Time Magazine vs Facebook

Time Magazine just announced Mark Zuckerberg as Person of the Year for 2010.

Excellent choice in my opinion.

Zuckerberg built a company from scratch that now serves a half billion people worldwide.

But what really got me thinking is how the two media properties - Time Magazine and Facebook – are so different.

One is in decline. The other is on top of the world.

When I was growing up, Time Magazine was relevant. We subscribed at home and I read it every week from the age of about 9. People talked about Time Magazine articles at school and at work. I even cut out the cover of each issue for about a decade and saved them. The magazine was thick and meaty with tons of ads.

Where is Time Magazine now?

As media tied to rigid production cycles decline—morning papers, evening newscasts, and weekly newsmagazines—real-time media grow audiences and profits.

What's more, at a time when news outlets across the United States were shrinking dramatically, upstart media companies focused on real-time like TMZ grow from zero to $25 million in revenues between 2005 and 2008.

Why do upstarts like TMZ, Politico, and Bloomberg now beat the likes of Time Magazine, People magazine, and the Washington Post? At a time when Americans are consuming unprecedented volumes of news and information online, why did more than 15,000 people across the United States lose their newspaper jobs in 2009?

I would argue that focusing on real time is critical to achieving a sustainable business model in media.

Facebook understands real time.

Zuckerberg built Facebook on instant status updates. You can see what's going on with your friends right now.

So why can't incumbent media companies like Time make the jump to real time?

My own view is that these organizations are burdened by cultural habits deeply ingrained by their manufacturing processes, by the news cycles they follow. For newspapers it's the daily print deadline. For TV news, it's the prime time broadcast. For the weeklies like Time, production cycles are even longer.

When the opportunity to move online arose, for these organizations it was an afterthought. And because online was an afterthought it did not force the core culture to reinvent itself.

Huge advantage flows from delivering in real-time content that satisfies intensely focused public curiosity.

Meanwhile, companies that started from scratch with a real-time mind-set (like Facebook) continue to grow.

It's not just the media business.

Across the economy, people are finding success by understanding the power of now. The power of real time is at work in your business, too.

Are you operating in real-time like Facebook? Or slowly plodding along like Time Magazine?

Much more on this topic here.

Comments

[Bill Gluth]

Right on, David, Mark Zuckerberg does deserve it. He built an amazing platform that has changed the world in so many ways.

When you compare Facebook to Time magazine today, there is quite a difference. Real time is beating plodding time every time.

Thought provoking post and just another example of how real time marketing and PR has emerged in the world.

[David Meerman Scott]

Thanks Bill. And did you notice that I managed to get this post out within about 2 hours of the Time announcement? It would have been faster had I been in my office to see the news earlier. I just love real time.

[KateNonymous]

My take is that Time would do better if it focused on what its medium can do well--long-term analysis--rather than on current news.

"Insight takes Time." See, there's even an easy tagline.

[Knowalex81.blogspot.com]

You know what is interesting to me, is that as new technology begins to emerge from simple people, Big Corporate Companies do not refuse to Real Time Media. Although, they jump into Social Media, they do not know how to use it properly. I believe that you have to step out of your box and think like a visionary! Thats what Mark Zuckerberg did. Fascinating story by the way.

[Mark - Life Coach]

Today, unlike in the past facilities, we are expecting to be able to select what we want to read. And many would like to rise their voice, to be able to contribute content and opinions. However, social media sites are just micro-blogging platforms which can act as referrals to the sources of various news links. And these news links sometimes may not have detailed history of the actual topic which can sometimes shift our thoughts to look into other media, like TV or News Pappers.

[Cindy Fahnestock Schafer aka Ira Mency]

I agree. Instead of Time as in real time it's Time Stands Still Magazine. It is amazing that Zuckerman did what he did, at his age, and how the world embraced it. Same with Etsy, kids getting together and making a handmade site and look at it now. One can only wonder if Time's readership interest may go up as a result of them putting Zuckerman's mug on the cover. After all, isn't that uncanny, once upon a Time you were something if you were in or on that cover. Now it's they who should be thanful.

BTW just got your New Rules of Marketing and PR book, and can't put it down. Wish I would have found you a long time ago.

[David Frawley]

Really keen observation of a completely ironic moment. Do you think the folks at Time see the irony? We see the futile attempts by Time and others to "adapt" an extinct medium. Today, I abandoned an article in boston.com when I was required to register in order to read the 2nd page of a 2 page article. Are you kidding me?

[David Meerman Scott]

Thanks for jumping in Kate, Mark, Cindy.

David -- I wish someone from Time would comment.

[Russ Jefferys]

Interesting. I think the two can happily co-exist, as alluded to in other comments.
The way I digest news/information I suspect is fairly typical nowadays.
Twitter, FB, RSS feeds etc all provide timely snippets of info that help to pique an interest - but I couldn't give up subscriptions to weekly or monthly magazines or stop buying weekend newspapers for when I want to immerse myself in the detail.
There's definitely a time for real-time, but I'll always find time for Time.

[mark allen roberts]

Another great post,

Far too many once leaders start focusing on their needs, growing their business, and lose their sensitivity to the needs and problems of their buyers. This opens up opportunities for others who stay in Real Time like facebook.

Mark Allen Roberts

[Rosanne Gain]

Always enjoy your posts, and this one was particularly timely. We are working with an economic development organization on their 5 year plan and how to communicate the message that the new economy requires evolving and being agile. You are right: thinking in real-time is not just for the media - it also applies to businesses and the organizations that help them grow.

[Stella]

Another great post, David.

Facebook is a proof that sustainable business success can only be achieved when an organisation understands the needs of its customers and involves the customers to fill their need.
One-time wonder organisations including some Development organisations that are too steoreotyped on their "gobbledygook" (I got that from you BTW) reign and fade.
Time Magazine is one of my favorite magazines and I look forward to seeing them fuse their offline news with the changes around how people now love to consume information online.
It's all left for all of us to learn and use a thing or two from Facebook - Mark deserves the award.

[LaRae]

There are all sorts of irony here. We're talking about Time because we do so at the end of every year when the "person of the year" is announced. Traditional -- and new -- media all carried the story. Regarding Facebook, I just don't have time to keep up with it. And many of my college students are telling me they're losing interest in the site -- partly because "adults" are joining in. I still like Time ... when I have the time.

[Derya Yilmaz]

thank you for ur posting. it is useful for me.

[Jdahline]

I disagree with you on this one. While Facebook is cool, relevant and changing the web, I believe Time should have picked Julian Assange. I'll reserve my opinions of WikiLeaks and Assange as they are irrelevant to this argument, but he has made such a larger impact in the world of news than Zuckerberg. Remember, this isn't an "award" on "who did something good or great" it's about the person's impact (positive or negative) on the world. Noone has done anything like what Assange has done.

[David Meerman Scott]

Jdahline - Excellent point on Julian Assange. He certainly stirred it up this year!

Rosanne - 5 year plans are necessary. But make sure that those you are working with can drop everything when the time to act is now.

Russ, Stella, LaRae - Thanks. I'd say it is not an either / or but rather a both / and.

[Extenze]

When you compare Facebook to Time magazine today, there is quite a difference. Real time is beating plodding time every time.

[Pablo Edwards]

Sometimes it is the President and sometimes it is the guy with all of the real power. Obvious choice in a down year.