Steve Rubel was the speaker at last night’s Must See Monday at the Cronkite School. It seemed apparent he’s been in PR his entire career, because he seemed more than comfortable speaking in front of a large audience. He noted 5 big things he thinks have changed in the media, 2 things that haven’t changed much, and outlined the Media Cloverleaf – a model laying media out in an easy-to-understand way.
The 5 BIG CHANGES Rubel said that we’ve seen in media over the past few years are as follows:
First, there has been an overwhelming expansion of media channels. How’s this little fun fact for you?: more content will be created over the span of today and tomorrow than in the history of media content leading all the way up until 2003. That fact along speaks for itself in terms of how much more media content we’re producing in recent years.
Second, we live in a multi-screen world, and businesses have to adjust to that. People often are watching programs on TV while tweeting about them using their smart phones and talking about them on their computer using Facebook all at the same time.
Third, every company is a media company. Whether we like to admit it or not, every company from Starbucks to Shell gas station has a Facebook page and promotes themselves.
Fourth, stories are more social than ever. We have to understand that with as many media outlets as we have now, stories are not as much “hard news” as they used to be, but rather socially spread.
And fifth, stories last forever. Rubel used terminology referring to Google as “the afterlife” of all the content we create using media outlets.
THE 2 THINGS THAT HAVEN’T CHANGED MUCH are that we love a good story. From when press and media were created to our highly advanced society of media today, the fact that people love a good story hasn’t changed. This coincides with the second thing that hasn’t changed much, that content is king. People may love a good story, but a good story comes with content, and that content has to be good. The content has to be what people want to read.
Eric Newton, Senior Adviser to the President of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, shed some insightful light on the future of journalism and media last night during the Cronkite School’s Must See Monday. His presentation was titled, “A history of the future of news: what 1767 tells us about 2100”. It outlined what his 35+ years of working and researching has taught him. There were four major points.
The first point is that realistically, no one knows what news will be like in the next 100 years. It will be a newly found digital age that we have yet to even wrap our mind around. He showed us a pattern that’s been happening in our society for quite some time: every 80 years there comes gigantic crises and also exponential awakenings. To demonstrate this pattern’s history to us, he used examples such as The Civil War, Third Great Awakening (major metropolitan newspapers starting), the Great Depression and World War II.
Second, and to me the most fascinating fact he pointed out all night, was the fact that according to his established and invested opinion, science fiction is doing a far better job at predicting the future of media than the experts are. Look at the cell phone, Star Trek was the first we ever saw that idea. And skype? Why, we saw that on The Jetsons! The new iPad was first thought of in the sci-fi movie phenomenon A Space Odyssey. Newton gave us two key roles of advice to follow, and one of them was to simply watch more science fiction.
Next, he really stressed that each generation grows up with a different form of media on the rise. These are undiscovered patterns – the forms of media we cannot predict. People in their 20s (he pointed to us, with a serious “pay attention now” look on his face), play key roles in inventing news media. The people of our age are going to be the ones that can adapt best to the new forms of news media (or media in general), and will be the generation that has to act quick when it comes time for the projected “WW3.0” and “WW4.0”, the two predicted World Wars in our future.
I was absolutely fascinated by the event put on by Eric Newton. It was easy to tell he was very well-respected, had a lot of experience, and had so much passion in the realm of what he was speaking about.
Tonight’s “Must See Monday” was an exceptional one – as you could see by the lack of open seats even after more were added. Michael Chow, the senior photographer for the Arizona Republic, was there to speak about his journey as a photojournalist. The thing that set this “Must See Monday” apart from others was the intriguing visuals that were displayed throughout. Chow kept the audience engaged by showing off some of his work, impressing everyone with some of the images that appeared on the screen.
Chow was initially drawn to the desert by the beauty of the scenery that isn’t necessarily common around the nation. The unique monsoon season, our regular brush fires, and clear desert shots of the moon are a few things he especially loves about Arizona. He also said he likes to add humor into his pictures, keeping his career something that he still loves to do.
One of the most challenging and rewarding requirements of his job, Chow said, is that he has to come up with stories relevant to the contemporary events in society. “One of the things I get to do in my job is witness history first-hand”, Chow said. With that comes one of the hardest moments to cover for him: grief.
He also showed us a few video slideshows he had created, something I could relate to after last week’s assignment in my Online Media class. His were impressive… for lack of a better word. The sound he used was what really made the slideshow come together. What caught my attention was that most of the sound used in the slideshows was just casual conversation by the people portrayed in the slideshow. Them casually talking to each other in the environment that the pictures created really created a setting that made me feel like I was a part of the event.
I have to admit, my love and fascination for shoes didn’t sprout out of nowhere. My mom has been in the shoe industry my entire life, and I also worked at Nordstrom for four years. In the shoe department. My experience with Nordstrom allowed me to gain a solid insight into the pricing of different manufacturers, and which whole-sale companies are more successful than others – despite their pricing.
If you were to ask an average college student such as myself where she buys her shoes, the answer probably wouldn’t be Nordstrom. My usual clients when I was a salesperson in the Women’s Shoes department were mothers – those middle-aged women who find pleasure in purchasing a new pair of beauties – and often talk about hiding the purchase from their husbands. Nordstrom tends to be on the more expensive side, especially when compared with stores that average college students tend to regularly shop at, such as Forever 21, Love Culture, and Divaz.
I’ve found a hidden gem. A store that everyone knows about and shops at, I’m sure, but not one that would come to mind when thinking of buying fashionable shoes. Target. Yes, a place where you can buy everything from family room rugs to toilet paper, you can also find great deals on shoes that are in style. Let’s take a look at some comparisons between designer-made shoes and Target shoes, with a special look at their prices.
Here on the left is a fabulous Michael Kors tall leather cognac boot, perfect for fall and winter to tuck into a pair of skinny jeans or wear with an urban-style skirt. This boot, sold at Nordstrom, is $249.95.
On the right, we have a Merona tall, genuine leather cognac boot, perfect for the same wear. It’s sold at Target for $69.99 (which for Target, is on the spendy side). Now tell me, is there really that big of a difference between the two? Aside from the slight change in the hue, the boots are relatively the same. The label is what’s different.
Now what about these? There’s the Yves Saint Laurent “Tribtoo” platform pump on the left, sold at Nordstrom for a whopping $795. Yes, you read that right.
Granted, Yves Saint Laurent is a salon shoe (which in Nordstrom terminology means high-end designer), but look at it compared with the Mossimo platform pump on the left, sold at Target for $29.99.
Now who, really, is going to be able to tell a difference? There may be a few shoe critics out there who would notice, me being one of them. Yes, I’m the kind of person who can see the difference in the stitching or the cut along the instep of the foot, but most people can’t. And honestly, me knowing all of this, I still would rather buy the Mossimo pumps because, well, shoes are shoes. You wear them on your feet, after all, they’re bound to suffer through some damage.
The moral of the
story blog post is, there are options. College students, if you’re struggling until next Monday when you get paid to make a visit to the grocery store to change the bare cabinets in your kitchen like I am, it’s not worth spending the heaps of money that some labels require you to. Shopping on a budget is possible. And believe it or not, kind of fun.