In February 2017 I will be at ACERE Conference (Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange) in Melbourne, Australia, to present research findings as a speaker. The conference will be held at NAB’s The Village and is hosted by QUT (Australian Centre for Entrepreneuship Research at Queensland University of Technology) and RMIT University.
Melbourne Apartment View
Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange
I worked on a case study of Sydney’s entrepreneurship policy and strategy towards the regional entrepreneurial ecosystem, outlined in the City of Sydney’s Tech Startup Action Plan, a comprehensive document created in collaboration with entrepreneurial ecosystem stakeholders as well as industry consulting entities over a period of at least 5 years. The plan was adopted by Council in June 2016 and builds on premises such as links between entrepreneurship and economic growth:
“Encouraging tech startups will create more jobs, boost Sydney’s economy, strengthen global connections and make the city a more desirable place to live, work and visit. Our tech startups action plan details how we will work with industry and government partners to create an environment that enables technology entrepreneurs to start and grow successful global businesses.”
The case study was done in 2016 during my time at UNSW (University of New South Wales) in Sydney as an international research student from Hamburg University of Applied Sciences in collaboration with Dr. Martin Bliemel, senior researcher at UNSW Business School, and also consists of input by industry stakeholders, policy makers and startup advocacy groups.
The peer reviewed paper will be presented during the conference and might provide an ample starting point for discussions on effective entrepreneurship policy and additional academic work in the future.
Literature research done in this context also provided a basis for further research and a master thesis on entrepreneurship policy implementation in Hamburg, Germany, that was completed in December 2016.
Well, it has been a few months now and so far I did not regret my decision. I opted for an iPad Pro 9,2″ with an Apple Pencil and a backlit Logitech CREATE Smart Keyboard to explore a post PC setup for professional work once more. The setup is complemented by my iPhone 6S and Apple Watch. I plan to try it for at least 6 months and then decide whether to buy a Macbook/Macbook Pro or stick with it. So far, I think this might in fact change my entire tech outfit.
Back in 2010, when the original iPad was introduced, I was thrilled by the possibilities advertised and switched from my MacBook Pro to an iPad and tried to get everything done on tablet exclusively. Back then, I was working at Scholz & Friends as was involved in project management and corporate change management. I just implemented Google Apps for Work at the entire agency network and mainly used web based tools such as Google Docs, Google Spreadsheets, Things, some Adobe Products etc.
The main issues back then were performance related (lag when switching apps, unusable clipboard functionality, no multitasking, etc.) and problems while integrating with agency toolchains and workflows with the Adobe Creative Suite, PowerPoint and Apple Keynote. Although the iPad had proven to be a very portable device and great for presenting, it quickly failed the test of being able to substitute a full fledged Mac as a professional working tool. Still I tried it for almost 6 months, so I am pretty confident about what I liked and missed.
When the iPhone 6 Plus came out, I wanted to try it out, so I could get rid of the iPad Mini. Since I mostly used it for reading, it seemed like the larger iPhone might be a good way to reduce the number of devices. I was so wrong. The iPhone 6 Plus was the worst iPhone experience I had so far. I wrote up some notes on that some time ago and couldn’t wait for the iPhone 6S, which for some reason still is my current iPhone. Although far bigger than on older iPhone models, the iPhone 6S screen size doesn’t suit me personally for reading longer texts, so I am kind of back to reading serious texts on my Mac. (I might still try out the iPhone 7S for the dual camera setup, which I think is pretty neat).
The iPad Pro
When the large iPad Pro was announced in 2015, I was amazed by its performance benchmarks and the perspective the device holds for creative professionals. Still, when I took a looked at the device and held in my hands, I was sure it wasn’t right for me. It’s too big, too heavy and doubtful as a game changer to the way I used computers before.
In March 2016 though, Apple introduced the iPad Pro 9,2″, a smaller version of its bigger brother. Without going too much into technical details, it is basically the same iPad in a smaller iPad Air like size. The small iPad Pro comes with some additional features, such as the astonishing truetone display technology and the downside of just 2GB of RAM instead of 4GB in the larger iPad Pro. So what’s the difference for me you ask? Basically, it changes everything.
I must admit, I am not sure if I would love an iPad Pro in even smaller iPad Mini like size even more. Still, I think this is not only the best iPad (and tablet for that matter) that you can buy today, it opens another angle to a post PC professional working environment for me. Among many others, Walt Mossberg to think so too and wrote up the best “iPad as a Laptop replacement” review in my opinion.
What do I do with it?
Nowadays, I read a lot in a professional capacity, ranging from scientific journals and magazine articles to endless project reports, technical requirement lists and strategy documents among many other things. Also, I am more on the move than ever before, traveling a lot, communicating mostly via mail, instant messages/chat (far less #slack as one would imagine) and collaborating on documents with cloud based tools such as G Suite (formerly Google for Work) and more recently iCloud (Keynote and Pages mostly). Since most of my daily tools are highly optimized for mobile usage, I am confident not to miss out on anything over using a desktop machine.
The real benefit comes with reading documents (mainly PDFs). For years I have been trapped again behind my desktop screen, reading and marking PDFs, scrolling through comments etc. all while sitting at a desk or in a somewhat uncomfortable pose with the laptop on my lap. With the Apple Pencil and the high performance iPad Pro, for the very first time it feels like I am actually faster on the iPad than on a regular Mac and in fact faster than on paper.
I especially like Workflow, an app that allows you to choose from or create automation workflows to optimise seemingly long click-thru processes on the iPad. It feels like Automator for Mac, an application than Apple seems to be fading out slowly.
Of course there are more apps I use on the iPad, but they are the usual suspects for communication, media consumption, travel, shopping etc.
Although there is still ample room for improvements for efficient ways to do complicated things on the iPad, there is far more than can be done than I would have expected a few years ago. I will let you know, how it goes from here.
Over the past years I used instant cameras quite a bit and experimented with the Impossible Project Instant Lab and their polaroid compatible film material to create instant images from digital photos. The Fujifilm instant film never was high on my list of priorities because I don’t like the formats they offer. Now might be a good time to give it another look. The Leica Sofort setup looks like a sweet deal.
For more information check out the article by WIRED.
During A/D/A Hamburg I joined new media artist Jeremy Bailey as a mentor for his 3 day Lean Artist seed accelerator workshop. It basically was a boot camp based on design thinking and lean startup principles to create culturally disruptive startups.
On the first day I joined the selected group of 10 international artists with a cynical review of the worldwide startup economy to promote a more creative approach to generating relevant startup ideas. Jeremy kicked the event off with an accelerated design thinking workshop to generate needs and insights for problem statements. Over the course of 3 days the cohort created startup ideas and iterated product prototypes and pitched their artistic business ideas for additional funding on the last day.
As mentioned before, Jessica Broscheit is conducting a workshop about air quality and urban data at the Creative Space for Technical Innovations at Hamburg’s University of Applied Sciences. It’s called “How Will We Breathe Tomorrow” and is part of the A/D/A Hamburg 2016, a conference about future utopias for today’s urban citizen. During the workshop people can learn about government efforts to collect and share air quality data in open government data platforms and develop their own air quality monitoring device to experiment with visual, haptic and acoustic ways to explore data.
Last year I worked with Jessica Broscheit und Hannes Sieg on another project within the “Next Media” master program at the University of Applied Sciences Hamburg (HAW Hamburg), called “Air Mask”. It involved research into air quality data and open government data platforms and lead to the development of a design fiction prototype of an air mask used for monitoring environmental data.
The collected data can be compared globally through a developed standardisation process and local air quality data was visualised on the mask itself in an easy to understand 3-colored alarm system. Just recently, Jessica created a website to document these projects.
The first cohort will start August 26-28 2016 as is part of the A/D/A Hamburg 2016, a conference about future utopias for today’s urban citizen. I was asked to join the cohort as a mentor, so I am looking forward to the event and can’t wait to see what the artists come up with.
The workshop was organised around the structure of typical startup accelerator programs, working on specific challenges while developing a working business model over a period of 12 weeks. It was a 5 person team with local ties in Australia, Denmark, Germany, Spain and the U.S. and backgrounds in engineering, marketing, business and process management.
The team utilized design thinking methodologies, experimented with real life feedback and consulted with industry mentors. While defining and differentiating the product, support and feedback on topics such as design, financials, financing, valuations, growth, IP and pitching to investors was provided by UNSW staff and additional industry professionals.
Business Model Canvas
Key element of the 12 week program was the business model canvas, a strategic management template for developing and documenting business models. It helped the team to visually describe all important elements and to iterate through various versions of the business model while working through the Build-Measure-Learn feedback loop. Also it allowed to sketch and discuss the business model on paper within the group, which made it very easy to discover flaws and potentials for further improvements.
As could be expected, the business model changed from week to week and many apparent problems were eliminated through validated learning and evidence based iteration. By getting user feedback as early as possible and accounting for every change made to the business model, waste of funds while developing the minimum viable product was minimized as much as possible.
Fantastic Five – B2B Breakfast Delivery Service
In week 12 the team pitched the state of the startup, its business model, go to market strategy, key metrics and financial projections to real investors within the local startup scene in Sydney and was offered to talk about possibly joining food delivery startup activities currently active at a local accelerator program in Sydney.
The pitch was presented during a demo day at the Michael Crouch Innovation Centre within a lineup of several other startups with a pitch deck of 1o slides in a time slot of 3 minutes with an additional 3 minutes for questions by the potential investors. The jury was made up by prominent members and angel investors of the Sydney startup community.
How much time and money does it take to start a new venture?
All in all, it was a very interesting experience. Considering the effort put into the project one can only imagine the results if one would be committed full time. I spent roughly half a day to a day per week on this project and expect the other team members to have been involved in a similar or slightly deeper manner.
So basically the business pitched to the investors was the product of 250-500 hours of work with no significant additional budget. All templates and tools used were free and everything surrounding the actual product was designed, developed and tested by the team members.
So as all of you know, it just takes a lot of effort and the willingness to put in the time to ideate something of value. It certainly is feasible to create a venture with high-growth potential within a matter of 3 months. In fact, considering the experience of this workshop, it might be possible to do it a lot quicker if the commitment and skill set of the team members match up.
TOTO is going to release a new Live Concert Recording on DVD, BLU-RAY, CD and Digital Video in September 2016. It is a recording of the 1991 concert at the Montreux Jazz Festival, during TOTO’s the last tour with the late Jeff Porcaro:
“At the personal invitation of Quincy Jones and legendary Montreux Jazz Festival founder Claude Nobs to perform at the famed Swiss festival, Toto couldn’t resist the opportunity, resulting in Toto: Live At Montreux 1991. “From the perspective of the members of Toto,” states guitarist Steve Lukather, “the Montreux Jazz Festival is amongst the most revered events staged in the world. Our association, as a band, and individuals, is something we are deeply proud of. So much fun, and so much history has graced the ground in and around the lake.” “
The setlist sounds promising and includes hits like On The Run (video above), Kingdom of Desire and Jake To The Bone (one of my favourites). As it seems it is a performance with the all time best setup: Steve Lukather, David Paich, Mike Porcaro and Jeff Porcaro. After Jeff Porcaro’s death in 1992, Simon Phillips became the drummer of the band and David Paich didn’t join the band on every tour. He was often substituted by Greg Phillinganes (who became a regular member of the band for a few years). Mike Porcaro, who died suffering from ALS in 2015, was covered for by bassists such as Leland Sklar and Nathan East over the years (who also was a regular member of the band for some time in the past). So, this is probably the latest recording with most of the original members of the band. I am looking forward to it.
This essay will elaborate on recent changes in the social media landscape, specifically changes in social traffic referrals and the persistence of social media, and their subsequent implications for digital business models of newspaper publishers. Taking into consideration that social referral traffic is becoming the main source of referral traffic for many media and news publishers, changes in the persistence of social media have the potential to largely compromise the publisher’s efforts to monetise their web traffic through advertising.
In order to classify changes in the social media landscape it is sensible to define the term for the current state of its development. For the purpose of this essay this can be done without illustrating the historical evolution of aspects, features and characteristics. Since social media have changed drastically over the past years, many attempts of defining the term have been made. Due to the ever-changing landscape and the rapid technological development of social media, many of these definitions seem out of date or imprecise. For the purpose of this essay the definition by Carr and Hayes (2015) will be used, since it provides an accessible explication for the long-term future, considers recent changes in technology, interaction and organisation as well as anticipates future challenges in social media. They define social media as follows:
“Social media are internet-based channels that allow users to opportunistically interact and selectively self-present, either in real-time or asynchronously, with both broad and narrow audiences who derive value from user-generated content and the perception of interaction with others.”
(Carr C T and Hayes R A, 2015)
This definition allows to include a wide variety of services, ranging from obvious social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, business networking sites such as LinkedIn, video sharing sites such as Youtube and Vimeo to live streaming services such as Twitter’s Periscope as well as old and new messaging services such as WhatsApp and Snapchat among many others. It also allows for future social media services to be included, as long as they are user-centric and interactive channels organised around content sharing, characteristics that are shared among all social media channels to date.
Changes in social referral traffic
One industry relying heavily on shared social media content is the media and newspaper publishing industry. Newspaper websites are largely monetised through advertising and rely on visits and page impressions on their actual web property (Ju, Jeong and Chyi, 2014). The sources for such website traffic can ruffly be divided among direct traffic (users accessing the website directly by entering the url in the browser) and referral traffic (users accessing the website through search engine results such as in Google or through a link on another web property or within social networks). Every user visiting a publisher’s usually free to use website generates page views while accessing different resources on the web property. With every page load advertising inventory will be displayed for the user to generate advertising revenue for the publisher. In conclusion publishers’ digital business models rely heavily on page views and ad impressions to monetise their inventory.
Over the past years the importance of social referral traffic for media and newspaper websites has changed dramatically. In August 2015 it was reported by FORTUNE that traffic analytics firm Parse.ly’s data showed social media as the largest provider of all website referral traffic with about 43% of the total traffic, while search traffic through Google accounted for just 38% (Figure 1). Facebook is by far the largest provider of social referral traffic in this dataset with close to 40%.
To emphasise the dramatic trajectory of this change, Facebook’s share grew rapidly from just 20% in January 2014 (Figure 2). For larger news and media sites, more than 50% are reported to get more traffic from Facebook than from Google (Ingram, 2015). This development could very well be considered a tipping point for the dominance of Facebook as the main source for news content on the internet.
With social referral traffic accounting for such a large portion of traffic for major news and media websites, it is clear that the monetisation of this traffic is crucial for the publishers’ business model. Unfortunately for publishers, recent research by Ju, Jeong and Chyi (2014) showed that users accessing news websites via social networking sites provide fewer page views and higher bounce rates than other website visitors. The authors examined 66 U.S. newspapers’ efforts to distribute their content via social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter and the effectiveness of these services as news platforms. The social media presences of the newspapers were analysed and the impact to the newspaper’s website traffic and therefore their advertising revenues examined.
The results of the efforts to drive social referral traffic have proven to be largely underwhelming, despite the hype about the business potential for newspapers (Ju, Jeong and Chyi, 2014). The research clearly illustrates the limitations of creating new advertising revenue streams through social referral traffic for newspapers. With an increasing number of visitors being referred through social media, the average page impressions per visit are shrinking on publishers’ web properties. This development has direct impact on the publishers’ ability to monetise their web traffic and is consequently accelerating at the same pace as the amount of social media referral traffic is increasing.
Changes in the persistence of social media
An important element of social media has been the persistence of content, may it be used in real-time as in Twitter’s Periscope or asynchronously as in WhatsApp. For many years it has been a crucial aspect that any content within the social media landscape remains persistent (Dewing, 2012), meaning accessible and searchable via the web for ever, even if the users’ practice focuses more on the shared present (Hogan B and Quan- Haase A, 2010).
Although the persistent element is still existent in lots of social media channels, recent services like Snapchat introduced channels which delete content shortly after consuming it (Carr C T and Hayes R A, 2015). There are more and more new services focussing on the “present moment” and deleting content after its consumption, e.g. Beme, Tiiny, Vine or Wickr, to name a few.
In conclusion non-persistent content is already an established element of the social media landscape at this stage. The result of content not being accessible after the “present moment” has direct implications for publishers’ business models relying on monetising of shared and long-term accessible social media content.
As the longevity of social media news shortens dramatically by recent shifts in persistence within social networks, meaning content being accessible and shareable for shorter periods of time, the time to generate social referral traffic for news sites is getting shorter as well. The long tail effect (Andersen, 2004) for news articles in this category may be diminished completely if the content is no longer persistent within the social media landscape. With social referral traffic only being generated on a short term basis, a large portion of monetisation potential is lost for older news articles. This increases the pressure on publishers to refinance their articles on a short term dramatically.
Things might get even worse for many publishers with Facebook’s latest publishing feature, Instant Articles. Instant Articles allow publishers to display content in its entirety directly within the Facebook stream (Groden, 2016). The user does not have to leave the Facebook platform and can consume an entire article, including videos and interactive elements, seamlessly within the Facebook experience.
Although this makes sense from a user’s perspective, it increases the publishers’ dependency on Facebook drastically. With Instant Articles the amount of off-website content and with it the difficulty to monetise this content is increasing. Publishers may sell their own advertisement for Instant Articles but in the end Facebook is in charge of the platform (McAlone, 2016), a drastic difference from the publishers’ own web properties. As well as it may be a chance for smaller publishers with no large sales force in place to use Facebook’s ad sales in Instant Articles, it may just as well be a huge problem for larger media and news publishers.
With these developments in mind, many publishers would have to change their social media strategy drastically if they decide to change their business model from free websites with advertising revenues towards closed websites with paywalls. Since news content tends to be free within the social media landscape and certainly will remain free within Facebook Instant Articles for the time being, it is doubtful that publishers can drive many users into their paywalls through social referral traffic.
Especially with content being integrated in platforms like Facebook in better ways, the lock-in effect for most users is increasing. This development makes it more and more unlikely that users are willing to tolerate a disruption in an otherwise seamless social media experience just to consume content elsewhere, not even considering paying for it.
Summarised it can be stated that social referral traffic in general is worse for media and news publishing websites than other kinds of traffic and leads to fewer page views and higher bounce rates. This leads to a direct threat to advertising revenues for most publishers as the percentage of social referral traffic increases. As a result the current business model of many media and news outlets is in jeopardy.
With recent changes in the percentage of social referral traffic as well as in the persistence of social media content, the pressure on publishing companies to find alternative ways to monetise their inventory increases rapidly. If content is no longer available within social media after it has been consumed in the “present moment”, the potential to drive traffic with this content is very limited and short-term.
Additionally with Facebook latest publishing feature, Instant Articles, many users are kept out of the publishers’ web properties. Therefor it seems unlikely that the quality of social referral traffic, meaning its page views per visit ratio, is increasing for publishers’ any time soon.
Taking into consideration the rapid growth of the percentage of social referral traffic over the past year, it is clear that the pressure is increasing for many media and news publisher with no deceleration of this trend in sight.
Lastly, publishers’ actual or conceivable efforts to erect paywalls for compensation of underperforming advertising revenues on their websites might be compromised by new publishing features such as Facebook’s Instant Articles, which largely contribute to keeping users within the social network and off third party web properties.
Since the illustrated parameters have a tremendous effect on the bottom line for news websites and tend to change very quickly, it is more important than ever for publishing companies to act swiftly if they want to avoid impairing their market position any further.
Unfortunately, all attempts as of today do not seem to provide evidence for any extensive success. Therefor a prosperous step into the future requires rapid and substantial business model innovation.
Due to recent changes in social referral traffic to news websites and in the persistence of social media, current business models of digital news publishers are in jeopardy.
DISCLAIMER:This essay has been written for the seminar “Online and Mobile Media” during an international research exchange at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Sydney, Australia, within the “Next Media” master program at the University of Applied Sciences Hamburg (HAW Hamburg) in 2016. For more information or any questions please contact me at email@example.com.
Apart from some very few media corporations such as The New York Times, who experimented with VR with a specific mobile application, most publishing companies have not yet committed to the VR trend. In fact many publishers still seem to struggle with the transition from print to digital media. Not only are they struggling to establish working business models for their websites, they also seem to be behind on the shift to mobile media as well.
With the ongoing acceleration of the technological revolution this is yet another reason to worry about the media and news industry in general. If these companies keep moving at an old economy pace, it is doubtful they can keep up with current developments. The next big thing might be around the corner even before they start to adapt to then already outdated technologies.
No matter if they are trying to protect their current business as long as possible or if they are just afraid of the future, there is no time to wait any longer. Since the exponential acceleration of the technological development is a fact, publishers should start facing the digital future without fear if they want to survive.
DISCLAIMER:This post has been written for the seminar “Online and Mobile Media” during an international research exchange at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Sydney, Australia, within the “Next Media” master program at the University of Applied Sciences Hamburg (HAW Hamburg) in 2016. For more information or any questions please contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org.