News aggregator vs. traditional content producer

October 12, 2007 on 3:56 pm | by Iulian Comanescu | In Analyses |

The topic of my presentation for the “Innovation in media” conference that took place yesterday, at Howard Johnson, has been “Traditional content producer vs. news aggregator”. Some kind of opposition is perceived usually between the two categories, but I’m trying to prove the opposition is rather historical. Books like The Bible were aggregating content since the dawn of time, while some non-aggregating concepts are yet successful on the Internet even in 2007.

Aggregators are more and more necessary with the increase of the amount of information available to the modern consumer. They may target wide or niche audiences, while rss readers are personal, “egocast” solutions.

Copyright issues cannot regard information itself, since information is free, so restrictions can be imposed by traditional content producers only in terms of the form of their material or in types of content other than information: opinion texts, image.

Traditional content producer vs. news aggregator (en, pdf - right click to download).

9 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

[...] ore de expuneri. Cred că pdf-ul e mai bun decât prăpăditul meu joc de scenă, de aceea l-am pus pe Comanescu.ro, în rezumat şi formatul original. Faptul că lumea a ascultat deşi n-am vorbit cum aş fi vrut [...]

Pingback by Media lui Comanescu » Inovaţia în media - după eveniment — October 12, 2007 #
As Tolontan likes to say, the readers are extremely exigents in details.
So, I have noticed one letter missing at page 28 in your presentation: “il eSt interdit d’interdire”. No offense, I hope
On the other side, your point of view is well-balanced and pertinent and people in charge with traditional paper content should be aware of the relevance of a good aggregator.

Comment by meplusmyself — October 13, 2007 #
Meplusmyself: yes, there is that letter missing and two or three other mistakes. I’ll correct them.

Comment by Iulian Comanescu — October 13, 2007 #
[...] cu placere sa parcurgeti trei dintre prezentarile sustinute cu aceasta ocazie de: Catalin Tolontan, Iulian Comanescu si Cristian Tudor [...]

Pingback by meplusmyself » Blog Archive » Publicul de media in Romania — October 14, 2007 #
great presentation, wish i had been there to see it. one question, though: what do you mean by old media beginning to agreggate themselves (last page)? how can, say, a daily newspaper agreggate content, when its very reason for being is producing new, direct from the source content of its own (unless, of course, you count info from news agencies and press releases as agreggated content). there should be, i think, some sort of nuance in defining agreggation: aggregation is ‘taking’ content from sources destined for public consumption, which are easily available.

Comment by MihaI Preotu — October 19, 2007 #
Mihai: A daily newspaper does use a lot of external sources to achieve its final contents/shape, as well as some other types of old media. The most important of all is news agencies, especially for foreign affair topics.

I rather see “news aggregators” as corresponding to a need of the audience - synthesis or hierarchy, than “mash-up” things. Lately, Google secured a deal with some important news agencies, such as Reuters, AFP or DPA, to get its content directly from them, together with eliminating duplicated content - actually, the same agency news printed in various newspapers and then included in the newspaper’s site. Does that mean that Google News switched from aggregation to “traditional content production”?

Then, there is something else. If you go to a Romanian newspaper office, all the TV sets are open on news channels. I think the situation is the same in other countries. More or less, the mainstream media are fed with the same agenda, the job is done with less legwork and more “official” sources such as PR releases and things deriving from politicians’ schedule.

Basically, what I’m trying to prove with the presentation is that the opposition “traditional producer” vs. “content aggregator” is rather a historical one.

Comment by Iulian Comanescu — October 20, 2007 #
haha, so basically, since everyone (in every medium) is putting out the same stories coming from the same sources, everyone is more or less aggregating. i can see where you’re coming from

but inkeeping with your distinction of information (free) vs paid-for content (which i found quite interesting), i suppose one could look at the widely distributed product of news agencies as some kind of subclass of information, one that you pay for.

so if you define (modern) aggregation as “synthesis or hierarchy”, custom-made for each particular end-user (or a particular class of end-users), then big traditional, print newspapers do not aggregate, but produce content (starting from information or even content produced by others).

Comment by Mihai Preotu — October 21, 2007 #
Mihai: you are right, the real opposition is somewhere between the oldskool content consumer, which is passive and generic - the reader of the general interest newspapers e.g. The new type of consumer is active - either involved in content production, or selecting his or her own interest area via tricks like rss readers, Google news customizations a.s.o.

Speaking of what ‘is’ and what ‘is not’ an aggregator or a content producer, once again, I don’t believe the distinction is that important. I would rather try and find the reasons for the success of this or that initiative. Several months ago I had a brief discussion with Calin Fusu from Neogen. At first, he said he wouldn’t get involved in content business, which he sees as very different from what Neogen does - roughly conform to the Google model. I replied that News.Google.com is also some kind of content business. He agreed.

Comment by Iulian Comanescu — October 22, 2007 #
fair enough. the distinction quite an esotheric matter, whats important is the practical implications. im not familiar with copyright legislation with regard to aggregators (if any, that is), though, and here it could be important to precisely define what is and isnt content aggregation.
so is he (getting involved in the content business)?

Comment by Mihai Preotu — October 22, 2007 #