You guessed it, blame it on the East Coast, as according to Wikipedia, “On November 7, 1994, WXYC (89.3 FM Chapel Hill, NC USA) became the first traditional radio station to announce broadcasting on the Internet.” It was the first time that anyone with a connection to the internet could listen to a live broadcast which a terrestrial signal could never have brought them. Today you will be hard pressed to find a commercial terrestrial radio station that is not also broadcasting online. Along side the introduction of live audio to the internet was another significant parrallel, the 2nd largest generation of young people in the history of the planet, Generation Y.

Generation Y, having been born roughly between the years of 1980 and 2000, in 1994 was just beginning to develop critical skills of cultural identity, being as young as they were. With the internet becoming widely available to households across the Western world, Generation Y was able to adapt to a pace of change in new technology that would ultimately define them. Radio, previously a relatively unchanged medium, was about to undergo a period of amazing revolution and relevancy.

Today the word “radio” can refer to a number of different type of medium. From traditional AM radio to satellite radio, there are many subsets to a formerly simple concept. This is significant to understand as Generation Y has access to all of these mediums and therefore, in general, considers the action (whether passive or engaged) of receiving audio to be conceptually similar. While it may be simple for Generation Y, one type of radio broadcast in particular is having a difficult time understanding how to remain as relevant as they once were with past generations; terrestrial radio.

Primarily an endeavor of a commercial enterprise, such as Clear Channel, terrestrial radio has a unique set of requirements in order to operate. These would include FCC regulation, expensive equipment and content distribution/creation. Putting these factors together it becomes incredibly cost prohibitive to manage and operate. Yet there is a distinct advantage held by terrestrial radio stations, legacy.

On average, an American household has 7-9 AM/FM radio receivers. This is, in part, due to the legacy that traditional radio has with previous generations. Another element of this legacy is the cost to the content consumer, radio is free. Lastly radio is ubiquitous and consistent, allowing for reliabbility from the content consumer towards programming. Understanding that there are pros and cons to terrestrial radio, how does Generation Y fit into the conversation?

Remembering that the vast majority of terrestrial radio signals in the US are commercial signals and that the model for funding this medium remains advertisements, the mandate for radio stations is to appeal to the emerging demographics of consumers, Generation Y. Generation Y are the gate keepers to the continuation of terrestrial radio as a major source of information and entertainment as a result. To date, there is a good deal of concern in the radio industry about how to retain Generation Y, despite the ubiquity of the medium in the past. This is due, as was discussed earlier, to the diversification of the concept of radio.

As Generation Y continues to widen the ways of consuming and enjoying audio content, the more competitive terrestrial radio signals must become. But, even with a competitive edge in regards to legacy that terrestrial radio holds, what was once known only by the few is now known by millions, that being amateur radio. Again, remembering that Generation Y doesn’t see radio as simply an AM/FM broadcast, but a multitude of mediums, it becomes evident that content produced on the cheap by peers and less than professioanlly trained hosts would become increasingly available and popular. This added to the fact that Generation Y, unlike previous generation, puts more faith in the casual support of a peer than an official endorsement and you have a very real challenge for terrestrial radio.

For terrestrial radio to become top of mind again for an entirely new generation there are several points of convergence that must happen between both parties. But remember, it is the duty of terrestrial radio to meet Generation Y where they are and not the other way around. Here are a few observations from the field.

1. Regardless of whether or not the radio station is a non-profit or a commercial operation, the relationship that the host/DJ has to listener, the advertiser and the station management needs to be be fundamentally reconsidered. No longer can hosts/DJs act as a representative for the station to the community or for the community to the station. To often the interests of one group, that being represented by the DJ, has too much sway over program content. This creates a divide between successful operations and quality content. To attract Generation Y listeners the host/DJ must become a voice for the creation and maintenance of an imperfect relationship between all parties.

2. Top 40 lists are repetitive and local bands are only local. While it is true that an AM/FM signal can only supply a single line of content at a time, there must be a compromise between Pop and playlists. This is much easier said than done as there needs to be predictability in results and listenership. This is why radio stations must rely on emerging online music distribution trends rather than traditional revenue quotas. To effectively engage Generation Y listeners, terrestrial radio must continue (as they have for 110 years) to adapt their content to attract new listeners.

3. Finally, similar to a the recent effort by the magazine industry, terrestrial radio must educate the advertisers about and prove to the listeners that there is a better way to communicate. It is, again, the duty of terrestrial radio as an industry to reach out to both ends of their lifeline and to educate and prove their new business model. It is rarely the fault of an advertiser or a listener for the quality and ROI of a broadcast.

For terrestrial radio to thrive they must retake control of the responsibility for their own performance and learn to listen.

As the night drew to a close, the wilder side of SEO truly was exposed. As those who have traveled within the inner circles of the SEMpdx community, these are a wild bunch! But in all seriousness, the conference came to a successful close having had cold, fresh beer served to the masses. At roughly 4:30, all three tracks had emptied back into the main hall where they were greeted by warm and accomplished faces, as if school had just been let out for summer. The itch had to be scratched.

Having the initiative to spark up a conversation I ended up chatting with a Scott Carver from R2C, a real nice guy. But it wasn’t until I ventured out into the crowd to take some photos that I really understood how cohesive and solid this group of people in fact is. From one communications person to another, the end of SearchFest 2010 was bitter sweet. Or was that just my beer? So I bid a farewell to SearchFest 2010 and hope that everyone involved feels truly satisfied with what they have accomplished.

According to Stefan Weitz’s presentation half of the time spent in search is spent on a few longer sessions, this being the majority of search behavior. Another interesting set of statistics are that 42% of search sessions need refinement and 25% of searches led to hitting the back button, the single most common behavior in searchland. With this in mind, he began to dive into the concepts surrounding Bing.

Stefan described four the four elements of Bing. Bing is known as a Decision Engine, not a Search Engine. This is the case as Bing is intended to guide the user through the complex array of search results by adding context and relevant perspective to the intention of the actual search. Bing is also known for the basics, still a focus of Microsoft, having never been forgot. This is impressive if you think about it as it is intended to be the next step in Search itself. Bing is designed around the navigation and sorting of the complex network of results, similar to the first element. Finally, is the element of decision making and allowing the user to make a more intelligent choice rather than havign to use guesswork as a foundation for finding relevant results.

Following the introduction to the philosophy of Bing came a prediction of where Microsoft believes the internet is headed. The first revolution in the internet is the notion that the web is becoming a place of objects instead of text and hyper links. With an increase in multimedia, such as video and images, there is a need to collect, categorize and create context for these objects. From this comes the second prediction for the future of the internet, Spatial Search. Spatial Search refers to the ability to create the context and perspective that is needed to relate these objects from the internet to the outer-world. The third prediction that Microsoft is making for the future of the internet is the ability to finally realize a Semantic Web.

The example given was Siri, the iPhone App (ironically enough an Apple product) that allows you to seamlessly link your queries in real-time through voice and location-based context. Here is the video that was used to demonstrate the power of Siri.

From Semantic Modeling came the fourth and final prediction about the internet’s future, Mobile and Augmented Reality. For this specific prediction, Stefan used a TED Talk that was given recently about the use of real-time image input onto Bing’s Mapping System. Here is that video

As time was beginning to run short, Stefan hurried to make his final statements about both Bing and the Internet. He stated that Bing was the next step forward in Search Engines and was designed around helping users make decisions, thus referring to it as a Decision Engine and not a Search Engine. All in all, I was very impressed by Stefan’s presentation and was actually able to interview him quickly before the batteries in my recorder died. To hear the recording simply go to www.getinsyght.com and stream or download the episode. The conference was off to a great start.

Its really a battle between the traditionalists and the innovations of the past decade that have led to this divide. On the one hand you have legacy media outlets that are hyper-focused on the maintenance of what had worked and on the other you have the early adopters of new technology clamoring to get access to information. In isolation, these two factions (hands) do not realize that they are working for the same master (body), the public.

Recently at a conference, We Make the Media, I was fortunate enough to witness the old guard and the new guard come together to have an honest conversation about the future of journalism. What was repeated over and over by those in defense of “the way things were” was the notion that citizen journalism can only go so far. And that professional journalism was being sacrificed for the purpose of convenience. At the same conference there were messages of the liberation of information and that accessibility was the new doctrine of journalism. Either way you looked at it, these two parties disagreed.

I think that this was my first introduction to the old vs. the new debate and it was revealing. I personally take the side of the liberation of information, but I do not agree with the notion that it has to be at the expense of professional journalism. This is where podcasting can play such an important role as a key player in this war of information. Podcasting provides a viable opportunity for both the high standards and ethics of journalism as well as the accessibility of the public. Platforms such as iTunes has proven this time and time again.

With programs from NPR and the BBC regularly being some of the most popular podcasts on iTunes it is hard to deny the ability of these networks to maintain a loyal listener base. Podcasting has allowed simple audio files to replace terrestrial radio signals, giving rise to the on-demand nature of media consumption. Without these podcasts, people from all over the world would not receive their news coverage. It is the podcast that has made this possible.

It is no secret that magazines are flooded with advertisements and inserts, making some of them almost unreadable. The arguments in support of this fact, at least in the past, have been made under the idea that ad revenue supported a large portion of the costs going into producing the other content. This doesn’t even take into consideration the notion that many magazines, to simply survive, have introduced the formula of “mixed content” to promote a product inside of an article. There is a checkered past here.

For the magazine industry to be using its own medium to attempt to justify its relevancy is bold. Yet, at least in my case, it wasn’t and wouldn’t have been through a magazine that I would even have found out about this new “relevancy campaign.” It was through the use of Twitter that I was made aware of it. I understand that using my own experience as testimony for the dismissal of their PR campaign seems trivial, but I am one of an entire generation that will be using digital tools to access their content.

It seems funny to me that magazines would be decrying the “pundits” as saying the sky is falling on print when it in fact is. I cannot stress this enough, print is truly declining as a medium to effectively target an audience. Printing a magazine aint what it used to be.

I will be giving each presenter their opportunity to tell you, the listener and reader, about their varying perspectives on the future of both journalism and media. I think that this is going to be one of the better episodes as I am expecting to interview each presenter while they are still “in the zone.” I think that conferences have a unique way of allowing people to truly put on their thinking caps, especially presenters, and to give their newest and brightest ideas wings. So stay tuned and be ready for some awesome insights from our fellow SEO thought leaders.

Oregon Media Central

According to their website, “Founded in June 2009 by Mitch Nolan, Oregon Media Central is dedicated to fair coverage of the media in Oregon and Southwest Washington.” Essentially, OMC wants to act as the link between the happenings of the Oregon media scene and the public. With a mission such as that it is important for OMC to have insider relations with varying new agencies. As was posted by Mitch Nolan himself on the Portland Mercury’s website, “Gmail wanted to automatically show everybody who my anonymous sources are. Fortunately, I caught it.”

It is therefore not much of a stretch to assume that Mitch Nolan has worked very hard at either building valuable relationships with people inside of the media world here in Portland or he is being passed a lot of information via anonymous tipsters. Either way, it seems to me, that OMC could be used in a number of ways that could be financially or personally damaging to people who need to be seen as seamless, the media. I would personally hope that the operators of OMC understand this.

Being that the subject of the blog is in fact the actual media and their product, information, it is important to address the significance of this relationship. From an information consumption perspective, having a resource such as OMC is valuable, yes. I imagine that the real value in having OMC will be in their allowing for commentary and providing an opportunity for backroom media operations to be exposed. Other than that it will be a game of whether or not OMC can provide original content consistently over time.

So similar to the issues of most media, we must wait until we are told.

This author and this website along with The Face of Media podcast, original videos and photography will act as a voice for the observation and predictions about the world of  content making and consuming. The objective is simple, education and application for the coming revolution in Media and Journalism. From the shrinking of local newspapers to the growth of international journalist networks, this website and related content will seek to feature much of it.

With no intention of earning an income and no disillusion of fame, this author and website will act as another unique spoke in the wheel of online news. So here we go.