Introduction
The power of new media is undoubted at present due to its strong impact on the public. No company producing goods or financial services currently neglects the possibilities which media offers to them. New media culture can be seen as a mixture of new technologies and new ways of presenting information such as the Internet and reality TV. Still, media culture remains the main persuasive medium that influences the minds and thoughts of people. The success of the new media product (film, advertisement, news story, etc.) is in many ways pre-destined by the media strategy. In the modern era, using sex in media messages becomes one of the most popular practices for companies. They do no longer need to attract people with new media based on competitive prices or higher quality than their competitors.
New Media Culture and Information
For information acquisition, new media is a less important moderator compared to the other learning processes – information distribution, interpretation, and storage – since there is a larger degree of individual autonomy in using various media to acquire information from the outside. This autonomy enables managers to make choices with a relatively high degree of independence vis-à-vis the organizational context. However, people need to be aware of the media usage patterns of their communication partners outside the organization. In particular, the organization wants to ensure adequate attention to the HR aspects of the intended changes. The leaders are aware that many technological advances have been made since the system is installed. The main competitors are already in the process of upgrading their information processing capability (Alaxander & Hanson 2008).
New Media Technologies
The online video websites substitute new products and propose users easy access to video databases. Direct-response and database marketers had long known that not every customer had equal value to the marketer. Even some brand strategists had embraced the challenge to develop new research methodologies (e.g., the rise of differential marketing). They all would have to identify the most valuable customers; the customers that gave the firm more business through referrals; the customers who were not worth catering to at all; the prospects the firm would like to convert to customers; and the types of consumers the firm would consider real prospects. Easy access makes loyal customers more loyal and satisfied with the services proposed by websites (Cohen, 2007).
Web-sites like YouTube or Joost attract Internet users and PC users appealing with unique value proposing and services. People tend to spend more time with online television. The white homogeneity of media content may have a powerful influence on audiences and may help explain the persistence of stereotypes in culture. The internet makes YouTube or Joost global companies that propose information and video to global consumers. In this case, new media culture cannot compete with the Internet because it requires sophisticated technology and services (Flew, 2003).
The technological developments that are taking place will extend the range of products used to connect to the WWW and other Internet services. Examples of this development can be seen with televisions and video clips allowing connection to the WWW. This combination of the WWW’s flexibility and the simplicity of the browser software provides tangible business benefits in terms of reduced training, lower development costs, and an increase in the range of users who can have access to the organization. The benefits of using WWW technology are available to all sizes of organizations, irrespective of whether they intend to possess their own WWW site. As the telephone network, the Internet operates globally. Once connected, the scope of access is not conditioned by geographic boundaries. Unlike the telephone network, the costs involved in global connection are not related to the distances involved. Conducting transactions with the adjacent office costs the same as contacting the farthest continent. The mindset that equates distance with cost must change when using the Internet. As has already been illustrated, the number and breadth of types of users who have access to the Internet are increasing rapidly. The narrow band of high-income, professional, and predominantly male users is changing to reflect more accurately the normal demographic distribution. No other communications medium has had access to such a large audience and range of people which increases the ability to leverage the value of information to a scale that has never before been possible (Wilson-Goldie, 2007).
Many viewers do not want to pay for additional services proposed by new media companies. Future information goods are likely to be characterized by the disaggregation of information content to facilitating novel pricing strategies. The units of sale for information goods can now be redefined: for example, digital maps can now be sold centered on a point specified by the customer rather than as a paper map sheet defined by the producer. It has been argued that a change to disaggregated information products implies that there is no need for ‘fair use’ provisions, as anyone wanting access to information good can pay a ‘micropayment’ to the creator for the smallest unit of information required (Vivian, 2008).
Reality TV
In this case, Reality TV as a channel of distribution is both changing the nature of the media products created and the way that they are sold. There are now emergent information goods that can only be created and sold using the Internet, for example, certain kinds of collaborative games. The low marginal cost regime for digital information representations created by the Internet also has the potential to change the way governments handle information. Using realty TV, governments collect a wide range of information for various purposes including governance, regulation, and the operation of services. In its governance role governments usually compel citizens to give personal details, for example to the census and the electoral authorities. In its services and regulation, role information is usually collected as needed from citizens and businesses (Naim, 2007). Governments now have to decide whether to make a charge for information dissemination through the Internet (even though the costs are low) to pay for the (possibly high) cost of the information production (Flew, 2003).
A large and expanding ‘Internet watching’ industry has grown up to supply such data. Those statistics that can be gained directly from the Internet about its traffic volumes and the geographical segmentation of its users provide a reasonably accurate picture of what is happening. The number of host computers connected to the Internet continues to grow annually at over 60 percent with their geographic distribution concentrated within a very few countries. Traditionally, new media controls information and a context delivered to end consumers. The Internet and digital encoding of information representations have profoundly changed information, and probably knowledge with it (Naim, 2007).
The WWW medium
The changes are far-reaching: the definition of intellectual property; the nature of the information ‘commons’ for the citizen; the right of privacy in communicated expressions; the regulation of information infrastructures (computer operating systems and networks); the definition of information goods; and the nature of government communication with its citizens. These changes mostly revolve around information ownership and yet no consistent framework has yet to emerge as the question has mostly been approached in a piecemeal way. It is argued in conclusion that a new information dispensation must be built which guarantees information ownership, as this is the foundation on which systems of trading, governance, and research can be built (Marris & Thornham, 2000).
More interesting, though, was the extent to which users of the Internet as a news source said that as a result, they are using traditional news. It seems that using online video sites may have a more negative effect on news viewing than news reading. This might be because Internet users most often go online for the sort of information featured by television news, especially cable. In the early days, online companies did their very best to replicate the printed or media product (Mayer et al 2001).
These emergent digital information standards now pose a major problem for competition regulators around the world as they span jurisdictions and the market dominance they create is not easily broken up by their nature. Although in some markets the developers may license the ‘standard’ technology to widen participation (the digital cellular phone standard GSM is one example), in others the standard-setter may aggressively protect its control over the standard as it regards it as an asset. At present most of the dominant information standards have been developed by US companies and they can only be regulated effectively by the US Department of Justice. However, the US Department of Justice understandably only serves the US national interest: from their perspective, an operating system ‘lock-in’ like Microsoft Windows is at least a domestic American ‘ lock-in (Flew, 2003). These technological questions will, however, mark out the information infrastructures of the next century. In the emerging technological and commercial environment defined by the digital encoding of information representations ‘ownership’ is coming to mean different things. For example, without encryption information ownership is only relative since owners of network servers and those with privileged access to them (e.g. intelligence agencies, hackers) can easily acquire and use information representations transmitted through the Internet. The Internet makes it possible to distribute information as good in digital form at an extremely low cost, thus changing the economics of information decisively (Korn, 2007; Hirst & Harrison, 2007).
The internet and online video websites have become a new sales channel of media culture uncontrolled by the state and free for mass consumers. If any element of the channel can be provided more cost-effectively, either by another organization or the application of technology, then the producer will have a strong incentive to change their sales strategy. New media culture is limited by censorship and regulations, channels of communication, and geographical scope. In other words, this situation creates a channel conflict for new media. Whenever there are a number of different sales channel elements that can address the same customer base, then there is the potential for conflict. The computer industry is renowned for having multiple channels which often find themselves in direct competition (Korn, 2007).
Advertising as a Part of New Media Culture
Advertising is a part of new media culture. Some direct marketers have long suspected that the reliance of media advertising on attitudinal factors, instead of behavioral ones, has resulted in “much ado about nothing.” Moreover, they consider the Internet an information media and therefore antithetical to media advertising. When these capabilities are combined to address traditional business situations, it is possible to generate tangible operational benefits. The American media marketplace is not only larger but far more specialized than any other environment worldwide. In the light of the Internet and its direct potential, these targeting options remained narrow and one-sided (Chun & Keenan, 2005).
Conclusion
New media culture constitutes a new vision of reality and popularizes modern social ideals through technological innovations. Constraints on the geographic, industry, or application areas of trading, available to each channel element, can suddenly disappear. Perhaps the most important thing that can be done is to recognize that a problem will exist and to ensure that the existing channel elements have been informed of how the changes will affect them. If possible, these existing channel partners should be involved in the use of technology and encouraged to accept the changes by sharing part of the planned benefits. There are several reasons why it may be necessary to reduce the level of margin on media products that are being sold via the Internet-related sales channel.
Reference List
Alaxander, A., Hanson, J. 2008. Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Mass Media and Society (Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in Mass Media and Society). McGraw-Hill/Dushkin.
Cohen, M. I. 2007. Contemporary Wayang in Global Contexts; Asian Theatre Journal 24 (1), pp. 338-340.
Chun, W. & Keenan, T. W. 2005. New Media, Old Media: A History and Theory Reader. Routledge; 1 edition.
Hirst, M. & Harrison, J. 2007. Communication and New Media. From Broadcast to Narrowcast, Oxford University Press, Melbourne.
Flew, T. 2003. New Media: an Introduction. 3rd Edition Oxford University Press, USA
Korn, D. J. 2007. Time for Tech? as YouTube Continues to Generate Buzz and Google Trades at near $500 per Share, the Tech Sector May Be Ready to Regain Market Leadership. Black Enterprise 37, p. 80.
Marris, P. & Thornham, S. 2000, Media Studies: A Reader. NYU Press; 2 Sub edition.
Mayer, M. D., Mohn, W. A. & Zabbal, Ch. 2001. PCs vs, TVs. The McKinsey Quarterly, (1), pp. 131-135.
Naim, M. 2007. The YouTube Effect: How a Technology for Teenagers Became a Force for Political and Economic Change. Foreign Policy, (2), pp. 104-110.
Vivian, J. C. 2008. Media of Mass Communication. Allyn & Bacon.
Wilson-Goldie, K. 2007. The War Works: Videos under Siege, Online and in the Aftermath, Again. Art Journal 66, (1), pp. 68-70.