According to Columbia Journalism Review, Time Warner INC. has six categorized holdings. (HBO, Turner Broadcasting System, Warner Bros Entertainment, Time INC, Time Warner Investment Groups, and Time Warner Global Media Group.) I didn't realize how many things they own that I didn't even know they owned.
Some of their subsidiaries work together, such as Adult Swim and Cartoon Network. They both appear on the same channel, but Adult Swim comes on later at night. The only independent subsidiary I saw was Time Warner Global Media Group. It seemed that Turner Broadcasting System or Time INC had the most extensive synergy with a multitude of divisions. And the most extensive division was Cartoon Network.
I think synergy provides more/effective resources to deliver entertainment and news. Working together means that these subsidiaries can help out other subsidiaries if they need additional capital. Then the ones who aren't doing as well can trend upwards to the ones who are and increase profits for the company as a whole.
Thursday, October 16, 2014
Thursday, October 9, 2014
Another Generations Take on News Networks
For this post, I interviewed my mother (who lives in Florida) and my aunt (who lives in Kansas).
I started with my mother first and asked which TV news channels she preferred. She told me that she used to watch Bill O'Reilly a lot, until he became too mainstream and "started to become an asshole." Then I asked what she prefers to watch now. My mother informed me that she mostly watches the local news for Cape Coral, Florida, but from time-to-time she will catch segments on CNN if they are discussing something interesting.
My Aunt was my next target. Her preference was The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. She liked these programs because she enjoyed comedy with her news reports and said ", I am mostly interested in their views because they are my views too." She said she originally watched MSNBC, but felt that regular news is too depressing.
Both my aunt and mother said that growing up everyone sat down and watched the news. The family would sit in the living room after dinner and keep up with world events.
I think it says something to these networks like Fox News and MSNBC that even older generations tend to move away from networks that lean too far in one political direction. Although, The Daily Show and Colbert Report are not free their moderate liberal views, I feel like the comedic effect explains their views better. You know, in a satirical sort of way. This also speaks volumes among TV versus print media. It's hard to relay comedy through a newspaper, so these periodicals have to stay strictly business. I can tell you first-hand that when I lived with my mother she only read local stories, the funnies section, and the obituaries (for some weird reason).
I started with my mother first and asked which TV news channels she preferred. She told me that she used to watch Bill O'Reilly a lot, until he became too mainstream and "started to become an asshole." Then I asked what she prefers to watch now. My mother informed me that she mostly watches the local news for Cape Coral, Florida, but from time-to-time she will catch segments on CNN if they are discussing something interesting.
My Aunt was my next target. Her preference was The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. She liked these programs because she enjoyed comedy with her news reports and said ", I am mostly interested in their views because they are my views too." She said she originally watched MSNBC, but felt that regular news is too depressing.
Both my aunt and mother said that growing up everyone sat down and watched the news. The family would sit in the living room after dinner and keep up with world events.
I think it says something to these networks like Fox News and MSNBC that even older generations tend to move away from networks that lean too far in one political direction. Although, The Daily Show and Colbert Report are not free their moderate liberal views, I feel like the comedic effect explains their views better. You know, in a satirical sort of way. This also speaks volumes among TV versus print media. It's hard to relay comedy through a newspaper, so these periodicals have to stay strictly business. I can tell you first-hand that when I lived with my mother she only read local stories, the funnies section, and the obituaries (for some weird reason).
Monday, October 6, 2014
Two Very Different Magazines, One Similarity.
To compare ads in magazines, I grabbed two random magazines in our apartment's living room. I grabbed an edition of GameInformer (GI) and Eastbay (EB). One is a magazine about video games and the latter is a magazine that sells sporting equipment and apparel.
Both magazines were scarce with advertising, which made it feel like a more rich read. The advertising it did have was mostly relevant to the content. GI had ads for upcoming games and EB had ads with sports athletes, such as Eddie Lacy, previewing the sportswear they promote. GI did have one Progressive advertisement that felt out of place. EB lacked editorial content, aside from the pictures of professional sports athletes. The other magazine, was full of stories from game developers, pictures from gameplay, and rankings of video games.
In the situation of these two magazines, I would say that the content influences the advertisements. These are two magazines that can stick to their guns and people who purchase them know exactly what they want out of them; and they get it. I find it very professional to keep out the clutter of non-related advertisements. It keeps a nice smooth flow to the reading. I might have just gotten lucky and picked up two magazines that are pretty static, but it seemed pretty balanced overall.
Both magazines were scarce with advertising, which made it feel like a more rich read. The advertising it did have was mostly relevant to the content. GI had ads for upcoming games and EB had ads with sports athletes, such as Eddie Lacy, previewing the sportswear they promote. GI did have one Progressive advertisement that felt out of place. EB lacked editorial content, aside from the pictures of professional sports athletes. The other magazine, was full of stories from game developers, pictures from gameplay, and rankings of video games.
In the situation of these two magazines, I would say that the content influences the advertisements. These are two magazines that can stick to their guns and people who purchase them know exactly what they want out of them; and they get it. I find it very professional to keep out the clutter of non-related advertisements. It keeps a nice smooth flow to the reading. I might have just gotten lucky and picked up two magazines that are pretty static, but it seemed pretty balanced overall.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)