Archief voor september 2008 | Maandelijkse archief pagina

Bloggers

State of the Blogosphere / 2008

http://www.technorati.com/blogging/state-of-the-blogosphere/

Global Snapshot of Bloggers

Demographics U.S. Bloggers
(N=550)
European Bloggers
(N=350)
Asian Bloggers
(N=173)
Male 57% 73% 73%
Age
18-34 years old 42% 48% 73%
35+ 58% 52% 27%
Single 26% 31% 57%
Employed full-time 56% 53% 45%
Household income >$75,000 51% 34% 9%
College graduate 74% 67% 69%
Average blogging tenure (months) 35 33 30
Median Annual Investment $80 $15 $30
Median Annual Revenue $200 $200 $120
% Blogs with advertising 52% 50% 60%
Average Monthly Unique Visitors 18,000 24,000 26,000

Segment Snapshot of Bloggers

Demographics Personal
(N=1015)
Corporate
(N=156)
Professional
(N=590)
With Advertising
(N=695)
No Advertising
(N=595)
Male 64% 70% 72% 66% 66%
Age
18-34 years old 52% 45% 48% 53% 45%
35+ 48% 55% 52% 47% 55%
Single 36% 24% 31% 34% 34%
Employed full-time 52% 51% 55% 49% 56%
Household income>$75k 37% 49% 42% 40% 37%
College graduate 70% 74% 74% 69% 72%
Average blogging tenure (months) 35 35 38 35 33
Median Annual Investment $100 $200 $150 $100 0
Median Annual Revenue $120 $250 $300 $200 0
% Blogs with Advertising 53% 64% 59% 100% 0%
Average Monthly Unique Visitors 12,000 39,000 44,000 46,000 4,000

Global Bloggers by Gender

Demographics Female
(N=438)
Male
(N=852)
Personal Blog 83% 76%
Professional Blog 38% 50%
Age
18-24 years old 9% 15%
25+ 91% 85%
Single 29% 36%
Employed full-time 44% 56%
Median Annual Investment $30 $60
Median Annual Revenue $100 $200
% Blogs with advertising 53% 54%
Sell Through a Blog ad Network* 16% 7%
Have Affiliate ads* 41% 32%
Have Contextual ads* 61% 73%

* Among those with advertising on their blogs

Loon naar werken

Op de foto enkele van onze eerstejaars die hun propedeuse in 1 jaar gehaald hebben.Ook vanuit hier van harte gefeliciteerd !

Dank voor alle steun van ons onvolprezen secretariaat bij de uitreiking. Op de foto Petra Verhoeven.

De eerste MEMuitzending van het jaar

In de pics de studenten die de eerste uitzending van het jaar mogelijk maakten.

Geweldig resultaat en er volgt snel een link met de uitzending.

Swype

Technology never stops. Interesting video this. If the commentary is to much; there are shorter versions on Youtube

Media Innovation Awards

Interessante lijst van concepten.

Er kan nog gestemd worden maar ik denk dat het een must is voor iedere student om hier goed naar te kijken. Wie weet sta je er over 2 jaar ook bij

http://www.innovation-awards.nl/

Google cuts data retention after EU privacy warning

From the EUobserver by  LEIGH PHILLIPS

Following complaints by EU officials about threats to privacy, global search engine giant Google has moved to reduce the amount of time the company holds on to data about what users have searched for.

On Tuesday (9 September), Google announced that it would cut the length of time it retains search data from 18 months to nine.

Google has made the changes to all its search sites worldwide
The announcement is the company’s second such reduction. Google originally maintained such records indefinitely, but limited data retention to 18 months in 2007 in the wake of initial privacy concerns.

The latest reduction still does not meet the European Commission’s preferences however, although the commission has not yet issued an official reaction.

In March, the European Commission’s data protection watchdog recommended that search engines not be permitted to hold on to personal data after the end of six months.

After an extensive inquiry into data retention, the commission’s advisory body on data protection had said in a report: “Search engine providers must delete or irreversibly anonymise personal data once they no longer serve the specified and legitimate purpose they were collected for.”

Search engines collect information from every search made using their service, as well as the address of the computer – the ‘IP address’ – that has made a particular search. This combined data, or search history, is a rich mine of user information, which can be tracked and sometimes combined with other data from third parties.

Google, for its part, said it is happy to allay privacy concerns, but there is a trade-off with quality of service, the company argued.

“While we’re glad that this will bring some additional improvement in privacy, we’re also concerned about the potential loss of security, quality, and innovation that may result from having less data,” Peter Fleisher, the company’s global privacy lawyer wrote on the Official Google Blog.

“As the period prior to anonymisation gets shorter, the added privacy benefits are less significant and the utility lost from the data grows.”

Google’s “Suggest” application, which predicts possible search terms as user types, making suggestions based on the letters that have already been entered, will also be tweaked. Currently, the company keeps track of two percent of the data from such searches, but this will now be completely erased after 24 hours.

In another example of European standards being adhered to beyond the EU’s borders, Google is applying the changes to all its search websites worldwide, not just to its European versions.

Just for fun

New possibilities; Iband

Difficult times ahead for the papers

A couple of months ago I saw an advert on Amazon for a device called Kindle. I cannot buy it here in Holland but in our library they have an Iliad and I immediately fell for it.

The article in the NY Times gives an insight into this development. Can’t wait till we get more competition in this market

Click here to read the whole story: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/technology/08ink.html?partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

Its all about the money

On Chris Andersons blog (the longtail) I found this article on 14 free businessmodels for our sector. A good read and maybe some food for thoughts. Also have a look at the paper mentioned here Apart from an interesting overview on copyright it also gives some more background information on the models.

Hal Varian: 14 Free business models

I had a great interview today with Google’s economist-in-residence Hal Varian on the economics of free. He pointed me to a  http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/Papers/2004/copying-and-copyright.pdf paper he wrote on the changing economics of content and copyright in a digital world. It includes 14 business models that allow content creators to make money even if they cannot stop the content from being distributed for free. Here they are:

“Most information is born digital and that digital information is typically very easy to copy and distribute, it is conceivable that copyright laws may become almost impossible to enforce. Are there ways for sellers to support themselves in such an environment? It is worth considering some of the options. Here is a brief list of business models that might work in a world without effective copyright.

Make original cheaper than copy. This is basically the limit pricing model described earlier. If there is a transaction cost for a copy-a direct cost of copying, an inconvenience cost, or the copy is inferior to the original in some way-then the seller can set the price low enough that it is not attractive to copy.

Make copy more expensive than original. The “cost of copying” is partially under the control of the seller, who could use a “digital rights management system,” some anticopying technology, or threats of legal action which would increase the cost of copying and, therefore, increase the price that it could charge for its product.

Sell physical complements. When you buy a physical CD you get liner notes, photos, and so on. Perhaps you could get a poster, a membership in a fan club, a lottery ticket, a free T-shirt, as well. These items might not be available to someone who simply downloaded an illicit copy of a song.

Sell information complements. One can give away the product (e.g., Red Hat Linux) and sell support contracts. One can give away a cheap, low-powered version of some software and sell a high-powered version.

Subscriptions. In this case, consumers purchases the information as a bundle over time, with the motivation presumably being convenience and perhaps timeliness of the information delivery. Even if all back issues are (eventually) posted online, the value of timely availability of current issues is sufficient to support production costs.

Sell personalized version. One can sell a highly personalized version of a product so that copies made available to others would not be valuable. Imagine, for example, a personalized newspaper with only the items that you would wish to read. Those with different tastes may not find such a newspaper attractive. Selling works with digital fingerprints (encoding the identity of the purchaser) is an extreme form of this. (Playboy has allegedly put digital fingerprints in online images.)

Advertise yourself. A downloaded song can be an advertisement for a personal appearance. Similarly, an online textbook (particularly if it is inconvenient to use online) can be an advertisement for a physical copy. There are many examples of materials that are freely published on the Internet that are also available in various physical forms for a fee, such as US Government publications (e.g., The 9/11 Commission Report, or the National Academy of Sciences reports.

Advertise other things. Broadcast TV and radio give away content in order to sell advertisements. Similarly, most magazines and newspapers use the per copy price to cover printing and distribution, while editorial costs are covered by advertising. Advertising is particularly valuable when it is closely tied to information about prospective buyers, so personalization can be quite important. In an extreme form, the advertisement can be completely integrated into the content via product placement.

Monitoring. ASCAP monitors the playing of music in public places, collects a flat fee, which it then divvies up among its members. The shares are determined by a statistical algorithm. The Copyright Clearance Center uses a similar system for photocopying-a flat fee based on an initial period of statistical monitoring.

Site licenses. An organization can pay for all of its members to have preferred access to some particular kinds of content. University site licenses to JSTOR content, Elsevier content, or Microsoft software are examples. This is particularly relevant when there are strong network effects from adopting a common standard, such as in the Microsoft example.

Media tax. This a tax on some physical good that is complementary to the information product (i.e., audio tape, video tape, CDs, TVs, hard drives, etc.) The proceeds from this tax are used to compensate producers of content. For example, the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 imposes a media tax of 3 percent of the tape price.

Ransom. Allow potential readers to bid for content. If the sum of the bids is sufficiently high, the information content is provided. Various mechanisms for provision of public goods could be used, such as the celebrated Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism. This could be used in conjunction with the subscription model. For example, Stephen King offered installments of his book The Plant on his web site. At one point he indicated he would continue positing installments if the number of payments received divided by the number of downloads from his site exceeded 75.6 percent. His experiment did not succeed, perhaps due to the poorly chosen incentive scheme.

Pure public provision. Artists and other creators of intellectual property are paid by the state, financed out of general revenues. This is not so different from public universities where research and publication is considered integral to the job.

Prizes, awards and commissions. Wealthy individuals, businesses or countries could commission works. The patronage system achieved some notable results in Europe for several centuries. The National Science Foundation or the National Endowment for the Humanities are examples of modern day state agencies that fund creative works using prizelike systems.”

Breaking news

Uit de speech van voorzitter Robert Veenstra bij de opening van het academisch jaar op Stenden…

En de naam is Stenden University Berlin.

Met Stenden University Berlin zetten we een volgende stap in het realiseren van onze ambities. Een sterk en internationaal merk in het hoger onderwijs met een nieuw concept.

Stenden University Berlin richt zich op academisch onderwijs, hoogwaardig wetenschappelijk onderzoek en kennisoverdracht. Dat past goed in onze strategie en verhoogt de kwaliteit van het onderwijs.
We ontwikkelen een zelfstandige onderzoekspraktijk met relevantie voor de beroepspraktijk of de beroepsopleiding.
De universiteit in Berlijn biedt met ingang van 2009 vijf wetenschappelijke master programma-s aan: International Communication Management, International Leisure and Tourism Management, International Service Industry Management. International Logistic Management, International Higher Education Management. De eerste drie gaan in het voorjaar van 2009 van start, de laatste twee in het najaar van 2009.

Door het bijzondere onderwijsconcept Leren op afstand is het mogelijk een internationale doelgroep te bereiken. Dit onderwijsconcept maakt deelname mogelijk van studenten uit alle delen van de wereld.

De eerste studenten worden in april 2009 verwacht.

Op de foto’s de ondertekening

Volgende Pagina »