THE MEDIACRACY

THE POWER OF YOU TUBE

PATRICK GOLDSTEIN, LA TIMES - Welcome to the new media universe, where
for millions of video junkies, the best TV network in America isn't
Comedy Central, MTV, ESPN or even HBO, but You Tube, the amazing website
whose video clips are viewed more than 100 million times each day.
Launched last year, the website has enjoyed an astounding ascent, being
bought last week by Google for $1.65 billion. In an era increasingly
defined by audience-driven events, You Tube represents the triumph of
bottom-up culture and another sign that old media businesses, from
record companies and TV networks to newspapers like The Times, are going
to see more of their audience migrating to the Internet. . .

When I heard that Barbra Streisand had cursed out a heckler at her
Madison Square Garden concert, I didn't go to CNN — I clicked on You
Tube. Sure enough, a fan had immediately posted a video of La Streisand
cussing like a sailor.

The impact of this instantaneous access has been earthshaking, from
politics to pop culture. Speaking at a conference in Paris last week,
Disney-ABC Television Group President Anne Sweeney minced few words
about how thoroughly the landscape has been altered. "The digital
revolution has unleashed a consumer coup," she said. "Audiences have the
upper hand and show no sign of giving it back."

You Tube is already having an impact on this year's election cycle. In
years past, political candidates were sold essentially in the same way
as movie stars — in carefully staged settings and market-tested ads. Now
the scripted veneer has been stripped away by young volunteers, armed
with video cameras, who stalk opposition candidates, record their gaffes
and post them on You Tube, not unlike the way the Smoking Gun displays
embarrassing photos of badly behaved celebrities. . .

While some fans are justifiably worried that the sale of You Tube to
Google will usher in the kind of advertising clutter rampant at MySpace,
which looks like the Web equivalent of a Sunset Strip billboard forest,
most of You Tube's troubles have arisen from media companies who view
video sharing as an attack on their copyrights and business models.
Earlier this year, NBC forced the site to remove "Lazy Sunday,"
believing fans should have to go to the network's website to view it,
apparently unaware that the young guys watching the clip on You Tube
were the same guys who'd already stopped watching "SNL" and network TV
in general.

This summer, NBC announced a marketing arrangement with You Tube, which
was followed by licensing deals with CBS, Warner Music and Sony BMG
Music. But the Wall Street Journal reported Saturday that lawyers from
News Corp., NBC Universal and Viacom still believe You Tube could be
liable for copyright penalties of $150,000 per unauthorized video.
Viacom, for example, claims that clips from its channels (including MTV
and Comedy Central) are watched 80,000 times a day on You Tube, meaning
potential penalties could run into the billions. . .

Two days after the Clinton-Wallace dust-up, Fox News forced You Tube to
yank clips of the interview, claiming copyright infringement, apparently
unhappy that so much traffic was going to You Tube instead of Fox News'
own site. But a day later the clip was back up.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/cl-et-goldstein17oct17,1,5528409.story?
coll=la-headlines-entnews

[Please note that the Review is one of the few media publications still
written in English. Thus we translate words like YouTube into their
English equivalent: You Tube]

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

WAL-MART SPINS STANDARD DISCOUNT PRACTICE AS NOBLE ACT

JEFF MILCHEN AND STACY MITCHELL, TOM PAINE - When Wal-Mart recently
issued a press release announcing discounts on some generic drugs at
Tampa area stores, its executives probably hoped for some favorable
publicity in Florida media. So Bentonville surely was festive the next
day when sweeping headlines like "Wal-Mart to sell generic drugs for $4
a month" ran nationwide—often on page one of newspapers.

After getting better advertising than even a multi-billion dollar
corporation can buy, Wal-Mart naturally pumped out another press release
last week, announcing drug discounts in 14 other states. The company
enjoyed another PR bonanza via national headlines promoting $4 generics
at Wal-Mart, but the media did consumers a great disservice.

First, there still are no price cuts whatsoever for Wal-Mart customers
in 35 states.

Next, Wal-Mart is not discounting generic drugs in general—it offered
the $4 price on 291 of the several thousand generic drugs commonly
available.

Further, even a casual look at Wal-Mart's initial list revealed just 124
different drugs (later increased to 143).

So where did the 291 come from? One needn’t have looked past the letter
"A" to see: 12 different variations of the common antibiotic
amoxicillin. Many other common drugs appear in multiple dosages,
including some already available at other stores for less than $4.

In the end, a global corporation made a business decision to discount a
small portion of one product line (even Wal-Mart says the discounts
apply to less than one quarter of their generics), and received
priceless publicity promoting its "low price" image.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/10/23/walmarts_drug_deal.php

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||