Feb 19

chp_busLast summer I read an interesting book by screenwriter/actor Brian Spaeth entitled Prelude to a Super Airplane. One of the many plotlines in Spaeth’s book involves a conflict between the “fast emerging pro-flying car contingent” and the “traditional pro-airplane members of the populace”. It is a battle for the future of aerial transportation – whether national production should focus on many private individual units or on a few massive public transports.

After reading Prelude, I started thinking about the transportation situation in Tampa. Like most of America, a large majority of the residents of Tampa prefer private automobile use over public transportation. Buses, although used, remain a secondary alternative, ridden primarily by those without cars or those looking to save money on gas.

I predict this is going to change in the very near future. I think we will soon see a major shift in transportation culture. A shift that will require change in the perception and utility of public transportation.

One of the most consistent news trends of the last few years has been reporting the dangerous relationship between communication devices and driving. Every few weeks it seems another story is written about an accident involving a phoning, texting, or tweeting victim. According to a recent Mashable.com post, “an estimated 6,000 people were killed and 500,000 were injured due to cell-phone related car accidents” in 2008.

There is no doubt people are having trouble pausing their desire to stay social. With the growth of the communication industry and ease of staying in touch, we are seeing a cultural shift from the importance of travel to the need for continuous communication. We value staying in touch more than we do those short moments in which our concentration is needed for driving.

So far, our society’s initial reaction has been to fight this cultural shift. Mashable, a blog dedicated to technology and social media, recommended “a combination of legislation, social awareness, and technological innovation to create a safe marriage between social media and driving“. CNN also recently reported on a product designed to disable cell phones from calling or texting while vehicles are in motion.

Unfortunately, the genie of communication and increased socialization cannot be put back in the bottle. On the contrary, we need to embrace our need to be social.

This is where public transportation must step up. They must take the lead in embracing this cultural shift. Instead of being seen as secondary, they need to rebrand, remarket, and refocus their message and be perceived as a safe alternative for those who want to stay in touch while they travel.

Here are some ideas how public transportation systems can promote themselves to those who are putting increased value on communications:

1) Engage their sense of adventure and participation – One of the major buzzphrases is the last year on the technology front has been “geolocation – the “the identification of the real-world geographic location of an Internet-connected computer, mobile device, website visitor or other“. Public transportation organizations should encourage riders to plug in and announce where they are. These organizations could promote “Tweet ‘N’ Ride” events, incorporate social applications such as Foursquare, or even do virtual treasure hunts or games of “I Spy“.

2) Increase routes through college and young professional residential areas – In order to encourage usage, buses need to be seen in areas where communication-savvy people live. This means putting routes in the residential areas of people 18 to 35. These routes need to stop by places this demographic frequents, such as campuses, downtown areas, malls, entertainment complexes, and sports stadiums.

3) Ensure routes have good signal – Whenever possible, public transportation organizations should make sure there are few, if any deadzones along the routes. They could also make all bus stops Wi-Fi zones. If possible, these organizations should also put Wi-Fi on the buses.

4) Embrace social media – Although many transportation organizations already have twitter and facebook accounts, these organizations need to better utilize these platforms. Not only should the administration be engaging potential riders, but the buses should as well. However possible, each bus should have access to the tweeter feed and “automatically” tweet its location when it reaches stops along its route. This information could be broadcast not only to individuals through twitter, but also possibly to a small screen installed in each stop.

5) Target parents – In order to encourage teens and other members of the millennial generation that buses are a viable option, public transportation organizations should create advertising campaigns targeted to parents and other decision makers. Parents should be informed that they do not have to discourage their teen from communicating, and that options do exist for teens to travel and stay in touch.

In Prelude to a Super Airplane, the great culture battle between individual and mass aerial transportation culminates in 2012. If public transportation organizations can capitalize on the current growing cultural shift between transportation and communication, we may see the battle on land much sooner.

  • Share/Bookmark
Feb 01

I know I probably shouldn’t be doing this, but the other day I checked the demographics of my Facebook fan club (If you haven’t joined, why not? It’s free, yo.). Although I wasn’t entirely surprised by the numbers, they were a bit startling. Apparently, I am most popular with the 25-34 male demographic. As a matter of fact, across all age groups men outnumber women 73% to 25%. Then I started thinking, besides my cheerleader post, I don’t remember the last comment I received from a female reader.

I don’t know why, but this bothers me.

(By the way, perhaps you noticed 73+25 = 0nly 98. I am not asking what the other 2% are. I’ll leave that between them and Facebook.)

Granted, I am a 25-34 year old male and most of my writing throughout the years has been on “guy” subjects like sports, music, and politics. I also don’t think it helps that my sense of humor is either extremely dry or utterly slapstick, neither of which I’ve noticed are the predominant sense of humor of the fairer sex. I also tend to be very random, which doesn’t help. From what I’ve noticed, most women prefer predictability, which leads to comfortability and connection. Most women want something they can relate to consistently, something they can identify with, and something, like Poison, they can believe in.

So besides following the advice of this article on marketing to women, is there anything I can do to make my writing more “female-friendly”?

  • Share/Bookmark
Jan 16

It’s been a good fortnight. First, I was linked to on ESPN.com regarding my post on the NRA and pro sports. Then, Rays Index.com linked to my post comparing their web traffic to MetsBlog.com. Now an article I wrote on the use of Social Media in the Pro Wrestling business was published on the website Online World of Wrestling. It is the number one google search result for “indy wrestling social media” and the number five search result for “pro wrestling social media”.

Check it out: “Indy Wrestlers: Social Media & Self-Promotion“.

  • Share/Bookmark
Dec 28

Thoughts about the Time Warner versus Fox battle that could soon leave millions without The Simpsons, American Idol, the Sugar Bowl, and a bunch of other programs:

bright house foxThis might be part of an overall change in distribution philosophy for Fox. Fox continues to try to strong-arm content distributors. Fresh off their dispute with Google, they are trying to hold Time Warner hostage by increasing costs to Brighthouse by an alleged 300 percent.

If Fox was smart, they would pull the plug on Brighthouse’s TV division all together. They would make all of their programming exclusive to sites such as Hulu.com, Youtube, Myspace (which Fox owns) or their individual websites such as FoxNews.com. They could even drive viewers of their shows to each shows’ respective website (GlennBeck.com, Simpsons.com, etc.).

The dilemma is in advertising. So far no one has yet figured out how to make fistfuls of dollars from online advertising. If Fox could drive its advertisers online and get the same income without having to pay the middle man they wouldn’t need Brighthouse. If Fox can pull it off, don’t be surprised to see NBC, CBS, ABC and other cable networks slowly migrating off cable television.

For Time Warner, which recently let AOL go it’s own way, their position is understandable. They have to know paying exorbitant amounts to be the middle man in the media chain is a losing venture. The money from big-money advertisers is moving to online ventures and away from the networks (see Pepsi’s decision to not air a Super Bowl commercial and divert the money to a social media campaign). From Time Warner’s point of view, there is no way they could re-coup value in a mega deal with a media distributor.

However, if Fox fails to get the same advertising dollars, it may make viewers pay for content on its sites. I personally think this won’t work, but Fox could gamble on the loyalty of its viewers and charge for each online viewing of the The Simpsons, 24, American Idol, etc. It may even choose to set up website subscriptions, such as those seen on adult sites. I could definitely see Fox offering $4.95 a month for unlimited online content.

(Side note: charging for Myspace would be the nail in the coffin for the once prosperous social media site. I guarantee having to pay would drive local bands, film makers, and other media creators from Myspace and on to more independent networking sites.)

This is a battle Brighthouse can’t win on the cable front. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if the battle shifted platforms to the Net very, very soon. If Fox were to leave Brighthouse, Time Warner does hold the trump card of Brighthouse’s internet access. Time Warner could block Fox’s websites from their millions of subscribers. This would prevent the average Brighthouse customer from having access to Fox-distributed media on any platform. Fox would definitely lose money as Brighthouse customers would have to decide where their loyalty lay.

I think we could soon see a day where customers choose their cable/internet distributor based on what content they have multi-media deals with. Of course, if unfiltered, completely neutral wi-fi access is eventually free and open as the radio spectrum is now, we would not only avoid this problem, but would see the end of cable television as we know it.

  • Share/Bookmark
Dec 19

Like many artists, writers, and creative geniuses, I have tons of unpublished material. I have several binders of ideas, notions, poems, and half-written stories. Every once in a while, I’m going to dust one off and publish it here.

Here is an interview I did with blogger, author, and longtime e-migo Jay Busbee. Jay now writes regularly for Yahoo! at their NASCAR blog, From The Marbles, and their golf blog, Devil Ball Golf.  Before blogging at Yahoo!, he was one of the many sports bloggers plugging away at independent sites throughout the web.

Back in early 2008, I sent Jay a bunch of questions about independent sports blogging, the mainstream media, and the voice of the common fan. He was kind enough to answer, and now, nearly two years later, I’ve decided to publish his answers. Sorry about that, Jay.

When did you start blogging? Why?

I started throwing some thoughts up on my own personal site around the end of 2004. Nothing special there, just a bit of ranting, reviewing, and pimping whatever I’d published at the moment. I didn’t start a sports blog until October 2006, when I launched Sports Gone South. It was the confluence of multiple events, I was at something of a career crossroads, looking for a new angle on sportswriting; I’d just discovered Deadspin; and my agent and I were discussing how I should start raising my profile and creating more of a “brand name” for myself. I’d written the same way I write now on sports blogs for years; I used to do a game-picking column in college that was the same sort of riffing, using sports as a jumping-off point for whatever I felt like ranting about. So, part of starting blogging was for fun, and part was a (theoretically) canny career move. So far, so good; Sports Gone South led to a paying gig writing Right Down Peachtree, Atlanta magazine’s Atlanta-only sports blog. (RIP RDP, ed.)

Did you have any goals going into starting a blog, or was it primarily self-serving?

The goals at the beginning were pretty amorphous – get my name out there isn’t exactly a coherent business plan, you know? But once I got rolling on it, I started seeing what was possible out there. There’s no major sports blog devoted exclusively to Southern sports, so that’s what I’m working toward. What I think we’re seeing now is more of a niche, narrowcasting sort of approach. Blogs are taking a single mission – a single sport, a single team, a single aspect of the sporting universe – and becoming the established new-media expert on that sector. I think that’s going to be the best way to distinguish yourself going for ward; generalists can just get lost in the mix.

How would describe the mainstream media’s coverage of sports prior to you starting a blog?

Top-down. Not that it has anything whatsoever to do with my blog, but the mainstream sports media, like the political media, is realizing that fans/readers aren’t idiots, and in many cases possess more expertise than the often self-proclaimed “experts”. It’s not enough to give the scores alone, but if you want to go blathering on about some topic, you’d best be sure you’ve got something to say. I think the anonymity of the Internet gives bloggers an inherent distaste for the mindless self-promotion of certain media types. It’s the logical, though nauseating, outgrowth of New Journalism, where the journalist himself affects (and, in some cases, becomes) the story. The problem is, when the journalist in question isn’t particularly interesting, or doesn’t have much to say, you’re going to see readers clamoring for a return to the story itself – which is what blogs do.

Did MSM sports coverage have any effect on your idea to start a blog?

Indirectly. I think I started it right after one of the massively overhyped Red Sox-Yankees series – it was a regular-season one, not even a playoff – and I, like most of the rest of America west of the Hudson, was saying, “Enough of this crap. It’s a good rivalry, but it’s not the ONLY rivalry.” So my initial blog tagline was, “Really, haven’t we heard enough about the Yankees and Red Sox?” The problem with MSM, as with any powerful medium, is that the medium dictates the message. A bloop single in Yankee Stadium gets infused with more drama than a game-winning three-run homer in Tropicana Field. And that’s wrong, friends, wrong on so many levels.

What do you think made sports blogging popular?

It’s the old “sports bar” motif – when you’re at a sports bar, you want to talk, you don’t want to sit and listen to someone talk AT you. You want to rant, rave, joke, whine, laugh, the whole range of emotions. Blogs let you do that, and the best of ‘em allow readers to find like-minded folks and form a mini-community that assesses sports and life without having to be told THIS IS AN IMPORTANT GAME by some outside entity. Fight the power, man!

Are you surprised at all with the growth of the sports blogging community?

Not a bit. I think it’ll only grow as non-blogger-types start to realize, hey, there’s some cool stuff on this here Internet! I’m always amazed at how few people, relatively speaking, actually read sports blogs. I get links from Deadspin or whatever, and it’s a couple thousand hits at best. Then I get a link from Sports Illustrated, and it’s SEVENTY THOUSAND hits. And even that doesn’t encompass the entire fanbase, much of which is content to watch the games alone. Once blogging becomes more of a mainstream medium, not just in sports but in all media, you’ll see even more exponential growth.

What is more important to a blogger’s success: ease of technology (publishing, voice, etc) or quality of content?

I’d actually add “voice” as a third category to that question. It’s not enough to have something good to say, it has to be stated effectively in a blogging format: fast and funny/sharp/witty. But yes, you’ve got to have a quality presentation – courier font on a white background doesn’t cut it anymore. You need the mix of pictures, video, and content to keep the attention of the masses.

In the end, though, I think you have to have quality content to go the farthest. People will call you out if you screw up stats or mischaracterize their team – try talking trash about the Kentucky Wildcats and see what happens, for instance – so you’d better know your stuff.

How important is it to capture the voice of the “common” sports fan?

Not very. Matter of fact, I don’t think there is such a thing as the “common” sports fan. Some are interested in stats, others in stories, others in rumors. I don’t think there’s this amorphous mass of fans out there with one common voice or perspective. As with any creative endeavor, it’s essential you tell your own story in your own words. Write what you like, and the money (and readers) will follow. That’s an oversimplification, of course; you could write all day long about Mesopotamian kickball if you wanted and you probably still wont get many readers. But if you try to follow trends “hey, let’s talk about how the Patriots are like Britney Spears!?” your posts are going to be dead on arrival.

Do you think blogging has changed the presentation of sports coverage by the MSM in the last 5 years? If so, how?

Absolutely. We’ve knocked athletes off their pedestals, and that’s a good thing. Take a look at the way Fox Sports presents games now – you practically want to douse yourself in holy water and bow before the icons of Favre and Jeter. But these guys are idiots just like the rest of us – probably more so than the rest of us. Of course, the end result of this idol-knocking is paparazzi, so maybe that’s not a good thing. But I don’t think as many people WORSHIP athletes anymore, and that’s a good thing.

Could you call sports blogging a “revolution”? If so, has it succeeded? What needs to be done?

Absolutely, it’s a revolution. Real-time reaction to events, the elevation of the fan, it’s all useful. The problem is that there’s still an ingrained distrust of blogging in general – some from MSM journalists who perceive a threat or don’t want to deal with the added competition, some from readers who just don’t realize the level of talent that’s out there in the blogosphere. But what you’ll see in coming years is columnists and editors who grew up reading Deadspin and blogs, and don’t see it as “the new thing” but as just another element of the sports landscape. Bloggers will get credentials to games, and other fans will realize that blogging isn’t just pajama’d freaks in their mom’s basements.

  • Share/Bookmark
preload preload preload