Traditional Media Continues to Shrink

Recently I was at one of my son's college football games visiting with him and his friends. In spite of our continued yelling for our side, they lost by a pretty significant margin and I had that sense that the game was over by the third quarter. So I focused more on conversation and talked to a bright and polite young man about his career future. "So, what are you planning on doing after graduation?" "A journalist," he said, quite innocently. Whenever people tell me this, I instantly want to laugh because I assume they are joking. Unfortunately, this was a very nice kid and he was ever so serious.

Being in radio and involved in a media news website, I meet young people virtually every day who are interested in journalism and are getting degrees in such. Where are their parents when they need them? Getting a degree in journalism today is like getting a degree in computer science when I went to college in the early 1980s. The only difference is that journalism majors should know better and so should their parents.

From the information I received in a recent Revolving Door Newsletter, it appears the traffic is going in one direction when it comes to media, and that is the exit door. The newsletter reports that "the axe fell at NBC Universal with 500 layoffs underway, including 30 from its sales staff. Elsewhere, CNBC laid off as many as 55 staffers and "The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch on hiatus." We also learn that "long-anticipated cuts finally came to Viacom, with 850 losing their jobs. Some 300 of those were from MTV, and top managers won't receive salary increases... Veteran CNN correspondent Miles O'Brien will leave the network, which is shuttering its science, space, and tech unit..."

In the book publishing world, Revolving Door reports numerous senior staffers at leading publications have left and "Simon & Schuster let go 35 people, including Rick Richter, president of the publishing company's children's book division... Thomas Nelson, the world's largest Christian publisher, laid off 10 percent of its workforce. "

From the magazine sector we learn that "Time Inc. is having trouble finding volunteers to take buyouts at its New York-based magazines. People completed its layoffs, while Sports Illustrated needs to hand out 20 pink slips. Elsewhere, seven staffers at Coastal Living, part of the company's hard-hit Southern Progress Group, will be let go. Time Out New York's investors put the magazine up for auction, hoping to get $40 million. Giving the timing -- terribly economy, advertising slumping, etc. -- you have to wonder just how bad things have gotten at New York's listings bible.

The list goes on. Traditional media is in huge trouble and is not only the victim of the Internet, but of its own inherent weaknesses. Solid journalism based on information and not opinion is hard to fine. If you want someone to tell you how they think about something, ask your next door neighbor. That is exactly what millions of people are doing by reviewing the 133 million blogs available on the Internet which operate on virtually no overhead. Another challenge of the journalism profession is that those who cover the stories of the day in every genre often have no idea what they are writing about. Journalism should be a double major accompanied with something of something so that they know how to cover that issue.

Unfortunately I don't see the industry changing. Instead, I see it continuously seeking scapegoats for its demise. Instead of being a worthy profession, I am afraid it is going to continue to slide down the track of being the butt of a bad joke.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Time Magazine's 50 Best Websites

Time Magazine is the king of lists. I don't believe any other magazine enjoys ranking things more than this media giant. Recently, I stumbled on their list of the 50 best websites. One of my favorite things to do is to assess the magazine's assessment. Often I have been critical because the magazine is notorious, in my opinion for promoting political agendas. This list, however, has done a solid job of compiling a useful and interesting group of sites. The following is the top ten, but the entire list deserves consideration.

Not surprising, number 1 on the list is GasBuddy.com. 750,000 volunteers notify the website where the best prices for gasoline can be found in almost any part of the country. With gas at over $4 a gallon in most US cities, this is a very helpful service.

Howcast.com is an innovative site that makes it possible to throw away the instruction manual for just about everything. The site is humorous and uses videos instead of mere words to get the message across. This is an excellent resource. It comes in at number 2.

Number 3 brings ILikeTotallyLoveIt.com. The name irritates me, but it is makes sense when you learn about the audience. This is a social shopping website. People post photos of items they like, leave and solicit comments about them, and other wise make shopping more fun. If you like that type of thing.

Omiru.com comes in at number 4. The site's tag line is "real style for real people." Of course, virtually every style publication and site makes similar claims, but this one may be true. It actually strives to make particular (and popular) fashions a good fit for the individual user. Interesting idea.

In our mentally and emotionally challenged culture, it should be no surprise to anyone that a site called PsychCentral.com would come in so high at number 5. This site comes with excellent assessment tools to help the user begin to understand what their needs are. Self-diagnosing can be dangerous, but understanding where to start is, well, a good beginning.

Travel sites for cheap deals are common place and appreciated, but inside information on the quality of a hotel is important. That is exactly what TripKick.com provides, right down to the best floors and rooms to avoid in specific hotels. For the frequent traveler, this is a must see site. It comes in at number 6.

WikiTravel.com provides something greatly missing from most travel sites today -- currency. People want to be kept up to date on the best deals, best rentals, best hotels, etc. They are not interested in last month's or even last week's information. WikiTravel.com comes in at number 7 and may actually solve many travel problems.

Coming in at number 8 is YahooAnswers.com. This may be my only major disagreement with the list. I have always found this site to be a pool of worthless information. However, if you always wanted to casually ask for information from people you do not know, this is the place to do it.

Ever wanted a useful site in the quest for nutritional information? You might want to take a serious look at number nine, Zeer. It has detailed information on food items and, better still, the comments of others on what is worth eating and why. Who would imagine, a user friendly food site.

Another site I had a few issues with is number 10, Afrigadget.com. The site's objective is to raise awareness about "simple, sustainable inventions in Africa." The site is actually quite informative and innovative and offers an enormous amount of practical information, particularly for struggling countries. But the site is also so narrow in focus and lacks daily updates, that I don't see how it deserved to be in the top ten.

So that's Time Magazine's top ten sites. Make sure you look at the other 40 on the list. I think that several others could and should be added to the list (while others are removed). Fortunately, Time Magazine allows me to make suggestions of my own. I suggest you let them know your opinions as well.

Would you like to get a periodical email of the best of Kevin Price's political and economic content? Subscribe to the Houston Business Review at Info@HoustonBusinessShow.com.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

How Liberal is MSNBC?

MSNBC is largely considered "liberal", even "flaming liberal" in the eyes of those who describe themselves as conservative. I've noticed this for a long time and it has even showed up in its sister network's (NBC) approach to the news. However, I didn't think it reached the point that other media that is often described as liberal in their own right, would start to take notice. But MediaBistro.com has noted just such a phenomenon.

"Add the Washington Post and Time Magazine to the list of organizations recently questioning the leftward shift by MSNBC. That list also includes the New York Times, the Associated Press...oh, and the White House."

We all know the White House has been unhappy, since President Bush is the network's primary target each day. But the New York Times? The Washington Post? Time Magazine? Who would have guessed. The article continues:

Time magazine's James Poniewozik takes on Keith Olbermann following the anchor's Special Comment on Friday. "Olbermann is edging ever-closer to self-parody, or, worse, predictability," he writes. "He sounds like just another of the cable gasbags he used to be a corrective to."

Continuing: An MSNBC insider gave TVNewser another take. "MSNBC has doubled down on Keith Olbermann, but they give up a lot in doing that," our insider said. "They didn't set out to be left wing, they didn't want to be left wing. But Keith Olbermann let the freak flag fly and did huge numbers as a result. I believe there's a revolt coming."

Than there is the Washington Post: Howard Kurtz writes about what "top NBC journalists," are saying about the network.

"NBC and its cable outlet have become more integrated since MSNBC moved to the 30 Rockefeller Plaza headquarters in New York last fall, a trend accelerated by the sharing of journalistic talent during the campaign," writes Kurtz. "Some top NBC journalists say privately they are troubled by the overlapping identities."

He writes of their primary night coverage, "anchored by (Chris) Matthews, a one time Democratic operative, and Olbermann, the 'Countdown' host who recently finished one anti-Bush commentary by instructing the president to 'shut the hell up.'"

Kurtz quotes people from Ed Gillespie of the GOP to Democrat Terry McAuliffe who charge MSNBC with pro-Obama bias. NBC SVP Phil Griffin disagrees. "To call us an arm of the DNC is a joke," he says. "We have people with multiple points of view. Everyone is getting a little thin-skinned. We argue and debate every topic."

This writer contends that those arguments are being done by journalists who are defending positions against the Matthews and Olbermanns out there with views that they don't actually maintain. That is a tough task to say the least. MSNBC is quickly becoming one of the most liberal networks on television and it is over flowing into the editorial views of NBC. That is costing that network's anchor (Brian Williams) in ratings. I agree with Time Magazine, if Olbermann keeps this up, we will be turning to the Daily Show for serious content.

According to recent surveys on marketing, most advertising attracts sellers (others who want you to buy more ads) and not buyers. Do you want to know why? Email info@HoustonBusinessShow.com and put "marketing audio" in the subject line and we will get it to you.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Time Magazine Rates Top 100 Influential

Time Magazine likes to rank. They rank events, books, people, and more. This past week they ranked the top 100 most influential. Sadly, I failed to make the list...again. None the less there are several interesting characters that made the list and it makes for interesting reading.

The list is too long to go into here, so pick up the magazine or visit the website. Here's a quick preview of the categories and notables:

Leaders and Revolutionaries

The Dalai Lama, Vladimir Putin, and the US Presidential candidates lead the list. What was funny to me about the list is that virtually all of these "revolutionaires" are anything but revolutionary. They tend to be very establishment indeed.

Heroes and Pioneers

Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie (no, I'm not joking), Oprah Winfrey, Oscar Pistorius lead this list. Many meet Hollywood's odd criteria of heroic, but Oscar is definitely worthy for the list. I do believe Oprah is a pioneer and has revolutionized media.

Scientists and Thinkers

Michael Bloomberg, Craig Venter, and Jill Bolte Taylor were the top three. I actually liked the section better than mosts. Time actually looked for serious thinkers and not merely the easiest names to draw from. Sure, they had their politically correct choices, but there were also some heady people on this list.

Artists and Entertainers

Lorne Michaels, Miley Cyrus, and Robert Downey, Jr. lead this list. I found this disappointing. Downey has largely been a disaster for years -- a brilliant and talented disaster -- but a disaster none the less. Lorne Michaels of Saturday Night Live has stumbled on a good year with the elections -- his first in years (if not decades), but the 100 most influential? Right.

Builders and Titans

Indra Nooyi, Ali al-Naimi, and Rupert Murdoch are the tops of this list and many on here (Murdoch is an exception) are people you haven't heard of before. Why? According to Time and other major media, the US has begun to decline in influence.

Check out the list, it is interesting reading. I would love to hear from others who have views on this list.

According to recent surveys on marketing, most advertising attracts sellers (others who want you to buy more ads) and not buyers. Do you want to know why? Email info@HoustonBusinessShow.com and put "marketing audio" in the subject line and we will get it to you.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at HoustonBusinessShow.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Time Magazine's Best Lists: Worst Business Deals

I have been summarizing my thoughts on Time Magazine's Best Lists over the last several weeks and hadn't even touched their business lists. Until now. I found the magazine's Worst Business Deals" very interesting.

* The Blackstone Group going public. It looked hot after years of some rather amazing deals, but lost 38 percent of its value in no time after going public. In my experience, VC firms are the epitome of feast and famine. It isn't the kind of place one puts the family nest egg in. However, you can't count these guys out yet. The stock market is a long term game. It is only a bad deal if you cash in from the early highs.

* DaimlerChrysler pays to unload Chrysler. After an amazing array of mathematic antics, Daimler actually paid $2 billion to unload the company to Cerberus. With mathematic geniuses like this, is there any question as to why Daimler was going broke?

* Microsoft overpays for Facebook. First it was MySpace and Murdoch, then it was Google and YouTube. Microsoft simply had to get into the social networking phenomenon. The one it bought a stake in was Facebook for $240 million. The deal gives Facebook an implied value of $17 million, but is only expected to make $30 million a year. Time Magazine fears it looks like AOL a few years ago. I agree.

* KKR and Goldman Sach's pull the plug on Harman Industries International. Time notes that "Private equity shop Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group's private equity unit pulled out of their $8 billion offer to buy high-end audio equipment manufacturer Harman Industries International, claiming a "material adverse change" in Harman's business. Harman's stock plummeted more than 20%." Harsh indeed!

* Bank of America dumps $2 billion dollars into Countrywide. "Better make that $1 billion — at least that's what B of A's investment was worth as of December 1. Bank of America thought it had picked an opportune time in August to invest in Countrywide's mortgage machine, but the mortgage mess hadn't bottomed out yet." Bank of America was already limping along due to its troubling approach to providing credit to its clients. This situation only makes matters worse.

Some of these stories are not as entertaining or as sexy as some of the others covered, but their implications are far reaching financially. And they are far reaching to investors, customers, and obviously the employees

Time Magazine's Best Lists: Commercials

In my recent "list of lists" on Time Magazine's "Best" series, I have been pretty critical. I have to admit though, I did like some of their choices for commercials in 2007.

On the upside for commercials, I love their choice of the David Letterman and Oprah Winfree "love fest" while watching TV together. The two have had a much publicized chilling relationship for years and to get them together made for an eye catching and humorous ad.

The "Impossible is Nothing" ad for Adidas made you laugh (when you saw the cute, little soccer player), made you cry (when you understood the challenges the subject had gone through), and made you proud (when you read how that person over came such). Great stuff!
One ad campaign that I love, but didn't get much air time, was Gatorade's "Thief" campaign. It is funny, smart, and memorable. A must see.

American Express' "Tina Fey" examines the numerous challenge facing a business woman, any of which could be devastating and how refreshing it was that someone rescued her from one without her having to break a sweat.

On the down side, they didn't include any of the great Geico conspiracy ads (like the one on the Flintstones) or any of the Cavemen ads that birthed a TV show (which died quickly, but still, leading to a TV show is impressive!). This is because Time Magazine tries to be some what "high brow" in the way it approaches things, I must conclude.

But overall, I was pleased with Time's choices in this category. I will be reviewing magazine covers in a future post.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Receive that free ezine by clicking here.

Time Magazine's Best Lists: The Top Bad Choices, Nonfiction Books

I've had plenty to say about Time's choices of religious stories for 2007 and am now going to look at a couple of its choices for nonfiction books.

It's number one choice, The World Without Us (by Alan Weisman), actually makes the case that the planet would be better off without humans. It is the typical environmental extremism discredited by the mainstream of society, with a more sophisticated writing style. The message is the same. According to Weisman, we need to leave. I wonder if he would be the first to volunter to leave?

Then there is Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA (by Tim Weiner). Another in the untold thousands of books trashing US intelligence. I've reviewed several such books on the topic and this is no more impressive than the others. When you read such you almost conclude that we would be better off without the resources such agencies provide. Such critics of the agency offer few suggestions on how to make it better. We need intelligence, develop something better than the CIA and don't merely be a critic.

There are a few choices that I liked and saw their value (especially Steve Martin's Born Standing Up: A Comic's Life). But the obvious political agenda in its other choices and incredibly overtly liberal agenda, made this list difficult to stomach.

Time Magazine's Best Lists: The Top Bad Choices, Religious Stories

I like to consider myself fairly positive. I like to think I look at a glass as half full versus half empty. But I really disliked Time Magazines "Best Lists". They were smug, sometimes anti-American, and hostile to traditional values. This post will be about the bad choices because my only problem will be where to stop. In fact, there are so many, the negative will take a few more posts. It will be far more difficult to find some good choices to write about, which I will try to do in the future.

The top ten worst? Where do I start? The religious section struck me as particularly disturbing. Here's the worst, in my opinion, of their best:

* Mother Teresa's "crisis" of faith. She wrote about how she wished she could had felt God's presence more, Time interprets this as doubting her faith. This woman put her faith to action for decades and allowed her head to rule rather than a heart saddened by the poverty she witnessed daily. Quite a leap on Time's part indeed!

* The "greening" of Evangelicalism. The impression you get from reading Time is that churches throughout the US are passionately proselytizing in the pursuit of a better environment. The near religious fervor behind Global Warming has overflowed into Christian churches, we are told. I go to church and am something of a student of what is going on in church culture. I'm surprised to find the "reach" described by Time. Furthermore, the hodge podge category included criticism of evangelicals for failing to support Sen. Sam Brownback because he converted to Catholicism. Confused? Join the club. By the way, I have watched this 2008 race closely and had no idea Brownback was Catholic. I assumed voters didn't support him for the same reason as me -- he didn't have a prayer.

* The "ROAR" of atheist Books. According to Time, atheism is hot. Every dinner party, every cocktail party, and every casual conversations includes discussions about books such as "Letter to a Christian Nation" and "God is Not Great." I guess I need to get out more often! I admit, I live in the Bible Belt, but I like to think I'm well read on what's going on outside of my neighborhood. This phenomenon is new to me and seems to almost support an agenda of the magazine.

* The trials of New Life Church. A single congregation and its personal drama is a top 10 religious story of 2007? Muslim religious leaders supporting democratic efforts in Iraq at the risk of death isn't on this list, but the falling of an evangelical leader (Ted Haggard) is? The same church was the recent victim of a gunman who killed two of it members. Very sad. leave these people alone, and get real about the choices.

* The Creation Museum opens. I found this particularly offensive and shows the magazine's agenda. It points out that the new institution has had huge numbers of visitors, but "reaffirms the scientific validity of the Flintstones." So much for objective media. Time doesn't believe that evolution is a theory (but is a "fact") and finds the fact that many Christians believe the planet was created by God and only around 6,000 years ago, ridiculous. Besides being bad journalism, the whoe approach to the article is impolite.

My next review will focus on the news stories. This will likely be a multi-part article on the bad side alone and I am afraid I will have little to say as far as good stories. We will have to see.

Kevin Price is the Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650). He is also Publisher of the Houston Business Review, which is available at no cost each week.

Time Magazine's Person of the Year

It's that time of the year again. The period of the year in which Time Magazine chooses its person of the year. It isn't always the person who has done the most good, but the one that has had the biggest impact, right or wrong. Sometimes it isn't even a person, with a computer winning one year and everyone winning last year.

This year's list is a little more conventional (in the order of the most popular):

J.K. Rowling

Al Gore

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Condolezza Rice

Steve Jobs

General David Petraeus

Vladimir Putin

Hu Jintao

In typical, smug, Time fashion, the list is made up of people whom the media elite believes are worthy of the "Person of the Year" title. Rowling, the author of one of the biggest selling books of all time. Al Gore the crowned king of nature. Ahmadinejad, the man most likely to get attention and terrorize his neighbors. Vladimir Putin, the dictator that won't go away.

There are a few that I think clearly make sense. Steve Jobs, certainly an entrepreneurial powerhouse. General David Petraeus, the man who has single handedly changed the debate on the war of Iraq. Hu Jintao, a man has transformed the Chinese economy and society. I have to eliminate Jobs because, although he continues to reinvent himself and his business in profound ways. I simply don't see his contribution as "Person of the Year" in scope. I think Jintao and Petraeus clearly qualify. They have both changed the world. But Time Magazine is an US Magazine and I'm an American, so guess who I voted for in Time's survey?

Petraeus has not only change the war in Iraq, but will possibly change the Presidential race of 2008 and US policy for years to come. Petraeus has become so successful that he is now forcing Democrats (who have staked their future on defeat) to come across as though they are running against the troops. Petraeus could change the political landscape for years to come.

Creating the New Media

The Internet has turned the world upside down. Brick and mortar has been rapidly replaced by click and portal. People have huge businesses without a building and the hottest TV networks are online.

For example, YouTube wasn't just another "website", but was the first new major network of the 21st century. Clever websites are not purchased by companies like Google for over $1.6 billion. A completely new media platform that has the convenience of the web and the visual qualities of TV apparently are.

The changes going on through the Internet are becoming an obsession of mine, something I discuss on my radio show (see video above), write about in this blog, and even think about when I'm alone (while looking at websites that fuel this interest).

Adding to this Internet debate is a website I recently stumbled on called Brightcove.com. The purpose of the site is to help people and businesses to create online TV networks of their own. Their client list is impressive, including A&E and CBS News (broadcast and cable), The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal (newspapers), as well as Time and Prevention (magazines). However, the site's value isn't limited to companies in the media, but to any company trying to develop creative ways to attract and keep customers.

What is most interesting about Brightcove is that you don't have to be a mega corporation to create your own online network. Instead, they offer options that allows small businesses to have the platform at no cost and share revenue for advertisements that they can run on the site they give you (with plenty of room for additional inventory). This makes it possible to have a very powerful media platform with minimal investment.

In addition, the site offers several lengthy articles on how to make the most of this impressive tool. I've spent hours on the site and I suggest you spend time there too.

Kevin Price is Host of the Houston Business Show (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and is Publisher of the Houston Business Review.

WebProNews Internet Winners

WebProNews is weighing in on the 8 biggest Internet winners for 06, and I found the list most interesting and something others might wish to read. I like the list and will only add a few edits. I encourage everyone to go to WebProNews and sign up for their newsletter, it is one of my favorite sources. I tell you how they won me over, great headlines in the subject line works every time. Here's their list. What other winners and losers would you add?

1. Google. Every year for Google has been a breakout year for the eight-year-old company, but 2006 was a blockbuster. Besides adding user-generated video phenom YouTube to its roster for $1.65 billion in stock, Google remained a favorite of Wall Street, with stock catapulting over $500 per share. That spike was more than enough to cover the cost of purchasing YouTube. And then they moved in with NASA.

I couldn't agree more. Google has moved from a site, to a verb (in searches, thus googling), to a legend.

2. YouTube. If Google was a winner just for acquiring YouTube, then YouTube founders Chad Hurley and Steven Chen, who created a site and flipped it for major moolah in just a year and a half, without even demonstrating how the site could turn a profit, are the biggest table scrap winners of the year. They still run their company and still got those stock certificates.

YouTube may be the first major television network for the 21st Century. What better place for it to be than online?

3. Broadband. Dialup Internet access has become akin to having outdoor plumbing. In the US, broadband access hit nearly 80 percent of the population. Because people no longer had to begin downloading a large file and then go to dinner while it finished, they spent more time actually enjoying video and audio content on the Web.

Broadband may be number 1, because YouTube and many interactive websites needed this technology to increase the Web's relevance. Without broadband, their would be very little market for dynamic content, in my opinion.

4. Lawyers. Happy days are here again for the corporate attorney. As Internet companies become Web giants, the window for lawsuit, valid or not, frivolous or not, gets a lot bigger. Google settles with advertisers angry over click fraud for $90 million - that's $60 million in advertising credit for the advertiser and $30 million cash for the attorneys who won that case. Yahoo's lawyers are so good, all they had to say was 'sorry about that' and write a check for $5 million to the complainant's attorneys.

Since I'm not a big fan of lawyers, I'll refrain from commenting much, but they have clearly been huge beneficiaries of the legal struggles related to the Web.

5. Social Media. For the end user it's been all about friends' lists, blogs, wikis, amateur videos, vlogging, podcasting, and instant messaging. From the consumer end, it's been a communication bonanza and the official creation of the citizen media. Ideally, the elite and powerful only provide the means by which the people communicate, not control the communication itself, and the people are eating up. And for the professional media, if we hear the words "MySpace" or "YouTube" one more time...

This is obviously huge and as important as the "social" part, is the participatory part, in my estimation. It is being able to influence media that has made such sites so huge.

6. Podcasting. The word "podcast" may have been Oxford's word of the year in 2005, but nobody really knew anything about it until 2006. Now organizations of all types - newspapers, corporations, educational institutions, radio stations, kids - have started their own virtual radio stations. Though Apple made threats to those audacious enough to use the term "podcast," a trademark infringement Apple said, all it took was a tongue-in-cheek one-dollar check to Apple head Steve Jobs to get official approval to podcast at will.

This, too, may be a little low on the list. Podcasting is creating a revolution that is striking fear in the heart of traditional media. People are looking for real, uncensored, and candid media; that typically cannot be done in a government regulated world of media. Traditional media, beware.

7. The Man. In all his incarnations, in government, media, or corporate America,The Man came out far ahead of the rest, even if he were scratched and bruised on the way. The G-Man, and his DOJ minions, strong-armed all the major search engines for their search data and got it, even from Google. Phones were tapped, records were seized, and online gambling, except that which is preferred by The Man, was banned. In China, The Man again forced Google to alter its search results to match the imposed cultural hegemony.

The government certainly was a big winner when it comes to the Internet in 2006, but in the top 8? I doubt it. I personally would put Rupert Murdoch in this spot for his ability to understand the power of the Internet and to transform his massive media empire into a responsive and dynamic media machine. This is being done through his very strategic Internet purchases.

8. The Proletariat. However, The Man hasn't always won this year. Though the telecommunications industry (one of The Man's most powerful front organizations) had Congress wrapped around its green finger, there were enough grass roots to forestall any legislation without meaningful Net Neutrality protections. With a massive Republican defeat in Washington, Net Neutrality has a fighting chance. When AOL tried to impose the equivalent of an email tax, the people revolted and AOL was forced to reconsider. When Britain proposed a blogger code of conduct, again the proletariat told The Man where to shove it. When TV wasn't as entertaining, when news wasn't as neutral or biased as it needed to be, when radio was too censored, and movies were far too polished, the people took the media into their own hands, which makes The Man very, very nervous.

I agree and so does Time Magazine which has called the Web contributor the "Person of the Year." That would be you and me! The world of the media is changing daily (maybe even hourly). Some, like Murdoch, are adapting and over time his traditional media will become a giant support to his Web media (just watch and see). Others are simply dead in the water, like the canal boat industry (no pun intended) that underestimated the power of trains, many in traditional media are still trying to charge for online content or are refusing to make dynamic media available (e.g., videos). Watch many traditional media go on the auction block and sell for cheap in the next few years.

This is a great list, but I would love your comments on this year's winners and losers. I would also like to know which companies or individuals you think will win big in '07.