Singer has already served 100 hours of community service.
Variety Struggles to Meet the Future
More layoffs at Variety; trade to charge for some online content.
Related
Keywords
Slideshow
Pictures from inside and outside the late pop star's Holmby Hills home, including shots of the bedroom where paramedics tried to resuscitate him, a mannequin bartender and a bloody shirt hanging in his closet. See more at RadarOnline.
In an interview following his promotion to editor, Gray told TheWrap he was not sure which direction he'd be taking Variety.com, which has lost audience in the past year.
"If I knew the answer to that, I’d be the richest man in world," he told TheWrap. "I’ll have meetings with Neil (Stiles) and Brian Gott, the publisher. But it’ll be an evolution, rather than a revolution.”
For his part, Stiles insisted that he and Gray do have a plan to keep the paper in business -- beginning with making Daily Variety, Weekly Variety and especially Variety.com more distinct. Variety.com -- like many sites -- has lost subscribers because much of its content is available for free.
“News online isn’t going to cut it. You can’t make money from ad-based news,” Stiles said. “The weekly and the daily need to define their own space, their own reason to exist. Most publishers are to some extent putting what is in print on the web. It has to be more than that. It has to differentiate itself.”
He added, “We have a hard-to-get to audience. They’re a very, very valuable audience,” he continued. “So, why would you offer low-end clicks per thousand? It’s not in the context of what they do for a living. It’s a very traditional targeted circulation model.”
Robert Dowling, former editor-in-chief and publisher of the Reporter, told TheWrap that Variety’s plan to put necessary industry tools behind a pay wall on the website is an excellent one. But, he emphasized, the company also should be targeting technology companies as potential advertisers rather than relying on studios as their main source of advertising.
“Advertising has taken a nose dive, but there are still billions of advertising dollars out there. It’s up to those who have creativity to go out and get it,” said Dowling, who consults and regularly writes about the industry on his blog, Hollywood -- It’s Not What You Think.
“I think covering those companies and getting them to spend money are two different things. What are the strategies for going after some of these companies? Maybe it’s gong to take time and different approaches. These are companies that want to be part of entertainment -- how do you get them to participate?”
“It could be the end of the trade, but it doesn’t have to be,” Dowling said. “That would be a terrible thing for the business.”
Stiles said that Variety has had content-sharing partnerships and sponsorship with MSN and Yahoo!, but they are not targeting technology companies as potential advertisers.
“We could get them to advertise, but I don’t know what they’d get out of it other than vicarious relationship with the industry and some kind of consumer traffic -- but that’s not really us,” Stiles said. “It wouldn’t replace the studios.”
“Variety has been successful for the length of time it has because it didn’t stay with vaudeville and silent movies.
Comments
Jimmy Says
Good article Lauren...Variety's problem is that they just regurgitate what they're given by their industry sources.free games
Izabella Says
Puhleeze Luis. You ever read Weekly Variety? That entire paper is smart analysis from Variety writers. And columnists like Brian Lowry aren't exactly known for regurgitating company lines.
Thank you by admin
mirc
mirc
Turkçe mirc
mirc indir
baqqins Says
chat
chat
muhabbet
chat siteleri
chat siteleri sohbet siteleri
kameralı sohbet
M Says
God they want to charge for their content? First off its not that great. Secondly, you can find the same content in several other places. As a former employee I know they are just setting themselves up for failure. They wast SOO much money in various ways but they whine and complain about not showing a profit. They think that laying off employees is best for the company but they need to look a little more internally at how they run things. There are so many ways they could cut costs but they only look at salaries. The management there is a bunch of idiots and and are destined for failure. Wanna start a pool on how long they will stay afloat? :)
rockyc Says
What a prick. He admits that the mag is still making profits but not as much, so they are "trying to take advantage by restructuring.” Yeah. Renew my sub, Neil.
Done with DV Says
After DV raised its online digital sub price from $14.95/month to $28.99/month, I decided that I could do without. And guess what? I find that I've been managing quite nicely, thanks. As a member of ATAS, I can get a discount, but I'm just not that interested. I can find out whatever I need to know from surfing other sites. DV's problem is that they're just not as relevant as they used to be, if they ever were.
JonathanT Says
Charging for tools that allow industry professionals to do their job is not a new idea: Hollywood 2000, IFILMpro. It didn't work then when users were willing to pay for content, so odds are it won't work now. Yes, there will be some companies/studios that will pay for certain tools and maybe Variety can bring in around 10 million (and that is a stretch) to access those resources. But the money companies pay for those tools does not come out of an ad budget so what will the sales reps over there do all day long? Variety has historically been a sales and marketing organization with the bulk of it's revenue coming from ADVERTISING. A page in Variety is around $20,000. Are they planning on charging $20,000 for access to the Variety.com tools? That sounds like supplemental revenue not something to base a business on. Might want to rethink that strategy...... or be content with a much smaller, less significant, and far less profitable organization. Time to trade in those Mercedes for a sporty Kia Soul.
maybe clueless Says
Maybe I'm clueless as you say. But I think it goes a bit deeper than that. Yes, I used to read Weekly Variety some years ago. It seemed heavily skewed toward broadway and international distribution, things I really don't care about. Like it or not, that was my impression as a reader. I stopped spending the time on it for those reasons....perhaps a disenchanted reader? If it's changed since then, that wasn't promoted in daily variety in any way that lured back "lost" readers like myself. If the company can't promote itself effectively, that's survival of the fittest in the informational world, not ignorance on the part of the consumer....
Clueless Luis Says
Puhleeze Luis. You ever read Weekly Variety? That entire paper is smart analysis from Variety writers. And columnists like Brian Lowry aren't exactly known for regurgitating company lines.
luis Says
Good article Lauren...Variety's problem is that they just regurgitate what they're given by their industry sources. It's a common problem in the run-of-the-mill reporting in the entertainment industry. People now are getting used to serious analysis and questioning of the sources, especially in the political arena and they like it. There's no reason why it can't take place in our industry. What's exciting about newer ventures like Wrap.com is they seem to recognize this and show signs of letting it evolve within the context of their format...keep it up, and thanks....
NEW COMMENT