Not like this is new news, but every day I’m reminded more and more that traditional television (and with it, traditional advertising) is dying.

For me, it started around 2002 with Netflix, which killed any need I had for cable TV. Why pay for HBO or Showtime when I could rent The Sopranos, Six Feet Under and Sex and the City and gorge myself for hours in one sitting? The years since then have produced an avalanche of other factors. This past year, an EyeTV and an HD antenna on our roof meant that my husband and I could snag HD-quality shows off the airwaves, record them to a MacMini (hooked up to a projector) and watch them whenever we felt like it. Add ABC and NBC’s websites (and my discovery that the Firefox extension AdBlock Plus zapped ads inside the ABC episode player) and there was no reason at all to give a rip about stupid ol’ networks and their stupid ol’ commercials.

Hulu sealed the deal, allowing me instant access to shows like It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia (not to mention discovering oldies-but-goodies like The Bob Newhart Show and full-length films like Ice Age for my kid). While they have ads that are immune to the powers of AdBlock Plus, they are relatively unobtrusive and don’t require any “click to continue” nonsense. The frosting on the cake is the growing number of self-produced and online-distributed shows like 3Way and We Need Girlfriends, the latter of which has been picked up by CBS. (We can only hope it enjoys a better fate than the pile of suck called Quarterlife, which NBC picked up and then promptly dropped when it suffered worse ratings than the XFL.)

And how about the glorious day when I discovered Best Week Ever was a free podcast that I could sync to my iPhone along with TV shows I had purchased from iTunes? I haven’t experienced a boring airline flight since.

And yet, with all of that, the networks seem to be in utter denial about what’s happening. The CW made a huge gaffe this year when, in an attempt to “force” more viewers to watch Gossip Girl on the network, they decided not to make post-strike episodes available on their website. Presumably, this decision was made to get better ratings: the show was crazy popular on the CW site and iTunes, but not on the dusty old television. Surprise, surprise, pulling the full episodes from the site had almost no effect on ratings. After tasting the freedom of watching a show online whenever you felt like it, who the hell was going to sit down on the date and time the network decided and watch it on TV?!

Their decision was understandable in the sense that nobody seems to have figured out how to monetize online entertainment in the same way that they have on broadcast, and the CW presumably makes less when I buy the episode from iTunes than if I watch it on TV where they can sell ads. But how long can that last? Viewers aren’t flocking back to television; they are (like me) tossing their TVs ad snuggling up to their computers.

So, my big question — and maybe some media buyer out there can answer this for me — is why? How can this not translate into better revenues for online advertising, or some new model for monetizing the distribution of online entertainment? Especially considering how damn trackable and relatively cheap it is compared to a TV commercial? At some point, won’t the old model crumble under its own weight? And can’t we come up with something better than just aping the existing broadcast model of interrupting the show with X-second spots?

While I love to pick on the ad industry (and bite the hand that fed me: I was raised by a copywriter and a print project manager), I don’t argue that there has to be a way to pay for this entertainment. I’m willing to watch ads if I’m getting a show for free (except during Lost. Sorry, ABC.), and I’m willing to pay iTunes to have Mad Men at my fingertips. I’m not the kind of girl that has illicit late-night encounters with BitTorrent. But — all that being said — advertisers need to find a way to reach us without assaulting us (I’m looking at YOU, movie theaters! I paid for my damn seat, don’t make me watch a car commercial before the show. Or how about TBS and their ridiculous “pausing the show for an ad” trick? See, that’s what drives us into the arms of AdBlock Plus whenever we have the option!) and consumers need to be realistic about their expectations around what is free.

But, I know that it’s unlikely any of this will change. The genie is out of the bottle: I have to read ads in bathroom stalls and my neighbors are all trading pirated files on Limewire. But, it sure would be nice if we could call a truce and allow more on-demand access to entertainment while also fairly compensating the businesses and people that create it. In the meantime, I’ll just enjoy insane Nissan product placements while watching Heroes on NBC.com and wait for this all to shake out.

About ten years ago, one of the biggest issues facing interactive marketers was the proliferation of information out there. The statistic at the time was: over a million web pages were being added to the internet every day.

Isn’t that quaint?

If you ever feel like you’re being blasted by a fire hose of information, you’re not alone. On a beautiful July evening, about 200 Internet marketing professionals gathered at the International Design Center to listen to a panel of MIMA members share strategies and insights for filtering through the onslaught of RSS, e-mail newsletters, Google Alerts, juicy blogs, sweet tweets and other sources to find truly useful information, fast.

Talk about a fire hose of information. Here are a few “gulps” from my notes, to help slack your thirst for information about managing information.

• When evaluating information, look for accuracy, authority, objectivity, currency, coverage and relevance. (Alisa Coddington, Knowledge Specialist, Carmichael Lynch)
• Focus on what is important: 90% of information is garbage. (Garrick van Buren, President, Working Pathways, Inc.)
• If it is important, the information will find you. (van Buren)
• Replace your professional filter with a social filter to find valuable information faster. (van Buren)
• Use Google Desktop to aid your personal search and so you don’t have to remember where you file everything. (Greg Swan, Social Media Strategist, Weber Shandwick)
• Use RSS for reading and monitoring. (Michael Keliher, Public Relations Practice Manager, Provident Partners)
• To help simplify choices about what you pay attention to, focus on value and think about the “why.” (Keliher)
• Call the reference desk at your local library or government agencies when you’re looking for data. (Coddington)

A recurring theme was the value of using your communities and Twitter to know what to pay attention to. If the information is important enough, people will be tweeting about it and asking their communities questions about it. As Swan said: “Sharing and participation are the currency of the knowledge economy.”

Do your clients face a barrage of bafflement? Do your colleagues visualize your synergistic solutions?

(That wasn’t very funny, was it?) All I’m asking is this: Do folks understand your writing? Your proposals? Your emails? Your web content? Your white papers?

I’m sure many of you are planning to attend the upcoming MIMA seminar: Too Much Information? Surviving Data Overload. The enticing event description asks: How do you filter to find truly useful information, fast? A companion question might be this: How do you create truly useful information, fast?

Your clients need clarity. Your colleagues deserve comprehension. Here are some fun tools to help you swiftly eschew obfuscation:

Web Economy Bullshit Generator
My Larsen colleague Gordon McIntyre-Lee recently forwarded this. (Hope you don’t recognize your writing here.)

Why Business People Speak Like Idiots: A Bullfighter’s Guide
Not new, but always fresh.

Fight the Bull
Surely you’ve visited this perennial favorite. The partner website to the book above. Download free Bullfighter software. (Unless you’re a Mac user. Sigh.)

Merriam-Webster’s Open Dictionary, Business Category
Just plain fun. You can read about customerizing your products, prevealing your redesigned site, and insourcing your greenification.

Coffee mugs for daily inspiration
My favorite: “Shift my paradigm before I’ve had my morning coffee and I’ll core your competencies.”

Have additional resources? Please share.

Here’s a closing quote from Lincoln that should help keep your writing as honest as Abe himself: “He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know.”

He’s not describing you, is he?

For the third year, MIMA is partnering with Evantage Consulting and the American Marketing Association (AMA) to conduct a survey into Web Analytics usage in the Twin Cities.  We’ll then put together a report on the key findings from the survey to share with the MIMA community.

Why take the survey?

• Your input is crucial.  We want to hear from Web Analytics professionals in the Twin Cities
• We offer an incentive!  10 people will win a $25 American Express gift card and five will win a $50 gift card
• It only takes 15 – 20 minutes

The survey will close at 5 pm on Friday, July 25. 

Take the survey now.

Someone recently asked me if getting a degree in this industry is helpful and if so, if she should go for Journalism or IT (which are the two degrees she noticed that most people had). My gut reaction was, “No.”

The first reason I don’t think a degree that focuses on Interactive is necessary is because the options for such a degree are quite limited: Computer Science, Human-Computer Interaction, Web Design. That about sums it up. And if, like me (and the questioner), you’re more interested in the front-end strategy, planning, messaging and project management work, those options aren’t really relevant.

I’m not against degrees in general, but I think one is better off getting a general liberal arts education (or some other degree that thrills you intellectually) and learning what they need to know about Interactive by living it, breathing it, and doing it.

Which leads me to the second reason I don’t think an Interactive-focused degree is necessary [quoted from my post on Geek Girls]:

“I believe that to truly be successful in Interactive, you have to love it. You have to live it, breathe it, consume it, and create it. You have to enjoy doing it even before you start getting paid for it and most of what makes you good at it isn’t something you can learn from a book. I don’t think that’s necessarily true for other careers. (Accounting, for example.) But, the best Interactive people I have met — even programmers in many cases — are those who are largely self-taught. The ones who stay up late at night staring into a glowing monitor just for the love of the game. Because those same people are the ones who continue to learn and stay on top of what’s new long after dust has started collecting on the frame of their diploma. And in an industry that moves as fast as this, those are the people you want working next to you.”

So, I’m curious: am I wrong? Do you, as an Interactive professional (or client), believe that a degree is necessary to succeed in this industry? And if so, a degree in what?