Has the 3D World Gone Crazy?

—Katie Bawler

For a majority of consumers, 3D has always been about film, but a recent series of media developments have thrust into the mainstream. Whether it be sport, television or even the first-ever 3D catwalk at the Burberry’s London Fashion Week show, I think we can safely say that nothing is off-limits from being ‘three-dimensionalised’.

Without question, the success of Avatar has had a huge impact, so much so that I wonder how long it might have taken the phenomenon to catch on if it wasn’t for the 3D James Cameron epic. Could we still be fumbling around with dodgy old novelty glasses with the lenses cut out and replaced with cheap blue and red cellophane? Probably not, but I don’t think that would be miles from the truth. For the general public, Avatar made 3D cool.

But the million-dollar question is where the technology will take us. The explosion of excitement around 3D makes it seem like anything is possible. Who knows, with the pace of technology in ten years’ time, 2D viewing might be as archaic as the gramophone. It’s even been mooted that 3D contact lenses could be the norm.

All this seems very exciting. But at the same time, I have to wonder if there’s going to be a bit of a backlash. How much do we really want to see a close-up of a sweaty rugby player as he grapples with four other guys in the scrum, or a malnourished model limping towards us on her way down the catwalk?

Whatever your opinion, 3D is upon us and this time it would seem well and truly here to stay.

A breakdown of the blogosphere

—Melanie

I came across this over at my favourite coolhunting spot, The Presurfer. It’s a  breakdown of the blogosphere today.

It’s certainly not an Earth-shattering representation, but it’s a very clever way to visualise it. Thumbs up to Intac for some brilliant linkbait.

NME’s new model retains army of readers

—Andrew

The ABC figures released this week paint a familiar picture for the music press: year on year, music titles are facing a brick wall as prominent as Pink Floyd’s; their readership being squeezed like Jools Holland on a bad day.

Weekly titles NME and Kerrang! announced falls in circulation of more than 20 per cent, while monthly titles MOJO and Q also posted circulation decreases, albeit on a smaller scale. It poses the question – what must a music publication do to survive?

NME, for example, has evolved and diversified to fit the needs that today’s tech-savvy reader demands. Far from its humble beginnings as a grassroots newspaper nearly 60 years ago, the magazine is now part of a multi-faceted music brand which includes its own TV and radio stations, concerts, awards, merchandise and a website that boasts 3.5 million unique users a month.

The print publication of NME - while still arguably the most iconic aspect of the brand - has simply become just one part of a much bigger remit. Those who interact with NME now do so across multiple platforms, engaging in content that moves far beyond the page.

In establishing a multi-platform offering, NME has not only safeguarded its brand, but enhanced it, too. The brand offers a much more tangible experience: for example, you can read the review of the new Marina and the Diamonds record in the magazine, listen to it on NME Radio, read her interview on the website and watch her live on the NME tour.

There’s a lesson to be learned here in the ongoing debate surrounding newspapers’ attempts to safeguard their existence. In creating a coherent brand across various platforms of which the print magazine is just one part, NME has negated the risk of readers flocking to other publications to consume their music content by effectively creating a ‘one-stop shop’.

The ABC figures may paint a picture that NME will forever struggle to replicate its readership figures of the halcyon days of the 70s and 80s. Then, the magazine regularly shifted a quarter of a million copies a week, compared to just 38,486 now. The truth may be closer to the fact that its readers, like the NME brand, are simply evolving in the way they consume music content.

Could you go a year without reading a newspaper?

—Katie Bawler

Talk has been rife in the media world about the waning importance of print media and whether it is due to have the final nail banged into its coffin.  In his blog, the COMMS corner, Adam Vincenzini is undertaking a substantial experiment to put to the test accusations of digital media cannibalising print media.

On January 1^st he embarked on a quest to go one year without buying or reading a print newspaper to see how it would affect his role as a PR consultant.

So far, he is discovering a lot - particularly about the ways he consumes digital media.  There is flexibility in digital news that allows him to choose which articles he reads, depending on his interests. He’s also become more aware of the rapidity with which he receives news throughout the day by following the Sky News breaking news Twitter feed.

I agree that taking in news digitally allows for immediate consumption. For example, when I get into work in the morning, I scroll my Digsby Twitter feed to get a steer on the stories that are due to be breaking later in the day.

But no matter what, I’ll always enjoy reading the paper. For me, the difference is that I’ll purvey a newspaper leisurely over my bowl of cereal. I look at newspapers almost as magazines now. I use them as leisure material, whereas I log on to actually read the news.

This is personal consumption, though. Professionally, I still can’t beat the feeling of seeing my coverage in the newspaper – it feels more real.  The sense of achievement is higher, and it’s something tangible that I can show friends and family. Maybe I hold print coverage in high esteem because I am quite new to social media. But having been encouraged to engage with online communities in my final year at university, I expect this to change.

I like print, I prefer it as I would Sainsbury’s Taste the Difference range to Sainsbury’s own brand, but do I really need it? I imagine not. Good luck to Adam with his ‘no newspapers’ challenge.