Clueless?

[Tom Snyder]

The other night a few of us were theorizing on the attitudes of media and broadcast folks, and all the others who tend to poo-poo groups like ours as insignificant, obnoxious, or both.. but either way, really not a force to be reckoned with, respected or even acknowledged, unless the relationship can be leveraged to their own advantage and spun back to us in hopes that we'll believe it's actually a win-win.

We were wondering why that might be. My thought is that it's because that's the way it's always been with them...they hold the power, and they can do what they want with no repercussions.

I recalled something I tell a lot of my customers about (I own an Internet company). It's called the 95 theses from the Cluetrain Manifesto. You can read them all here: http://www.cluetrain.com/#95theses

Just for the sake of starting a discussion, my question is this: If I'm a broadcast decision maker am I aware of the concept? Should I be? Should I fear it?

[Matt Heebner]

Sounds like a course called Management 101...


Matt



[This message has been edited by Matt Heebner (edited 12-29-2002).]

[mr_yeti]

It occurs to me that one of the main reasons that groups like this are not taken seriously is that, while message boards are excellent venues for exchanging ideas and information, they are extremely poor tools for organization. There are, at last count, 276 members of the board here, and I'm absolutely certain that we represent the largest semi-organized television-viewers group in the area.

I do not wish to be offensive, but much of the conversation here revolves around what amounts to petty bickering between members over which method of reception is best, etc. This can hardly be construed as constructive, when all of us have (or should have) one goal: to enjoy the benefits, and they are myriad beyond picture and sound quality, of HDTV.

Mind you, I am not just idly observing these things. They bother me. I would like to see a more organized approach taken here, but that isn't my decision to make. Preaching to the choir is pointless. We all want HDTV, and the best way to get it for ourselves and others is to work together. I don't know what kind of approach would work best. Letter-writing campaigns might help. We could all pool together to buy Tim C. a DirecTV HD box. These are just thoughts that have crossed my mind. Happily, there are 275 other minds out there who may be willing and able to help.

Or maybe I'm only dreaming. It is quite early yet.

[ReesR]

I believe what the Cluetrain Manifesto is telling us is this forum is making a difference.  Irregardless of what mainstream corporate thinking is the marketplace is being informed individual by individual.  Those in their ivory towers do have alot to be concerned about as the Cluetrain Manifesto points out.  But I believe the secret is we now hold the power.

It doesn't matter if we have only 276 "registered" users.  You gotta realize there are a huge number more who merely look in on what we say here.  Those who become more comfortable with the language will join and share their experiences and requests for info.  Those who need more time will lurk more.  Either way, we are the winners.  We are shifting sentiment.

Thanks Tom for sharing the Cluetrain Manifesto.

------------------
Rees Roberts
Racine, WI
reesr@wi.net

HDTV Receiver:  Sony KD-34XBR2 16X9
Bi-directional AntennaCraft VHF Yagi Model #2260P
+
2 Winegard PR9022 UHF yagi's pointing N & S
Antennas at about 30 feet
Samsung SIR-TS160 HD Directv receiver

[ReesR]

I offer but one piece of proof that we are making a difference:

In a short span of time, Tim C of the Journal Sentinal went from saying we were but experimenters...to reading this forum...to purchasing his Sony High Def TV...to writing a mini-series on HD.  Even though he didn't get it totally correct in his mini-series, he did get involved.  But his articles were merely a blip on the radar screen.  We, on the other hand do this on a daily, weekly, monthly and yearly basis.  Ya gotta know we are making more of an impact on HD in the Milwaukee area than a mini-series in the Journal Sentinal.

Rees

[mr_yeti]

I was saying that the 276 members were a strength, not a liability, and that some sort of organization would make the forum more effective than it already is. As I said, this is an excellent place to come for technical information and, especially, the opinions of others.

Informing people one at a time is fine, but it's slow going. And this is certainly not in keeping with the overall, and understandable, impatient tone of this forum.

I never said we weren't making a difference, I only suggested that we might be able to do more. Perhaps you feel I was wrong to say so. I apologize.

[This message has been edited by mr_yeti (edited 12-30-2002).]

[ReesR]

No, maybe it is I who needs to apologize.  I believe we are both saying the same thing.  I was actually referring to the Tim C's and Jim Hall's amoungst us, not you.  My examples and descriptions were to emphasis our strengths not liabilities as Jim always is so quick to tell us.  Remember, they have a vested interest in making us think we are but a drop in the bucket.  Otherwise, they look like they are not the power house they want us to think they are.

While your suggestion that informing people "MAY" be slow going, in fact, as more and more people know about this forum information gets out just as fast.  And remember, word of mouth is still alive and well.  People are becoming aware of this forum for information.

It is Jim Hall who doesn't get it (not to mention Ch 6 and the Sinclair stations ch24 and ch18).  The main 3 networks knew it was time to provide HD programming now.  Now he has to get it to us.  He is only hurting his own cause by claiming that there are only so many people registered here or he knows everyone here by their first name.  Jim's competitors certainly realize it was time to get moving.  I'm just wondering how long it is going to take.

Three cheers to the 95 theses from the Cluetrain Manifesto.

As for a better way to become organized...I think if you accept the 95 theses from the Cluetrain Manifesto you would also believe we have what we need already.  But I certainly would appeal to you or anyone else if they had a good idea.  Throw one out there and let's talk about it.  I know there are people out there willing to help.

Rees

[This message has been edited by ReesR (edited 12-30-2002).]

[Tom Snyder]

I was a little reluctant to include Jim Hall in the same breath with others, as his participation with this group indicates that he does "get it" to an extent.

However, 9 months after 58 launched HD, we're still waiting for Time Warner and 58 to come to terms. While we wait, an information vacuum is created, and filled with opinion, conjecture, anger and error. People here are wondering what to do about it, because we want to help. But it's counterproductive to exert energy on misguided actions, which will be dismissed outright. An accurate understanding of the issues allows us to take effective and appropriate collective action.

I know there's a reluctance on the part of business to publicly negotiate stuff like this "in the media" (which in the Internet age includes sites like ours), but a guy as smart as Jim can certainly figure out a way to take advantage of this forum to build loyalty, fill the information vacuum and help him do an acceptable deal that gets all his digital stations on cable quickly...

...or at least respect us enough to explain why not.

[This message has been edited by Tom Snyder (edited 12-31-2002).]

[mr_yeti]

I agree with you, Tom, to an extent. I think that a constructive conversation and an understanding of all of the issues involved in getting CBS 58 on cable is very important -- but both parties involved must be willing to talk first.

My conversation with TWC about this very issue has been one-sided, to put it mildly. It sort of reminds me of Jack Nicholson's character in "A Few Good Men." Maybe they feel we can't handle the truth. There might be some good reasons that this isn't happening yet, but that can hardly be information vital to national security. Obviously, a business relationship already exists between CBS 58 and TWC - the analog channel is carried, but that is mandated by law.

I see your point about not taking action until we have all the information, but I just don't see that happening any time soon. Why on earth should it take 9+ months to get a channel on cable? It's going to have to get there eventually, and I just don't understand what the dragging of feet will accomplish.

[Tom Snyder]

Stall tactics are a great negotiating strategy if one side really wants to get a deal done.

However, if neither side is in hurry, all it does is to stalemate things forever with no action.

If both sides are in a hurry, the one with the greater urgency has the negotiating disadvantage. So the goal here is to create a greater urgency for your opponent.

How do you do that? One way is to find a way to build pressure on your oponent.

(sound of the information vacuum being filled by conjecture follows):
I'm just guessing here, but the attempt by both sides to have us contact the other is just a contest to see who can generate the most pressure and thus put the other in the inferior negotiating position.

If this is the case, then putting pressure on both sides may actually be counterproductive and may only serve to continue the current gridlock. So the only way it will get done is for us, as a group, to put all of our pressure on one side or the other.

So we would have to decide which side we want to support.

I could be wrong on this, but it's worth consideration and discussion.

[ReesR]

Tom, not knowing what is delaying the process also not knowing what each side wants might allow us to make a very ill informed decision on who to support.

Rees

[Kevin Arnold]

I would suspect that the negotiations between 58 and TWC are handled at a corporate level by Weigel out of Chicago. They do have a reputation as very tough negotiators. While it is true that there exists no business plan to make money off the digital side yet, that ignores what this period of time really is--the time when reputations are built and (via the internet) where the pikers get badmouthed. This would be my concern as a GM, that is, my station being tagged as less than consumer friendly or worse. That kind of reputation stays around for a long, long, time and is hard to shake. Definetly this is the time for the broadcast business to be looking ahead long range and not just 6 mos to a year.

[Tom Snyder]

But Jim has at least participated. To my knowledge, Time Warner hasn't even acknowledged our existance.

Would it make sense to give each party an equal opportunity to make their case for our support, and then we decide, based on the info they want to provide us?

[mr_yeti]

That sounds fair, Tom. Jim will be easy enough to get ahold of, but who are we planning on contacting at Time-Warner?

[Tom Snyder]

Has anyone here in the group had a real communication with/from anyone at TWC? Or has it all been auto-generated spin?