New media is giving cable stations problems, as viewers flee to online alternatives, but ESPN's mobile apps and online presence offer a model for traditional media to transition into the future.
Media-Mind is our column charting how technology's opportunities and challenges transform traditional media and entertainment, for better or for worse.
The worldwide sports leader has several cable networks, including ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU, each of which is viewed via the company's comprehensive mobile app, Watch ESPN. The app is available for iOS and Android and provides access to popular shows like "SportsCenter," "Pardon the Interruption" and "Mike and Mike in the Morning."
In addition to giving viewers the opportunity to watch ESPN wherever they go, the app is available for free to customers with Bright House Networks, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon FiOS TV as an extension of their cable subscription.
Broadcasters like NBC, CBS and FOX, along with pay cable stations, are losing ratings as customers look to Hulu and Netflix to watch their favorite shows on demand. The loss of live viewers diminishes the stations' worth to cable providers and hurts advertising revenue, something ESPN's strategy is helping it avoid.
ESPN's decision to offer its own app rather than license its product to other companies allows the network to control the way it redistributes its content. Watch ESPN puts all the company's broadcast content in one place, making it the best option for viewers who want to watch the station's programming on-the-go. In addition, the station's partnership with cable companies make sure it is still valuable to providers at the same time, serving its customer better.
One of the only flaws the Watch ESPN app has is it's only available to subscribers of specific cable providers. For example, a New York viewer who has Cablevision as their provider does not have access to the Watch ESPN app. However, as ESPN continues to work out deals with remaining cable providers, the app will become even more of an asset to the company as it attempts to reach viewers all over the world.
There is even an alternative for customers who aren't somewhere they can watch ESPN. The company's new ESPN Radio app allows customers to stream more than 30 of its radio stations across the company. Users can download the app for a one-time fee of $5 and stream unlimited for as long as their data plan will allow, and they'll have access to podcasts featuring commentary from the station's analysts and reporters.
ESPN Gets It
Any time new media arises, the automatic reaction of content providers seems to be to stick with traditional methods for as long as possible. However, by embracing mobile devices' ability to carry its product beyond the TV, ESPN is blazing a trail to increase its audience and reach markets it may never would have otherwise.
ESPN specializes in live programming, the one type of show that analysts say is immune to DVR and capable of sustaining ratings. However, the company still went out of its way to create new ways for its fans to view its content and its future-focused emphasis is paying dividends. The network adopted a philosophy that viewers should be able to watch ESPN on "the best available screen," and its digital portfolio has added value to its affiliates, its rights holders and advertisers.
ESPN's model for offering content digitally may not work for other cable stations, but the company's success suggests that embracing new media is a good thing, if done correctly.
Young girls are regularly pressured to send nude pictures or record sexual acts, according to a U.K. report, illustrating how technology can push harassment to new mediums.
"A Qualitative Study of Children, Young People and Sexting," a report by researchers at the London School of Economics, Open University and the U.K.'s Institute of Education, found a third of under-18 texters received a lewd sexual image by text or e-mail. On top of that, the focus group research revealed a substantial portion of young males had dozens of sexual pictures of their peers on their mobile devices, indicating their habit of sharing explicit photos with each other.
"Girls are being pressured by text and on BlackBerry Messenger to send 'special photos' and perform sexual services for boys from an early age. In some cases they are as young as 11. Even while we were interviewing them they were being bombarded with these messages," Institute of Education researcher Jessica Ringrose said, explaining how toxic the climate has become.
Navigating burgeoning sexuality is an inescapable facet of adolescence, and many teens dismiss the adult hand-wringing about the upswing in shared sexual images as unnecessary. After all, teens have engaged in sexual activity throughout human history, and some young people rationalize sexting as an extension of a natural exploration.
Some sexting can be just that, if it stays between the people involved, and the picture sender acts for the right reasons. But the type of persistent, pestering behavior exhibited by many of the young men in the study, coupled with their tendency to pass intimate images around and objectify their subjects, clearly marks this type of behavior as bullying and abusive, not an innocent sexual experiment.
Teen cruelty is nothing new, but recent high-profile suicides springing from relentless bullying is putting a spotlight on the issue, and parents, educators and adults everywhere are desperate to curb socially vicious behavior.
Mobile technology opened up new venues for bullying, letting aggressors bombard their targets at all hours of the day, through Facebook, Twitter, text messages and more. Hurling insults online affords the bully an emotional distance, so young teens making cutting remarks feel secure doing so via social networks or text messages. As a result of the attackers' ability to infiltrate more areas of their lives, bullied adolescents have fewer places of respite. Young people check their phones everywhere, including the home, which brings the problem to more intimate spaces.
In some cases, like the situation between Tyler Clementi and Dharun Ravi, bullying is inextricably linked with technology, with aggressors pursuing and humiliating their targets entirely by digital communication.
Boys far too shy to demand girls take their clothes off in person feel empowered by the distance built into texting, and young people who are well-mannered in person may behave like outsized charlatans on instant messenger.
With young people often outpacing their teachers and parents when it comes to tech savvy, the lack of supervision and education about online etiquette contributes to the churlish behavior. And though some research shows teen sexting is not as rampant as it is often portrayed in the media, this recent study suggests it is still a sizable problem that can lead to widespread self-esteem issues among bullied girls.
Even though U.S. law officials are trying to amend current child pornography laws to keep ignorant teens off sex offender registries, sending these salacious texts can often still land teens in trouble with authorities.
To quell this damaging behavior, parents and educators need to step up to the plate and begin a comprehensive online etiquette campaign. While teens may never stop sending each other naked photos of themselves, smart education strategies can point out and change the climate of blatant sexual harassment.
Could a brain scan supersede the SAT college entrance exam? One professor says yes, but practical and ethical questions linger.
UC Irvine professor emeritus Richard Haier insists brain scans could replace standardized testing within a lifetime. Haier experiments with brain scans, and his decades-long research revealed brain scans show the most intelligent people often have highly efficient brains.
Haier summarized how brain scans could process data about the quality and quantity of grey matter and synapse activity to make assumptions about someone's job suitability, saying, "The brain imaging data algorithms that combine all this information could well give an accurate indication of your intelligence and your cognitive strengths and weaknesses -- maybe even your vocational talents."
The most intelligent people did not have a surplus of brain activity while they solved a puzzle, suggesting their brains needed to work less to come up with the correct answers.
Haier is overly optimistic about society's ability to rectify the tangle of social issues springing from measuring someone's worth by their brain function.
The SAT already comes under criticism for being less objective than it seems, as certain demographics receive educations that better equip them for the test than others. But for all its faults, the fact that someone of average intelligence can master the SAT if they try hard enough illustrates the test can reward both naturally brilliant people and workhorses.
Doctors use brain scans to diagnose strokes, so why is diagnosing intelligence different and far more dangerous?
Scanning the brain and coming to a conclusion about how much a person can accomplish intellectually may prevent people of average intelligence from pursuing far-fetched dreams of math super-stardom, but a brain scan determining aptitude may needlessly circumscribe the lives of a larger percentage of the population by placing limits on their ambitions.
Not everyone who comes up with a brilliant idea or implements a complex assignment accomplishes the task with ease -- hard work and luck often trump natural inclination, and telling people not to bother trying will do much more harm than good. A brain scan will measure cognitive ability, but not drive, motivation, commitment or emotional intelligence, which are all often integral to success.
Replacing the SAT with a brain scan would hurt people who are not natural savants, but who work incredibly hard to maximize their potential. The world needs both kinds of people, and judging students and potential employees only on their natural aptitude may reward people who are content to rest on their laurels, and punish people who work hard to learn new things, which will make for a less-balanced society.
Students who want to understand how their brains work may want to take the brain scan as a diagnostic test, but parents, admissions officers and job boards should not use the scan to decide where or what children study, or what jobs are suitable for certain candidates.
Virtual grocery stores won customers over in Philadelphia and Seoul, but the newest Chicago iteration has yet to catch on with commuters.
Online grocer Peapod is test-driving a program in Chicago, allowing subway commuters to shop at a virtual store with their smartphones. The walls have pictures representing items like bananas and milk, and users can download an app to scan the items they want, which Peapod delivers to their homes shortly afterwards.
Peapod unveiled a similar store on multiple train platforms in Philadelphia, and reported a bump in mobile orders.
A similar bump in mobile orders may not happen in Chicago. The virtual store, in the northeast tunnel at the city's State and Lake red line station, is in an inconvenient spot outside of the area where people wait for trains. Commuters eager to catch a ride cannot use the virtual store without risking missing the train, because it is not within the ticketed area.
Over a four-hour period a few days after it launched, no one walking through the subway tunnel used the program, or even considered using the program. Most people ignored the store or looked at it with mild interest before continuing on their way.
Keith Brown, 41, noticed it only after it was pointed out, and said his mother often used Peapod. "She is way too old to come to the subway, though, so she wouldn't use this," he noted.
"I like the idea, and I'm comfortable with mobile payments in general, but I don't feel like I need this," Chicagoan commuter Amie Kesler, 27, explained.
Dan Thorpe, 24, echoed Kesler's sentiments, saying "I have a grocery store around the corner, and I'm going to stick with that," but he was enthusiastic about this project's potential.
Why did virtual shopping find more success in the subway stations of Seoul and Philadelphia? It's simple: location and exposure.
In Seoul, Tesco's Home Plus tested virtual stores inside the waiting area for trains, meaning commuters could browse while waiting for an incoming train. Home Plus is the second-most popular grocery store in Korea, so everyone was familiar with the store's products, and Home Plus rolled out virtual stores throughout Seoul, including locations at bus stops.
While South Korea's virtual store has a some differences with Chicago's version, Peapod's based its virtual stores in Philadelphia on similar concepts, just a different city. Peapod reported a boost in online sales in Philadelphia, but the reception in Chicago is chilly thus far, even though the Windy City has more product options.
One main difference between the two locations is Philadelphia's virtual stores are in the area where commuters wait for a train, whereas Chicago's store is in a tunnel leading into and out of the subway station. Because commuters are still rushing to their destination, they are not as likely to take a moment and look at the virtual store, let alone order groceries from it.
The experiment in Chicago underscores potential difficulties for mobile-based shopping. It is not enough to compete on the novelty and convenience of purchasing goods and services via smartphone: businesses hoping to boost sales through mobile payment methods must still think strategically about audiences, placement, marketing and differentiation. In other words, services like Peapod's must meet consumers where they already are, rather than hope to change their lifestyle and daily routines.
If Peapod wants a successful Chicago test run, it should consider changing its virtual store's location to make it more convenient for shoppers. Even though people are growing comfortable with the concept of mobile payments and smartphone shopping, companies looking to expand in this area will not see significant growth unless they make the experience preferable to the other alternatives.
Denise Abbot used Facebook to send a stern message to her 13-year-old daughter, fueling debate over parenting in the digital age. What took so long?
The Ohio mom took to daughter Ava's Facebook page, posting a picture of her daughter, with a red "X" across her mouth and the following caption: "I do not know how to keep my [implied by picture as mouth shut]. I am no longer allowed on Facebook or my phone. Please ask why."
Abbot's actions were prompted by a familiar situation for many parents. Ava was mouthing off to her mom in front of her friends while her mom was driving them -- providing a running, immature commentary about her operation of the vehicle. As the chatter continued despite Denise's warnings, she considered an appropriate punishment. By the time they got home, Denise decided on a course of action.
Does the Punishment Fit the Crime?
"I decided to do something that I know would totally impact her, and that the next time she started that, she'd think 'I don't want my face all over Facebook again with a red 'X' over my mouth," said Abbott to NBC, adding that she thought her daughter was fit to handle her punishment. Abbott said she doesn't regret her actions.
Almost immediately, traditional media picked up on Abbot's Facebook punishment, bloggers took to their sites to cheer and jeer the mother, and parents on soccer sidelines and baseball bleachers buzzed about the story, just as they did in February when a frustrated gun-toting dad made his point to his daughter on the social network.
These parents' specific tactics will likely be subject to ongoing debate, but the question of whether parents can or should use social media in parenting is much more obvious.
Using Facebook to Lay Down the Law
Parents make use of the things that kids value to discipline, motivate and reward, whether that is a car, hobbies or technology. Twenty years ago, nobody would bat an eye if a parent took the car keys away from an unruly teen. Today, teenagers report they actually value smartphones over cars, making technology and its attendant social media connection a powerful parental tool.
Today's teens, born and bathed in glowing light of the digital age, often feel entitled being on Facebook, but that doesn't mean they are, especially when they have developing ideas of what's appropriate to post on the social network.
Are parents so intimidated by the digital edge kids have over them that they are afraid to cut off the connection? Maybe, but they are making strides.
Where the Kids Are
Parents are increasingly checking up on their kids' Facebook activity, according to the latest phase of the "Digital Diaries" project by online security firm AVG.
But tellingly, words like "snooping," and "peeking" describe the practice for parents, suggesting there may a double standard in play here. When the general population browses Facebook to check up on friends, they are using the site as intended, so why the outcry when parents do it?
Some compare social networks to diaries, but parents and children shouldn't have any illusions -- this is not the case. Without restrictions, these sites are easily accessible by friends, strangers, colleges, employers and others. So, what's a parent to do?
"You have to adapt your parenting skills with the times," Abbot told NBC. And, her daughter's response indicates she may have gotten the message.
"I feel like I deserved it because I was mean to my mom and spoke disrespectful to her in front of my friends," Ava wrote in an email to the television station.
For crafty tech fans sick of paying high prices for cell phones, a solution may be at hand: make your own.
MIT's Media Lab created a do-it-yourself cell phone, with parts running about $150. Once assembled, the wooden phone can make and receive calls using the same networks and SIM cards as traditional phones, and even features caller ID.
The finished product looks like a clunker from 1997, a far cry from today's sleek smartphones, but the challenge of putting it together may appeal to tinkerers and people who catch the DIY bug from excessive Pinterest use.
The phone isn't practical -- many high quality smartphones cost about the same, do a lot more, and don't need assembly -- but the project shows mobile technology has advanced to a point where piecing together a basic phone is as simple as assembling an Ikea bed.
The home-grown phone kits will probably not become available for commercial use due to FCC rules about using U.S. airwaves for homemade devices. However, MIT's project demonstrates how easy it is to assemble a rudimentary phone, which may inspire others to try their hand at making a knockoff iPhone or black market Galaxy S, although cobbling together all the features those handsets offer would significantly increase the price of parts.
Still, there is interest in these kind of tinkering. One man already tried his hand at a mock-up iPhone, although it did not make calls. Another handy student went further, buying a touchscreen and piecing together old computer parts to create a fully functional faux-iPad for about $125.
Phone users looking for customized experiences often "jailbreak" their phones, overriding conventional settings to play around with software options. Sometimes this creates problems, as it leaves phones vulnerable to malware and security invasions, but it points to consumer desire to take control over their mobile technology experience and to deepen their understanding of the mechanisms at work.
MIT's DIY kit may appeal to that type of phone user, as it encourages customized hardware, and although it will likely not be available for in stores, it shows the growing interest in personalizing phone hardware.
Tags:
