Feedly partners with RSS apps like Reeder as Google Reader’s end draws near

It’s now less than a month before Google Reader shuts down, meaning that anyone who relies on the service better be testing the alternatives right about now. Feedly, which has emerged as one of the top contenders, made the choice a little easier Monday when it announced that it’s partnered with a number of other RSS apps — among them the popular iOS app Reeder.

Feedly wrote on its blog:

“We have been working behind the curtains with the developers of Reeder, Press, Nextgen Reader, Newsify and gReader as design partners for our Normandy project. Today we are excited to announce that you will be able to access your feedly from all these apps before Google Reader retires and that the access to feedly API will be free. More details soon.”

(The Normandy project, by the way, is how Feedly makes its API available to developers. The API is free and Feedly said it’s rolling out access gradually; developers can request access here.)

If you’re already using one of the above services, expect integration in the next couple of weeks: Newsify noted on its blog that users should “look for an update before the end of June to start using the Feedly service,” while Press said its “plan is to provide an app update in a couple weeks that will allow you to easily add your Feedly account and have the same RSS experience you’ve always enjoyed using Press.”

    

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2013/06/04/feedly-partners-with-rss-apps-like-reeder-as-google-readers-end-draws-near/

Netflix makes changes to public API after “Streamageddon” backlash

Netflix made some changes to its public API Monday night that make it harder to figure out which movies are going to be taken off the service. The company will no longer provide the expiration date of movies through its API, which will mean that third-party tools like Instantwatcher.com’s Expiring Soon on Instant list will stop working.

“With the frequent, often last minute, changes in content flow the title expiration data available through our API has been inaccurate, so we have decided to no longer publish this information,” a Netflix spokesperson said via email. The company’s Director of Engineering – API Daniel Jacobson reiterated this point in a post on the company’s developer blog, adding that members will still be able to find the expiration date for each movie or TV show episode on the title’s web page.

The move will likely impact a number of third-party services, and comes two months after Netflix essentially closed its public API to all newcomers. Back in March, Netflix said that it was no longer issuing new API keys because the way the company was changing the API had changed: Initially meant to enable third-party apps, Netflix’s API has been playing a key component for the technology behind the company’s streaming service.

Restrictions to public APIs have been a common pattern for companies like Netflix and Twitter in recent months, but it looks like there may have been another reason for Monday’s changes: Netflix took a number of titles off its catalog in early May, leading some publications to write about “the great Netflix Instant vanishing of 2013” or even a “Streamageddon purge.”

Not all of those stories were completely accurate. Some reported a number of 2000 titles disappearing, but Deadline put the number close to 1000. And reports that Warner was pulling titles off of Netflix to power its own streaming service were quickly denied by the studio.

Netflix clearly wasn’t happy about all that streamageddon talk. Now it looks like it pulled the plug on another part of its API to prevent us from freaking out in the future — like at the end of the month, when a number of Viacom shows are set to disappear from the service.

    

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2013/05/14/netflix-makes-changes-to-public-api-after-streamageddon-backlash/

Generation Mooch? Why 20-somethings have a hard time paying for content

I distinctly remember learning how to read, and it wasn’t from a book or in a kindergarten classroom.

It was sitting at the breakfast table with my Dad every morning, when we would read the weather section of the Washington Post. We checked to see if it was hot in Arizona (it usually was) and cold in Canada (it always was). For this reason I’ve always felt an affection for the DC-area newspaper, and I continue to read some of its blogs and politics coverage to this day. But when the newspaper rolls out a paywall this summer, it’s doubtful I’ll start paying for access. I can still log in using my parents’ subscription, but if they stop paying? I might owe that newspaper my literacy, but with the rest of the internet at my fingertips, it’s still not enough to get me to pay.

There was an excellent post on Buzzfeed earlier this week about HBO Go passwords, in which John Herrman surveyed everyone in his office and asked how most of them access HBO, a content provider that only gives digital access to cable subscribers. The responses evoked a trend I see among my own 20-something friends, which is that hardly anyone actually subscribes to HBO.

The anecdote struck me as one that perfectly illustrates how much of my generation is building habits around digital content and what exactly we’re willing to pay for. We’ve grown up with a wealth of news and video available for free on the internet, and for many of us, we also have access to high-quality content through parents or friends with subscriptions to services like Netflix or the New York Times. We built media habits around this content from an early age, but we were never forced to actually pay for content.

And there are a lot of us. Will those companies be able to convince my generation that their content is special or unique — and that one day, we should pay for it ourselves?

Content for free, at our fingertips

Online video - streaming video - people looking at computer - teens on laptopIn some ways, it’s pretty obvious why my generation is reluctant to pay for content — it’s because we’ve never had to.

I’m 22, and I took typing lessons in fourth grade, had computer classes on how to do Google searches and make Powerpoints in middle school, and joined Facebook when it launched in my early days of high school. Until I left for college, my family’s desktop computer was set to open to the New York Times homepage. (At the time, it was free for everyone.) My peers and I learned how to write research papers in high school by citing sources online and by not copying things from Wikipedia, and most of us read Hamlet with the assistance of Sparknotes.com. We discovered music on YouTube, and a few lucky kids got smartphones in high school, which were ubiquitous by the time we hit college.

My generation has grown up connected to the internet, and we’ve never been at a loss for finding news and information on the web — for free.

Families have been sharing physical newspapers and televisions for years, of course, but when my parents’ generation left home for college and then grad school or jobs, they had to call up their local newspaper or cable or phone providers if they wanted any of these services. Now, there’s less incentive than ever to leave Mom and Dad’s family cell phone plan, and it seems that for many of my peers, the same applies to digital subscriptions to newspapers, magazines, and cable subscriptions.

Out of curiosity, I asked about 15 of my friends (most of whom are recent college graduates in varying levels of employment) what content they personally pay to consume. The answer from most of them — minus a few New Yorker-subscriber outliers — was not much. But when I asked everyone what they read or watch using a parent’s (or a friend’s parent’s) subscriptions, the answers went way up. Almost everyone had access to Netflix, and a good number read the news on paywalled websites like the New York Times, and soon, The Washington Post.

But when I asked if anyone would pay for this content themselves if their parents stopped paying, hardly anyone said they would. The only media that most people said they would pay for was Netflix, and a few said they would subscribe to avoid paywalls on their local newspapers.

My friends of course aren’t representative of the population at large, but as mainly upper-middle class college graduates, they’re the demographic combination that’s currently most likely to pay for news online, according to a 2010 Pew study. While most of my friends said they read the news and watch video on a regular basis through their parent’s subscriptions, most said if they lost free access, they’d probably go somewhere else rather than pay. That might not be to a place that offers the same quality, but at least it would be free.

As one friend told me, “If it’s online, it feels like it should be free.”

Finding solutions to get us to pay — one day

Girls Lena DunhamNow, it’s not necessarily surprising that 22-year olds aren’t clamoring for financial advice on retirement from the Wall Street Journal or picking up the tab on multiple subscriptions when the youth unemployment rate remains at 13.1 percent. Many people don’t have parents who subscribe to anything, and are perfectly content with the free content on the web and videos on YouTube. And for those who do, mooching a Netflix subscription still pales in comparison to the cost of cell phone plans 20-something share with families. Plus, my age group has always made up a fairly low percentage of newspaper readers anyway. Presumably the value we place on news will rise when we have kids and own houses and spend a few more years paying taxes.

It’s also possible that we’ll have to look more broadly at the media services my generation will pay for than just newspapers and magazines. While I personally pay for a variety of news subscriptions, Twitter remains my most valuable source of information and I would probably pay more for access to that feed than anything else. Instagram might not be the future of news and information, but it’s fair to say a lot of people would probably pay for that.

HBO has clearly decided that letting us mooch off subscriptions to access Girls is worth it, since one day some of us wil grow up, get jobs, and subscribe. But hoping and praying, while perhaps the defining media business strategy of this age, is not a particularly compelling long-term bet. Perhaps it should consider low-cost subscriptions meant for recent graduates, that would get us used to paying something but at rates more in line with our typical income levels. Maybe it means creating or structuring content specifically for younger readers and their digital tastes, or adopting micro-payments that remind us more of purchasing an iTunes song than a year-long subscription.

But even if the content providers move in this direction, will my generation ever pay for quality media? We have grown up with the world at our fingertips on the web, mainly for free. And we’re taking those habits and assumptions with us into adulthood.

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2013/03/29/generation-mooch-why-20-somethings-have-a-hard-time-paying-for-content/

Politico hits 1,000 Pro subscriptions and plans to launch a magazine

Over a thousand organizations are now using subscription site Politico Pro, the politics website announced Tuesday. Politico says the site reaches 7,000 professionals per month and has a renewal rate of 96 percent.

Politico launched Politico Pro in February 2011; while it was originally aimed at individual subscribers, Pro quickly switched its focus to the group subscriptions that now make up the vast majority of its base. Pro offers some subscriber-only articles, early access to morning newsletters, customizable instant alerts and other perks. Pro started out covering energy, health care and technology and added more coverage areas — defense, financial services, tax and transportation — last year. Starting this month, Pro subscribers can also receive an afternoon policy newsletter called Pro Report.

In an attempt to drive more Pro subscriptions, Politico is launching a free quarterly print magazine that will feature past Pro coverage. On March 22, it will be delivered to “every member of Congress, the White House and all federal agencies as well as to 160 newspaper boxes and 100 Washington-area Starbucks.”

Politico is tight-lipped on what a subscription to Pro actually costs. Subscription fees vary based on the type of organization (government, nonprofit and so on) and how many employees it has, as well as the number of coverage areas an organization wants. Nieman Journalism Lab reported last year that an individual subscription starts at $3,295 a year, with group memberships starting at $8,000 for five people and one coverage area.

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2013/03/12/politico-hits-1000-pro-subscriptions-and-plans-to-launch-a-magazine/

Here’s something new: Little, Brown UK launches digital-first imprint for literary fiction

Several publishers have launched digital-first imprints for genre titles — science fiction/fantasy, romance and so on. In these instances, books are published first as ebooks and aren’t released in print unless they take off. Until now, though, we haven’t seen a major publisher launch an e-imprint focused on new literary fiction — more serious fiction of the type that wins awards and gets major reviews.

That appears to be changing with Little, Brown U.K.’s launch of Blackfriars, a digital-only imprint that will focus on new literary fiction and serious nonfiction. The Bookseller reports that the imprint will publish nine to twelve titles a year, and they’ll be eligible for submission to major literary prizes like the Man Booker Prize. The Bookseller notes:

Digital titles are accepted by prizes including the Man Booker Prize and the Women’s Prize for Fiction, with the condition that they are published by “established” houses and made available for sale in print if the title is selected by the judges at the shortlisting or longlisting stage, respectively.

Blackfriars’ first titles will be published in June. Two of them were previously published in the US: The Painted Girls by Cathy Marie Buchanan by Penguin’s Riverhead and Benjamin Anastas’s Too Good to be True: A Memoir by Amazon. According to The Bookseller, the “royalty rates on the titles are largely the same as those on standard combined print and e-deals.” Traditional publishers’ standard royalty on ebooks is 25 percent. (I’ve asked Blackfriars if it is paying advances, and what its ebooks will cost.)

Without the promise of higher royalties, digital-first imprints are not likely to be many authors’ first choice when they consider their publishing options — especially when it comes to literary fiction, which generally has not sold as well in digital formats as genre fiction has. But imprints like Blackfriars could provide a home for books that have had a little trouble taking off, and the books will get additional marketing support from Little, Brown.

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2013/02/22/heres-something-new-little-brown-uk-launches-digital-first-imprint-for-literary-fiction/

Best of the Streamys: 4 shows you should check out

Don’t call it a comeback, but the highly-anticipated Streamy Awards returned on Sunday night for a third time, to honor the best that web video had to offer in the last year.

“Web video is all about passion,” host Chris Hardwick said during his opening monologue, and there were so many shows, full of said passion, that were either nominated or awarded on Sunday night. Here are a few of them that deserve, if not statues, then definitely some consideration.

SourceFed

The winner in the Best News/Informational Show category was long-standing YouTube star Philip DeFranco, but worth checking out is his fellow nominee SourceFed — and not just because DeFranco created it.

SourceFed, a lively news recap hosted by a revolving troupe of hosts, covers topics ranging from Doctor Who news to North Korea testing nukes. I was first exposed to the manic energy of the show’s hosts during last year’s VidCon conference, and they are consistently entertaining.

Lindsey Stirling

Lindsey Stirling, a one-time America’s Got Talent quarterfinalist, began making YouTube videos in 2007 that featured her dance and music skills. She won a Streamy this year for Best Choreography. The above video, an homage to Michael Jackson’s “Thriller”, is a great example of why.

Burning Love

Burning Love swept the awards dolled out for Best Comedy. It’s pretty funny, especially if you’ve ever seen a single episode of reality television. A second season just got started, so you’re not too late to check it out.

Epic Rap Battles of History

Epic Rap Battles of History has been a comedy rap juggernaut since 2010; above is their Steve Jobs vs. Bill Gates rap, which they performed live during the Streamys. I mean, it’s no “Ice Ice Baby,” but ERB still knows how to drop a beat.

Any winners you’re excited about? Any nominees you feel were robbed? Sound off in the comments!

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2013/02/18/best-of-the-streamys-4-shows-you-should-check-out/

Barnes & Noble will close up to a third of its stores over the next decade

Barnes & Noble plans to close about twenty retail stores a year over the next ten years, the company’s retail CEO Marshall Klipper told the Wall Street Journal . Today, there are 689 Barnes & Noble stores nationwide, plus 674 college stores.

The WSJ notes that “the chain shut an average of about 15 stores a year in the past decade, but until 2009 it also was opening 30 or more a year,” with a peak of 726 stores in 2008. Klipper may have chosen to talk to the WSJ to show investors that the company has a plan. He said that fewer than 20 of the chain’s retail stores are unprofitable.

Barnes & Noble is threatened by the shift to online book shopping at Amazon. The company has rolled out a host of Nook e-readers and tablets that face stiff competition in a market dominated by Kindle e-readers and saturated with cheap tablets from Amazon, Google, Apple and others. Barnes & Noble just delivered a terrible holiday earnings report, showing Nook, BN.com and retail sales all down, with a particularly large decline in Nook device sales. The company plans to spin off the Nook and college stores into a separate unit called Nook Media, with Microsoft and Pearson both holding stakes.

When Borders, then the nation’s second-largest bookstore chain, went bankrupt and liquidated all its stores in 2011, it seemed as if it could be good news for Barnes & Noble, which would have a chance to grab former Borders customers. But it appears that former Borders customers largely switched their book buying over to Amazon.

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2013/01/28/barnes-noble-will-close-up-to-a-third-of-its-stores-over-the-next-decade/

Paragraph launches an aggregated lit mag for the iPad age

Paragraph, a New York-based startup that provides a range of digital author services like apps, released the first issue of its new weekly short story iPad magazine, Paragraph Shorts, on Thursday.

paragraph magazineParagraph Shorts is a little like a Flipboard for short stories, but rather than an algorithm, it uses humans to find short stories — in text, video and audio formats — across the web (from outlets like The New Yorker, The Paris Review and The Moth), then aggregates them and distributes them through a free iPad app. When a Paragraph Shorts reader flips his or her iPad to landscape mode, social features appear, including the Twitter and Facebook streams of the stories’ authors and the magazines they were published in.

Paragraph Shorts aims to add value through curation, introducing readers to authors and publications they might not have known about otherwise. “By curating the best short stories, and offering them to people who might not have known they existed, Paragraph will create a link between great literary magazines and readers who are eager to kill fifteen minutes in a quality manner,” Lorin Stein, editor of The Paris Review, said in a statement.

Of course, killing fifteen minutes reading a short story through an app doesn’t necessarily extend to a subscription to the publication it came from. But all the stories that Paragraph features are already free online, so the app’s main benefit to the stories’ publishers is to drive traffic to their websites and to increase social media around them. The company is also considering exclusive content at some point.

Paragraph founder Ziv Navoth previously ran marketing and partnerships at AOL. Paragraph is self-funded by Navoth and his partner, Edo Segal, who also run two other businesses: Enhanced ebook and app platform Holopad and ebook distribution platform Convertabook.com.

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2013/01/10/paragraph-launches-an-aggregated-lit-mag-for-the-ipad-age/

‘Game-changing’? A free future for Mirror, Record, other papers on iPad?

Imagine if a national newspaper dropped its cover price and went free to readers. That’s what UK title Daily Mirror and Scottish sibling Daily Record are doing — at least, on iPad.

For their first iPad app, the publications have launched e-edition replicas that mimic the printed red-tops in every way, save for the £0.45 ($0.72) price.

Many publishers like The Guardian and FT, for their first iPad foray, launch for free on the device, often with a big advertising sponsor, in order to build audience, only to require subscriptions a few months later. Though most newspaper websites, including on iPad, are free, the typical iPad newspaper app subscription pricepoint has settled at £9.99 per month.

For the Mirror and Record, however, there is not yet any suggestion that the zero cover price is a temporary, audience-gathering exercise.

That makes this launch interesting. In a possible future where print is replaced by tablet consumption, the Daily Mirror and Daily Record just became freesheets. Former Mirror digital publisher Matt Kelly calls it “game-changing”.

remarkable move on ipad by The Daily Mirror – totally free five days a week, then the weekend editions only available in print. Gamechanger.

— Matt Kelly (@mk1969) December 3, 2012

London’s Evening Standard has already successfully gone free in print on the city’s streets, increasing advertisers’ exposure through heightened circulation, and recently moved back in to profit. Some industry observers believe only a free future is viable in an age where paid circulation is declining for most titles.

Daily Mirror free iPad editionIn the Mirror and Record‘s cases, the e-edition downloads are free only on weekdays — weekend editions still require payment.

But newspapers’ historic strength has been their financing by multiple revenue streams — ads and cover price. So are the Mirror and Record crazy to lock themselves in to a future where no-one pays anything for them?

Last year, the papers jointly circulated over 1.4 million printed copies per day, making £256.6 million in annual circulation revenue and £135.1 million in advertising revenue.

So, in a future in which they replaced their paid, printed newspapers with free tablet editions, the publications would be losing their largest income source.

Last year, they reached around 4.1 million readers per issue combined. But this secondary readership in a tablet world would certainly diminish, since few people will share their iPad in the same way they will share a low-cost printed paper. So even advertiser outlook may be diminished.

Also, tablet ownership amongst the Mirror and Record reader demographics are not yet at the levels of, say, The Times.

However, there is one big benefit that likely rides above all others for the titles — any free downloads they do get will be added to their declining print circulation. That is because, while native-looking tablet apps don’t count toward ABC data, e-replica distribution can be pitched, by canny ad sales staff, as extra circulation.

What we are likely seeing is the iPad being used to prop up circs, more than the definition of a whole new business model in its own right.

All in all, this is likely a smart first move for publisher Trinity Mirror to gently build up a tablet audience and stabilise its declining print base. When readers open the app — which, by virtue of being a replica, was likely cheap to build and which requires zooming to read text easily — they are asked by Apple to share their name, email address and post code with the publisher.

That information can be used to target future promotions — perhaps future subscription invitations?

Many a publisher tweaks its tablet and mobile business model along the way, and I would be surprised if Daily Mirror and Daily Record are yet committing themselves to a free future forever.

 

  1. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

  2. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

  3. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

  4. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

  5. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

  6. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

  7. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

  8. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

  9. Daily Mirror free iPad edition

    1 / 9

     

Next Previous

via paidContent http://paidcontent.org/2012/12/03/game-changing-a-free-future-for-mirror-record-other-papers-on-ipad/

Gartner predicts raft of fake online reviews by 2014

A recent spate of fake online reviews is just the beginning of a trend, according to Gartner research.

The book publishing world was roiled by the recent disclosure that self-published author John Locke bought Amazon reviews and author Stephen Leather used “sock puppet” accounts to build online buzz  for his books, as GigaOM’s Laura Owen reported earlier. This kerfuffle comes after months of reports about too-good-or-bad-to-be-true restaurant and other reviews on Yelp and other online review sites.

Well, get ready, because it’s just the beginning, according to Gartner, which expects that 10 to 15 percent of all online reviews will be paid for by companies within two years. As companies seek to cash in on consumer time spent on online review sites, Facebook and Twitter, it’s not surprising that companies would try to steer consumer perception of their products.

According to a statement by Gartner senior research analyst Jenny Sussin:

With over half of the Internet’s population on social networks, organizations are scrambling for new ways to build bigger follower bases, generate more hits on videos, garner more positive reviews than their competitors and solicit ‘likes’ on their Facebook pages … Many marketers have turned to paying for positive reviews with cash, coupons and promotions including additional hits on YouTube videos in order to pique site visitors’ interests in the hope of increasing sales, customer loyalty and customer advocacy through social media ‘word of mouth’ campaigns.

Three years ago, the FTC found that companies paying for rave reviews without disclosing that the reviewer was compensated constitutes deceptive advertising and can be prosecuted. Gartner thinks that means companies will take a proactive role policing reviews that defame their products and services and pressure online sites to remove them. That will give rise to “reputation defense” companies specializing in such practices.

 

via paidContent http://gigaom.com/2012/09/17/gartner-predicts-raft-of-fake-online-reviews-by-2014/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pcorg+%28paidContent%29