have become our “home” away from home where we spend most of our time in.

The term “karoshi,” or death from overwork, gained notoriety in Japan several decades back when people in Japan used to die abruptly due to a stroke, heart attack, cerebral hemorrhage – basically, keeping up with the demands of their workplace.

Japan’s police agency mentioned more than 2,000 work-related suicides in 2013, as well as 10,000 deaths in 2009 involving lawyers which according to their statement, "May be due to overwork”.

“How can we afford not to work hard when everything is so costly these days, yet our income remains the same? We simply go day to day just trying to make it through until the next pay cheque. We can barely manage to pay rent, let alone owned our very own homes,” says 29-year-old Michelle Swee, an accountant.

And human resources manager Farid Sulaiman, 31, has the same routine day in day out.

“I go to work every day just to pay my bills, my rent, as well as my loans. I wake up at 6am Monday to Friday, fight the traffic at 7.30am to get to the office; then do it all over again once the clock turns 6pm. I get home at around 7.30-8pm every day. Every single day, the same thing. I no longer have a life, how can I? I’m exhausted all the time.”

As for 37-year-old Dev Shenka, it’s a robotic life.

“Sometimes I feel like we are a robot, going around routinely doing what I need to do just to get by until the day I retire or expire. But never going anywhere,” said the operational manager for an IT company.

For Lisa Ghani, 31, life is a rat race of endless and pointless pursuit.

“We are tired and we're being worked to death. Yet, we cannot escape that rat wheel or else we would lose our homes, health care, not to mention basic ability to buy food to eat,” said the 31-year-old marketing manager for a skincare company.

And because of this, we have become busy people. Always busy working and have no time for anything else, not even living. We are all running on empty.

So much so that we have become an angry, moody, easily irritated, and agitated nation due to our unbalanced stressful life.

Everyone is too busy looking out for themselves that they forget to live life. They forget how to be role models to their children. But how can we get out of the rat race that goes nowhere, with all the price hikes in basic necessities as well as everything else?

How can we ever go anywhere if we are too busy trying to make ends meet? With all the technology such as the Internet and smartphones that exist today, companies should really leave the “old” way of running things and embrace the new way of doing things with the help of the technologies that are readily available to us today because it can truly benefit both parties.

The employee won’t have to fight the traffic (spending time, energy, and money), and therefore is able to perform better.

The employer, meanwhile, saves energy (on air-conditioning, computer, lights etc.) as well as get a happier employee which translates to a loyal employee.

If every Malaysian made time to stop being busy every now and then, and take time to ponder on what they actually want to achieve in life, to appreciate and enjoy their families, friends, and respect each other’s differences as well as space, we may probably be a much more productive and caring nation as opposed to the bitter bully that we are today.



24 January 2015

STOP PRESIDENT O'BUMMER FROM DENYING INDIA's POOR AFFORDABLE MEDICINES

U.S. imperialism's Chief Executive Officer a.k.a. President O' Bummer will be visiting India soon and is likely to bring pressure to bear on India with regards patents on pharmaceuticals on behalf of the big U.S. pharmaceuticals giants.

Hopefully, India's President Narenda Modi will tell President O' Bummer to shove it but let us too stand up independently for India's poor and sign this petition below.


la Luccha Final
===============================

President Obama will fly to India in days. Right now he’s hearing most from the Big Pharma lobby, so let’s race to hit our one million target and stand strong for affordable medicine around the world.

Now help boost our call by sending the email below to friends and family, and share this link on Facebook:


Thanks for all that you do,

The Avaaz team

PS - Many Avaaz campaigns are started by members of our community! Start yours now and win on any issue - local, national or global: http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/start_a_petition/

-----------
Dear friends,

President Obama’s visit to India in days could spell life or death for millions of poor people in Asia, Africa and Latin America, but if we move fast we can ensure they can still get the medicines they need.

India produces cheap HIV, malaria and cancer drugs, but Big Pharma wants to stop this, to sell their own products at higher prices. Their fierce lobby has got the US to push their line hard, even threatening trade sanctions if India doesn’t change patent laws which put people before profits. Now pressure is rising with talks set to begin on an investment treaty.

Before Obama flies, let’s build a million-strong call to protect India’s proud role as the pharmacy to the world’s poor, make it a mega media story while he is there and then deliver it with our own common sense trade plan developed by experts that protects access to medicine. Add your name now:


Pharma giants say India’s patent laws allow companies to undercut them, deterring them from investing in new medicines. But drug companies prioritise researching drugs for the rich, not the poor, and they often price their products sky high -- a new hepatitis C treatment currently sells for $1000 per pill!

At a White House breakfast last October, India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi told Big Pharma CEOs to invest in affordable medicines, rather than play legal games to squeeze every drop from their existing patents. But he agreed to set up an Indo-US forum on drug patent laws, and published a draft policy with concessions to encourage American companies to invest.


President Obama boldly faced down critics to expand health care in the US, and before he flies to India, let’s make this the moment the US, Indian and other governments agree to put patients before profits. Add your name now:


When a giant Swiss drug company sued the Indian government over affordable medicine for cancer patients, fifty thousand Avaazers in India and Switzerland spoke out against the move, and the case was thrown out of court. Now the world’s pharmacy faces a bigger threat and it’s time to take another stand.

With hope and determination,

Alex, Bert, Laila, Ricken, Emma, Diego and the whole Avaaz team

MORE INFORMATION:

Let India make cheap drugs (Business Standard)

India-US panel: Access to medicines may be under threat (Deccan Herald)

PM's US Visit: Narendra Modi’s CEO diplomacy to soon set the cash register ringing (Economic Times)

Investment treaty tops Obama’s agenda (Business Standard)

Ebola in West Africa is a wake-up call (Al Jazeera)

Novartis loses landmark patent case in India (The Telegraph)

Avaaz.org is a 40-million-person global campaign network that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people shape global decision-making. ("Avaaz" means "voice" or "song" in many languages.) Avaaz members live in every nation of the world; our team is spread across 18 countries on 6 continents and operates in 17 languages. Learn about some of Avaaz's biggest campaigns here, or follow us on Facebook or Twitter.


25 September 2014

ONCE AGAIN, PROOF THAT FREE ENTERPRISE GRAVITATES TOWARDS MONOPOLY

When the personal computer made its debut in the late 1970s and the Internet began to go mass market in the early 1990s, starry-eyed techno-Utopians believed that this enabled the small person to speak on a level playing field with established corporate giants, and even beat them.

However, the BATR.org article below testifies to the dialectical-materialist reality, that any industry with a large number of competing small startups, which provide a wide degree of choice to consumers, has almost always gravitated towards monopoly, or at least one company or a  handful of companies dominating their industry's market.

It is in fact, the very free market forces which the libertarians so love, which drive the very processes of natural selection, whereby weaker companies either fail and drop out of the market, especially during periods of economic downturn, or are acquired by the stronger ones which survive, and over time, this process repeats itself until only a handful of players are left.

Microsoft was just a small startup worth US$16,000 in 1976 but today the corporation is worth billions of US dollars and virtually monopolises the market for desktop PC operating systems. Google, Facebook and Twitter all began as small start-ups but today dominates their respective areas and functions in cyberspace, with Google dominating several areas and functions in cyberspace.

However, before I go any further, please allow me to digress and explain the Libertarian (right-wing anarchist) political ideology underlying this techno-Utopian radicalism which has spread out from the United States to infect many tech-savvy, urban, middle class Malaysians, and how it goes against my pro-working class ideology.      

For some years now, I came to notice a key difference between popular political and economic perspectives of the Europeans and North Americans (U.S. Americans and Canadians), and that is that the Europeans, well at least the British back in the 1970s, were and still view conflicts of interest in terms of capitalists versus workers, and in Britain at least, this was due to the strongly pro-labour ideology of the old Labour Party which was founded in 1900 by the trade unions and socialist political parties of the 19th Century.

The ideology of the old Labour Party was defined by Clause IV in the party's constitution:-

"To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service."

Today of course, the New Labour Party of Tony Blair and Ed Milliband has abandoned Clause IV and New Labour has become a party of capitalism, with "a slightly more human face than the Conservatives", and New Labour did not repeal the laws restricting the trade unions which were introduced by the Conservative government under Margaret Thatcher.

When I was a student in Salford, Lancashire in the 1970s, most of my fellow students described themselves as socialist of some variety, mostly pro-Labour and its policies, though neo-liberal tendencies have gained ground amongst students since then, or the more radical ones tend towards Anarchism.

Thankfully, this working class consciousness still survives amongst the working class, or what's left of the industrial and services proletariat, though feeling betrayed by New Labour, some are turning far-right demagogues, such as the British National Party which advocates social and economic policies quite similar to those of the old Labour Party, except that it is white-supremacist, anti-immigrant and wants to repatriate all non-whites from the United Kingdom, even if they were born there. The BNP also says that it wants to take the United Kingdom out of the European Union and to pull British troops out of the Middle East, Afghanistan and other foreign interventions which do not directly serve the United Kingdom's interests.

Anyway, the BNP is not all that popular electorally, though the populist rightist United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) has been gaining ground electorally. UKIP promises to take the United Kingdom out of the European Union and to limit immigration and seems to be more accommodating to non-whites already in the United Kingdom. Already, some traditional New Labour voters are turning to UKIP, a pro-capitalist party, actually Thatcherites who have turned against the United Kingdom's membership of European Union, which Thatcher supported.

This video documentary by The Guardian shows this working class defection from New Labour to UKIP very clearly:-

"In the first of a new four-part series titled Britain's in trouble, John Harris travels around UKIP's eastern heartlands and finds poverty, anger and the breakdown of normal politics. From the forgotten residents of Jaywick, England's poorest council ward, to an encounter with Nigel Farage at the Royal British Legion, he finds out how a force made up largely of Tory exiles has managed to style itself as a party for the working class." CLICK HERE TO WATCH  Here is a Russia Today video on You Tube which testifies to that from around 3.20 minutes into the video.

My point here, is that whether these workers turn towards left wing or right wing parties for their economic survival, they do so from the perspective of themselves as the working class, even though they could well be betrayed once UKIP is elected to power, just as Hitler killed the leaders of the Sturmabteilung (SA or Storm Detachment), which was the  left-wing Strasserist faction of the Nazi Party (National Socialist German Workers' Party), including its figurehead, Gregor Strasser himself. Strasser reportedly raised his hand in the Nazi salute and shouted "Heil Hitler!" just before the firing squad killed him.

Most of the killings of the SA were carried out by the elitist Schutzstaffel (SS), a paramilitary unit which provided protection to the Nazi Party and its leaders. Membership of the SS was restricted to people who were only of "pure Aryan German" ancestry, requiring proof of racial purity. It's also said that unlike members of the SA, many of whom were working class, many members of the SS came from middle class or aristocratic backgrounds.

Of course, UKIP would not do what the Nazis did to their worker-supporters, but it could just not honour its promises to them and serve capitalist interests instead.

However, the bigger question is what are the more hard-core left parties in Britain and elsewhere doing to organise the suffering working class to fight back against their exploitation by and deprivation under capitalism. In the absence of any viable left alternative, no surprise then that the workers turn to the right which promises them relief from their predicament. In The Guardian's video, you can see how that liberal or leftist pathetically tells voters how bad UKIP is but offers no viable alternative. This is just like opposition politicians in Malaysia who try to win rural votes and small town votes by telling voters how bad the ruling Barisan Nasional is and bring up issues such as Altantuya, Interlok, and others which may be of concern to urban, middle class voters like them but of lower priority or of no priority to to rural voters whose first priority is their economic survival. 

Now we turn to American political radicalism, which is largely about the conflict of interests between small businesses and large corporate businesses - for example, mom and pop stores against Walmart, the independent burger stall owner-operator versus McDonald's, the small farmer against giant factory farms, the independent cafe owner-operator against Starbucks, in software - the large corporate software companies (the "cathedral" in Eric Raymond's words) versus a galaxy of small, independent software companies (the "bazaar"), and so forth.

The cyber-Utopians believed that information and communications technology enable the "little guy" to challenge the big guy. This keynote address in late 1983 introducing the Apple Macintosh micro-computing, with the dramatic "big brother 1984" climax at the end, reveals this "little guy versus big guy" battle. CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS HISTORIC VIDEO which portrays IBM as that "big brother" or "Goliath" and Apple as the proverbial "David", its nemesis.

So after all those years of media hype, hoohah, bullshit and ballyhoo about how ICT and the Internet enables the small guy against the big, basically Libertarian (right wing anarchist) sites such as BATR.org (Breaking All The Rules) website recognises how highly corporatist the Silly Con Valley and the venture capital investors which finance technology startups have become - thus confirming the dialectical-materialist reality that what began as an industry with a galaxy of competing small players has metamorphosised into giant corporations, whilst new startups in green technology and biotechnology require government funding, since the startup costs of such companies are very high and time to profitability is very long, so they are asking government to commit to support them by buying from them over others - in short demanding some kind of government favouritism for their products and services.

For example, last April, Space-X, an American company founded by space industry entrepreneur Elon Musk, filed a protest against the U.S. Air Force, claiming that it "unfairly prevented it from competing for space satellite launches". The Air Force had signed a "block contact" to purchase 35 from United Launch Alliance - a Boeing and Lockheed-Martin joint venture. Most of the launches are done using the United Launch Alliance' Atlas rocket family, which use the RD-180 rocket engine, made in Russia by NPO Energomash, which is owned and controlled by the Russian government.  CLICK TO READ THE FULL BUSINESS WEEK REPORT

Simply put, Space X wants the U.S. government to give it business - a demand which is anathema to free market, open border libertarians and neo-liberals.

However, I have no objection to governments prioritising their own countries' companies over foreign companies. When I worked as a computer service engineer in the 1980s, there U.S. multinationals in Malaysia had a buy U.S. first policy, so why shouldn't other countries be able to do the same. That was before all the hype, hoohah, bullshit and ballyhoo about globalisation, borderless world, open borders, level playing field and so forth were touted by the worldwide following the formation of the World Trade Organisation in 1994.

One thing about the ICT industry, especially the PC hardware, software, digital content and Internet industries is that they have relatively low barriers to entry, unlike say the semiconductor electronics manufacturing industry, automotive industry, biotechnology industry, oil and gas industry, aerospace industry and so forth, which can require billions of ringgit in investments.


So almost any Tom, Dick and Harry can get into PC hardware, software, content and Internet industry, with the help of some money from angel investors and venture capitalists to help them develop their products or services and to successfully market it. The angel or venture capital funds help carry the startup through its initial loss-making period. This contributes to all the hype, hoohah, bullshit and ballyhoo over the sociologically, economically, culturally and politically transformative power of ICT, coming out from the Silly Con Valley and elsewhere, with starry-eyed journalists in the ICT media, self-serving technology entrepreneurs and business executives, and assorted opportunistic CON-sultants all promoting all this hype, hoohah, bullshit and ballyhoo.

On the other hand, from a technology perspective, Elon Musk and Space X are innovators, in that they developed reusable rockets, which take off into space and descend back to earth complete on their own power, and all that's required is to refuel it and off it can go again. This is unlike traditional rockets where most of the launch vehicle is used once and discarded, and reusable rockets thus save plenty of money. Click these links to view the launch of  Space X's GRASHOPPER ROCKET and of the giant, use-once SATURN V LAUNCH VEHICLE used to send the three Apollo 11 astronauts on their moon mission. In the case of the Apollo moon missions and the Saturn V launcher, a very small part, the COMMAND MODULE housing the three astronauts returns to earth.

So one has to take one's hat off to Space X for developing reusable launch vehicles, though to be absolutely clear, Space X's larger rockets are still not completely re-usable, unlike the Grasshopper in the video, which by the way was a proof of concept which did not not go into space.

On that note, people may again begin to talk about travelling through outer space and actually go places, instead of "going places" virtually, whilst sitting on one's backside behind a computer screen.

Well, developing such re-usable launch vehicles and their precision guidance and control systems, as well as their test launches, is certainly far, far more expensive than developing an iPhone application, a piece of computer software, a game or an online service, so companies like Space X need government support, whilst Silly Con Valley entrepreneurs can relay on private funding and afford to fart in the faces of governments.

Well, at least some techno-Utopians have woken up to reality.


The BATR article follows below.

Yours truly

IT.Scheiss
http://itsheiss.blogspot.com

==========================




Silicon Valley Corporatists

Remember the days when an entrepreneur would perfect their whiz kid ideas in a garage and bring them to market? Did Steve Wozniak ever envision the behemoth that Apple would become and the cult camp that worships every new product that flows from their robotic coolie assembly lines? Riots Over Rotten Apple Mania describes an example of the forbidding underbelly of corporatist business model that Apple exemplifies so dramatically. Notwithstanding this record of 21th century sweat factories, do the venture vulture capitalists of Silicon Valley interject added value in the products and services they fund or do this culture of touting IPO offerings simply game a system to print money based upon imaginary dreams?

The Economic Policy Journal article, Silicon Valley Investor Joins The Corporatism March, cites Ron Conway, a Silicon Valley angel investor, who has backed many of the tech companies that we know and love.”

“Conway wrote a piece for Techcrunch where he's calling for the other Fascism. Remember the Fascist Mussolini from Italy. It was he who said, "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."

"Gone are the days when the tech community can innovate and run their businesses in spite of government. As we saw with the SOPA/PIPA debate, public policy has a direct and significant impact on startups and the investors who support them.

Whether it is regulations that stifle innovation or tax policies that hinder job creation, government has a major role in the success or failure of a startup. It is critically important for the tech community to engage in public policy."

Silicon Valley companies are not limited to IT development, just as much as investment funding is not wholly occupied from Wall Street firms. The principle is the same wherever the money comes from, as the Rise of the “venture corporatists” explores in an account about John Doerr of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

“None of the alternative energy sources being developed today – solar, wind, geothermal, or biomass–is close to financial sustainability, which means that the supersize returns V.C. funds depend on will require massive government subsidies, regulations, and mandates… So Doerr has launched an audacious campaign to invest millions in handpicked political candidates and influential political action committees, to push for subsidies and pro-greentech policies and require the government to purchase the kinds of fuels and technologies his startups will be marketing. Since 2000, Doerr and his wife, Ann, have contributed more than $31 million to political candidates and causes.

In essence, Doerr is helping to create the biggest new market the world has seen since the dawn of the oil industry–and asking for taxpayer dollars to do it.”

“Green” alternative energy has more to do with replicating money than producing sustainable energy. Instead of writing code for computer-generated speech, the paradigm at play buys the ambassadors of government policy, circuitously as part of the business plan.

Lachlan Markay sums up the paradox for investors and the public in The Venture Corporatists. “As long as green technology remains not simply an economic venture but a moral one, taxpayers will continue to nobly lose money as politically connected “social entrepreneurs” reap a windfall.”

Here lies the rub. What exactly is the moral imperative? The lament of Alex Shud Bayley in No, I still don’t want to work for Google makes a universal point.

“Since I’ve been out of the Silicon-Valley-centred tech industry, I’ve become increasingly convinced that it’s morally bankrupt and essentially toxic to our society. Companies like Google and Facebook — in common with most public companies — have interests that are frequently in conflict with the wellbeing of — I was going to say their customers or their users, but I’ll say “people” in general, since it’s wider than that. People who use their systems directly, people who don’t — we’re all affected by it, and although some of the outcomes are positive a disturbingly high number of them are negative: the erosion of privacy, of consumer rights, of the public domain and fair use, of meaningful connections between people and a sense of true community, of beauty and care taken in craftsmanship, of our very physical wellbeing. No amount of employee benefits or underfunded Google.org projects can counteract that.”

The notion that Silicon Valley business enterprises automatically advance civilization and improve the human condition is one of the most disturbing viewpoints that have infected the smart phone sect. Placing the blame solely on tech executives avoids the reprehensible relationship that Ron Conway is so eager to exploit.

The article, Why DC And Silicon Valley Don't Mix Well seems to agree.

“The thing that DC should be most focused on is "fixes to previous government efforts that tried but failed to fix a problem that turned out not to need a regulatory solution." Other industries seem to want handouts and investments and the like, but you don't see that much in Silicon Valley.”

REALLY ???

However, some executives excel in screwing up a once reliable service.  Silicon Valley corporatist companies often fail. The next likely candidate for a downfall is Yahoo.  Marissa Mayer’s tenure as CEO may be numbered according to Eric Jackson, founder and managing partner of hedge fund Ironfire Capital.

“Jackson says that since Mayer took over she has spent $2 billion buying companies and that most of those acquisitions have been for naught.

"Can you name any other acquisition Yahoo has made besides Tumblr? If not, what does that say about them?" Jackson writes at Forbes. "If these small acquisitions were mostly talent-driven as characterized by management, why was it necessary to spend, say, $30 million to hire 3 people from a dying company? Was this really the best use of shareholder capital? Yahoo should not [be] responsible for bailing out VCs from their failed investments. This isn’t TARP."

Deplorably, many tech corporatists are mismanaged like Yahoo. Divesting a significant portion of Yahoo’s stake at the Alibaba IPO, raises a much needed current valuation, but what does this transaction do to improve the service? The Corporatists only care about tapping the rigged markets for immediate gain.

James Hall – September 24, 2014
CLICK HERE TO VIEW ORIGINAL ARTICLE


Subscription sign-up for the BATR RealPolitik Newsletter

Discuss or comment about this essay on the BATR Forum



26 August 2014

China may unveil homegrown OS rivals to Windows, Google and Apple

All the best to China with its own home-grown OS.

China already has at least three of its own Linux distributions:-

Red Flag Linux, an open source operating system and software suite  based upon Red Hat Linux, from Red Hat, an American product.

http://www.redflag-linux.com/

Deepin Linux based upon Ubuntu Linux from Canonical, originally a South African company now based in the Isle of Man, and Debian Linux by the US-based Debian Foundation.

http://www.linuxdeepin.com/index.en.html

Start OS also based upon Ubuntu and Debian.

http://www.startos.org/

China perhaps wants an OS which is fully developed in China.

Below is a Russia Today article on China's plans for its own OS to counter U.S. National Security Agency online spying.

la Luccha Final
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK4o9wf13fo



China may unveil homegrown OS rivals to Windows, Google and Apple
Published time: August 25, 2014 14:39



Following revelations of America’s National Security Agency’s global internet surveillance system, combined with a desire to enhance domestic production, China is beating a path towards unveiling its own operating systems in October.

The Chinese-made substitutes would first be introduced on desktop devices, later expanding to include smartphones and other hand-held devices, Ni Guangnan heads an official operating system development alliance established in March, Xinhau reported at the weekend.

China bans government purchases of Apple gadgets - report


22 August 2014

IN MEMORY OF THE LIVES ON MH17

TODAY WE SADLY COMMEMORATE YOUR TRAGIC LOSS AND MOURN TOGETHER WITH YOUR GRIEVING FAMILIES, WHICHEVER LAND THEY MAY BE.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO SEEK JUSTICE FOR YOU.
MAY YOUR SOULS REST IN PEACE

03 August 2014

THE DOMINANCE OF MICROSOFT SOFTWARE IS ALL IN THE MIND

In his blog, Pandanomics Protectionism, blogger Big Dog wrote"


Pandanomics Protectionism
"Amidst a fast growing economy and prominence as an upcoming economic Super Power, China is still very uneasy of the great dominance of Microsoft as world’s most influential if not monopolistic computer software platform provider."

He went on to cite three western and Chinese articles, with his own comments in between.

"That is a grave worrying bit by the Chinese authorities, which is still subjected on absolute control of the Communist Party of China. An interesting story is about China raiding Microsoft office for alleged anti-trust practices"

And concluded:-

"Unless China is ready with indigenous operating system to replace Microsoft and thus having the control that she desires, then the Chinese have no choice but be dependent.

"It makes sense why China is very uncomfortable with inability to control the most widely used operating system and computer software platform. Even one time a visionary and advocate of the ‘Multimedia Super Corridor’, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad changed his mind about not able to exert control.

"The abuse of information democracy is just counter productive of moving the nation forward. The nation and its economy should not allow itself to be opened for being held for ransom, by oligopolists. Worse still, monopolists.

"True for Malaysia. True for China".


CLICK HERE FOR FULL BLOG

To that I commented:-

Whilst I fully agree with the need for countries to have their own independent software, however dependence on Microsoft's Windows operating systems and Office productivity suites are more a matter of users' mind and habit, rather than dominance and coercion.

China already has at least three of its own Linux distributions:-

Red Flag Linux, an open source operating system and software suite  based upon Red Hat Linux, from Red Hat, an American product.

http://www.redflag-linux.com/


21 July 2014

DR. PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS BLASTS WESTERN MEDIA LIES

This shows that U.S. imperialism has geo-strategic interests in blaming Russian separatists and Russia for shooting down MH17.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkTRJgDkNFg

This is the same Hillary who gloated, "We came, we saw, he died" in relation to the murder of Muammar Ghadaffi by U.S. and European imperialist backed rebels, which has now left Libya floundering in an economic mess.

Note that this shooting down of MH17 comes soon after the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) countries set up a BRICS Development Bank and soon after Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak spoke of sending humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza.

Such events are referred to a false-flag events to create reasons to justify military and other actions.


Of course, National Endowment for Democracy, National Democratic Institute and Soros -financed NGOs in Malaysia, as well as liberal imperialists in Malaysia's "alternative" media won't like what I am saying but to hell with them.

Activist Post article follows below.

IT.Scheiss
===============================


Hillary Tells EU to Use MH17 Tragedy to Find Alternatives to Gazprom (dollar dumping gas giant)
Activist Post

Ah, now the agenda is starting to make a bit more sense. Hillary Clinton doesn't want a good crisis to go to waste. She told Charlie Rose that her recommendation to the European Union is to take advantage of the shot-down MH17 tragedy to "Immediately accelerate efforts to find alternatives to Gazprom."

DR. PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS BLASTS WESTERN MEDIA LIES

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, a prominent American who served in the Reagan Administration blasts the lies and disinformation of the Western media prostitutes about the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17.

Let's not forget our own media prostitutes in the "alternative" media who echo the western media whores.

Read on.

IT.Scheiss

=====================


What happened to the Malaysian Airliner?


Washington’s propaganda machine is in such high gear that we are in danger of losing the facts that we do have.


One fact is that the separatists do not have the expensive Buk anti-aircraft missile system or the trained personnel to operate it.

Another fact is that the separatists have no incentive to shoot down an airliner and neither does Russia. Anyone can tell the difference between low-flying attack aircraft and an airliner at 33,000 feet.

The Ukrainians do have Buk anti-aircraft missile systems, and a Buk battery was operational in the region and deployed at a site from which it could have fired a missile at the airliner.

Just as the separatists and the Russian government have no incentive to shoot down an airliner, neither does the Ukrainian government nor, one would think, even the crazed extreme Ukrainian nationalists who have formed militias to take the fight against the separatists that the Ukrainian army is not keen to undertake–unless there was a plan to frame Russia.

One Russian general familiar with the weapon system offered his opinion that it was a mistake made by the Ukrainian military untrained in the weapon’s use. The general said that although Ukraine has a few of the weapons, Ukrainians have had no training in their use in the 23 years since Ukraine separated from Russia. The general thinks it was an accident due to incompetence.

18 July 2014

WHO DUNNIT? WELL WHO HAS THE MATERIAL CAPABILITIES!

The blame game has already started as to who is responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 over Eastern Ukraine.

Reuters blames pro-Moscow rebels

"(Reuters) - A Malaysian airliner was brought down in eastern Ukraine on Thursday, killing all 295 people aboard and sharply raising the stakes in a conflict between Kiev and pro-Moscow rebels that has set Russia and the West at daggers drawn."

Here U.S. CBS highlights Ukrainian allegations that the Russian military was responsible. Click here

Here, Russian news agency Ria Novosti points out that the armed militia fighting the Ukrainian Army does not have the surface-to-air missiles wit the range to hit an aircraft flying at 30,000 feet or around 10,000 metres high, but the Ukranian Army has.

"MOSCOW, July 17 (RIA Novosti) - A Ukrainian army battalion of Buk air defense systems was deployed near the city of Donetsk a day before the crash of a Malaysian passenger plane on Thursday, making the downing of the aircraft by one of the missiles highly probable, an expert source said.

"According to reconnaissance data, a Ukrainian army battalion of Buk air defense systems was deployed near Donetsk on Wednesday morning,” the source said.

The source added that armed militia fighting Kiev-led forces in eastern Ukraine does not have Buk systems, which are capable of shooting down aircraft flying at altitudes up to 25 kilometers (82,000 feet).

Earlier the same day, adviser to the Ukrainian Interior Minister wrote on his Facebook page that a Buk surface-to-air missile system was indeed used to down the plane, but insisted that the self-defense forces had done that.

11 July 2014

REVERSAL OF THE SCOURGE OF PRIVATISATION SINCE THATCHER & REAGAN

The global scourge of von- Hayekist, Chicago School, neo-liberal privatisation of key public utilities and state-owned enterprises which began with British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and soon after by U.S. President Ronald Reagan is being increasingly challenged, as countries around the world realise that it's not working out as privatised enterprises put profits before the interests of the people.

This was followed by a series of "de-regulation" or "liberalisation" of telecommunications network operators, electricity, water, airlines, schools and universities and other state-owned entities which pleased the capitalists no end, since they saw profits, profits and more profits, whilst spin doctors convinced consumers that it was "good" for them, gave them "freedom of choice", etc., etc..

Following Margaret Thatcher's visit to Malaysia in the mid 1980s, Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir began a spate of privatisation of public utilities and resources, and today one of the results of that is the proposed Kinrara-Damansara Expressway (KIDEX) which will be built and operated by a private concessionnaire, which has the right to collect tolls from its users. Besides that, KIDEX will also result in the demolition of hundreds of homes, the reduction of school playing fields, spoil Petaling Jaya's skyline, add to noise and exhaust fume pollution.

Chic, arty-farty, yuppie, Bangsar-wallah, Neo-Liberal types hailed privatisation and freedom of choice, like diabetic children suddenly told that they can eat all the sweets they want, but like the long-term consequences for these diabetic children, privatisation has been found to have resulted in the deterioration of public services.

I compared the bus service of Greater Manchester in the U.K., which was run by a city-owned corporation back in the 1970s when I was a student there wit what I experienced of it when I visited in the late 1990s, when Manchester's bus service was operated by several private companies. In the 1970s, bus drivers could tell you which buses to take to get to your destination and you could travel anywhere in Manchester on the buses on a single bus pass. However with the privatised system, I could only use the bus pass I had bought on routes in South Manchester, and the bus drivers could not tell me what buses to take.

State ownership of public services isn't socialism of course, nay, under a capitalist state, it's state capitalism but that's still better than privatised entities.

If you want to see what real socialism is like, watch this video. It's in Spanish or Portuguese with English subtitles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJZl1bO8JQY

02 July 2014

MOBILE ADVERTISING MARKET SOARS BUT DO MEDIA ORGANISATIONS PROSPER?

This question lies at the heart of the purpose of this blog, IT.Scheiss.

On 19 March, 2014, eMarketer reported that global mobile ad spending in 2013 increased 105.0% to total $17.96 billion and that this year (2014) mobile advertising is on track to rise another 75.1% to $31.45 billion, accounting for nearly one-quarter of total digital ad spending worldwide.

Now that would have the mobile communications and content industry dancing with ecstatic joy, and the information technology (IT) and business media breathlessly proclaiming this fact to the world, that mobile is the next big thing in advertising, where Web-advertising was lacklustre.

There surely will be a whole lot of half-baked and self-styled mobile media CON-sultants going around telling every media organisation in town that they should all drop print and go mobile, and if they needed help, well pay them their hefty CON-sultancy fees. They'll also be charging hefty fees to speak at seminars and conferences.

Sure! No argument! Reality informs us that mobile advertising revenues are growing worldwide, and we heard it said over 10 years ago that Web advertising would the "next big thing".

However, Web advertising didn't quite happen as expected, especially not for mass media organisations which either hoped for or were led by new media CON-sultants into believing that it would, and they jumped onto online bandwagon. But, on the other hand, current real-world evidence points to quite a different story for mobile advertising which looks like it's actually on the road to great heights.

Still, based upon the actual experience of mass media, the big question remains as to who actually prospers from this mobile advertising trend. Would it be newspapers, magazines, radio and TV stations which set up mobile editions accessible on tablets and smartphones or is it some other companies which are not really mass media publishers or broadcasters?

The second paragraph of the eMarketer report answers that question:-

"Facebook and Google accounted for a majority of mobile ad market growth worldwide last year. Combined, the two companies saw net mobile ad revenues increase by $6.92 billion, claiming 75.2% of the additional $9.2 billion that went toward mobile in 2013. The two companies are consolidating their places at the top of the market, accounting for more than two-thirds of mobile ad spending last year—a figure that will increase slightly this year, according to eMarketer."

I'll leave you to read the rest of the eMarketer article here but this begs the questions- Whither the future of journalism as a viable paying career in the long term. After all, how many journalists, radio and TV announcers do Google, Facebook and Twitter employ, especially when their business model is to get a the masses to post all kinds of content on their sites, which gets THEM the eyeballs and ears, which then attracts advertisers to THEM?