The key reason as to why traditional practices are reluctant to change, because it is COSTLY to change.

Note that revolutionary stuffs like twitter started with a niche market with basically little or no infrastructure. There’s nothing for them to reverse. Afterall they are creating new stuffs.

However, looking at the idea of Path Dependency. The model of the traditional businesses are already in place. For Media especially, it means almost total reverse of their practices, when they are highly dependent on it, (Systems, People, Company processes).

Hence, they are extremely reluctant to change. It’ll be an extremely daring thing to do. It’s like, schools used to lay cables for LAN connection… when it’s no longer in use now, since they have to spend on wireless… But the cost is already there for installing the LAN connections, and it’ll take more cost to remove them. This simple move of reversal is already quite unwelcomed, but there’s nothing much the companies can do…

That’s why mocca and podcast and whatever the traditional media is trying to do and advertise…

In my personal view, it’s already pointless… cos they miss the critical point. What they can do, is to either ride on the existing platforms, and plan new models and processes that can easily shift to fit the new wave (that will be coming soon).

If not, they have to innovate to think of revolutionary stuffs… that’s up and new from facebook etc.

But by now, we should all acknowledge, why we lack innovators cos the culture of locals, has this deeply-ingrained fear of losing. It’s very expensive to lose… even once.
Shan´s last blog ..President Obama’s Speech in Cairo: A New Beginning

I used to be in PR in a relatively senior position (not boasting, just so that you can put my comments in context) and a point I would like to add is that even PR firms, and this includes ALL the big boys, have been very very very slow in getting their social media act together. This was my pet peeve for a couple of years but the global bosses while they agreed, couldn’t do anything about it.

What PR firms encounter is that traditional PR gurus and honchos are too set in their ways with traditional media (old age maybe? and old in PR terms is the same as in advertising terms >40yrs) and while they are not resistant to learning about new or social media (in fact they are very enthusiastic about it), don’t seem to quite grasp it at the end of the day, which frankly is not their fault cos these are the same generation that also never quite grasped Powerpoint slides, advanced Word processing, Facebook and Twitter.

So you get a bunch of senior consultants who privately admit that they don’t really get it. What to do? Hire.

So you hire staff who do get social media to head up the dept. And then you realise that they are all very young. And while they might be brilliant in their own way, their inexperience holds the dept back. Frankly, any PR firm’s social media head probably only has 3-4 years experience in social media at the MAX cos thats how long new/social media commerical engagement has been around for.

Its really nobody’s fault and the upside is that things can only get better as more engagement continues and the market (PR firms, bloggers, traditional media, companies) matures.

The fact that movies, news, books, advertorials, TV shows, and all stuffs that can be flashed on screen, ARE already flourishing in the new media. Who cares the late runners like mocca.sg, podcast.sg… tad too late, i must say.

Yes, Straits Times on paper, is still very much alive, and there’re plenty who are still cool with paying for physical newspapers, pretty much because of habits as we all belong to the digital migrants.

However, if I’m the boss of SPH, Kinokuniya, Golden Village, HMV “I’ll be sleepless over the sustaining the biz” because future generations (or the current younger youths) are born in the age when their first toy is a handphone, a mouse, or a computer. I quote the above, from my professor. They don’t need newspapers anymore. They don’t need physical books anymore, cos there’s Kindle, don’t need to go cinemas, can easily purchase movies online, and download songs.

An interesting example will be Sony and iPod. Sony (during my time) had all along been the forerunners of portable music. Who gives shit about apple (that’s meant to be eaten). However, cos Sony was too hung up over preventing piracy = mp3, they miss the shift entirely to iPod and iTunes. So what we see now, is Sony uncle, trying to run after the change of music industry.

The above doesn’t entirely represent my view. I learned that in class… and I thought it’s really cool. Lol

Social media is all aflutter with news of his passing. This morning’s newspapers still have no news on it, and for a reason.

But does this mean I won’t read the papers? No. I like the depth of analysis and objectivity that traditional media provides.

As someone pointed out about “commodity” news in the Open Room – these days, no one will pay for that. But I would pay for well-written, insightful content with interesting perspectives.

But what happens if one day, some segments of social media can provide that as well?

Food for thought.