a trickle down to the rest of the country with locall newspapers put on the cover of their page would reflect . what the new york times do. that s kind of what i twitter has become. twitter has become i the a1 for the nation. so even if an individual is not on twitter reading tweets, i they are absorbing news in some capacity, and that news, - and whatjournalists think is important, i and whatjournalists- are seeing, that issue trickles down to twitter. so it all trickles down, - even if you are not directly on the platform. when you say a1 you mean the front page of the new york times? i apologise. the front page of the i new york times, yes. and as we close this edition, i am interested to hear the three of you respond to vivian s point, which is really all of our discussions about how we all consume news, where we all find information, where we discuss the world we live in, all in some ways connects to twitter and connects to social media. chris from the telegraph, would you agree
documentaries and so the feeling was that it wasn t you know, if you wanted news and you cut the cord and you didn t want to pay for cable any more that this wasn t really in alternative because it really wasn t that much news on it. and help me be as clear as we can be with the terminology here. we hear analysts talking about linear tv versus streaming products. just unpack those phrases for us a little bit, please. right, so linear tvjust means traditional television the terrestrial tv, broadcast networks like abc, nbc, cbs, these are all services you get free to air, they don t cost you money. cable costs you money but it comes to a fibre optic cable into the back of your tv, whereas streaming is something you can get anywhere, you don t have to have a cable package. lots of folks historically who ve lived in new york, say, couldn t get free to air
tv and they paid the cable company to get it. so this is something that is revolutionary, streaming, the whole idea is you can cut the cord, you don t have to pay for television any more and you could buy it a la carte. so you could buy, say, cnn say for $5.99 a month. you re with us on the media show so are christen vivian. let s also bring in lauren hirsch who is a reporter at the new york ties for a long, can you help me with one question? why is it that news broadcasters are so preoccupied with streaming, why did cnn decide this was worth investing hundreds of dollars in? so for the past couple of years we ve seen media companies funnel money into streaming thinking that s the future of content. we ve seen subscriptions drop in traditional tv so therefore they are looking to where streaming is to effectively replace that. but the problem is, there is now so much competition and we don t know what people will pay for, they don t know how much, how many streaming services people will
talent from other networks, spent millions of dollars bringing these people in. all the while you had the management at discovery say, not being able to say rather, that they didn t want this service they didn t see it as viable, they didn t think it would be profitable and they wanted to wrap news into a larger bundle with news, sports, movies and entertainment and it wasn t their vision at all. help us understand what this product was while it existed. i m sitting in the us, and open up my phone on my tv, what do i get? you would get a couple of different things. it was billed as a little bit more lifestyle. it wasn t necessarily the breaking news that you would see on cnn, although they did have an element of that when there was big a news story about a guy in brooklyn who let off a smoke bomb and shot at people in the subway, cnn+ covered that. they were also doing panel shows. it was a little bit more lifestyle, there were news
it s really easy to answer that question. there were two management teams who wanted different things. warner media had wanted to launch the streaming service, they had conceptualised the idea, they d brought in all this talent from other networks, spent millions of dollars bringing these people in. all the while you had the management at discovery say, not being able to say rather, that they didn t want this service they didn t see it as viable, they didn t think it would be profitable and they wanted to wrap news into a larger bundle with news, sports, movies and entertainment and it wasn t their vision at all. help us understand what this product was well it existed. what this product was while it existed. i m sitting in the us, and open up my phone on my tv, what do i get? you would get a couple of different things. it was billed as a little bit more lifestyle.