Death of Traditional Media? Maybe a Tad Exagerated

The Death of traditional media has been already announced a few times…

“Radio will kill newspapers”

“Television will kill the radio”

“Pay TV will kill Over-the-Air Television”

“Internet will kill everybody and everything”

“Facebook will kill Google”

Notice how some “media gurus” makes a killing in the ad industry?

They tell everyone that the media ecosystem is doomed every time something new is introduced.

And that this new disrupting media will take over everything.

And if you use this newfangled thing wisely (and they’re here to teach you for a fee of course), you’ll never have to invest in another ad campaign, you’ll never have to make a cold call again, you’ll never run out of prospects and the business will market itself. Sure.

And every two-three years, the bubble burst.

• The 2000 dot.com bubble.
• Napster.
• Friendster.
• Myspace.

And there’s more…. According to the Mendelsohn Affluent Barometer, one of the main indexes to track media use among affluent Americans, traditional media is still top compared to online. In August 2011, affluent Americans (more than 100k per year) read their daily news in hard copy (86%), watched their favorite shows on TV (94%)… When asked how affluents followed Osama bin Laden’s death, network TV topped the list, cited by 70%, and an additional 40% cited printed newspapers. Similarly, when asked how the followed the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear crisis in Japan, network TV again topped the list, cited by 76%, with an additional 49% citing printed newspapers.

Aside credibility, it seems that the number of hours spent per media is favoring TV… In 2010, the average American spent 30 hours watching TV each week vs 6 hours using the Internet according to Nielsen.

So, what’s your take on the whole deal?