Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Seriously. No one likes paying for things. How is this news? Nuts...
the thing about twitter really annoyed me. do these teenagers not know how to add each other? i'm guessing having zero interest in current affairs (judging from the fact that they also don't read newspapers) and topical matters means that they would have nothing to 'tweet' about.
i'm not sure why the ramblings of one 15-year old are being listened to. For example, I think CDs have continued selling for the past ten or so years mostly because of the people buying them are generally more monied and much older.
I think it's probably of more use to those who've left school. After all, you can get contracts including internet for free that aren't that much if you're earning a wage and at that point twitter and Facebook become useful to you. So I can't even see why that's anything to do with this.
Teenagers 20 years ago didn't really buy a great deal did they? I don't remember having a great deal of pocket money and so buying music or even one game was a big commitment so you always copied/borrowed stuff.
Clearly spending power has changed a lot now: the money you give your kids for lunch would probably buy an album, but that doesn't mean we need that market.
and that social networking esp.twitter is primarily a 'young' thing which isn't at all true...and that's why it's revealatory that teenagers (this one kid and his friends) say they don't actually like it or use it.
i had zero money to buy stuff as a teenager and pretty much copied everything/borrowed it from the library/only heard it on the radio.
but the kid that wrote this - he probably can afford to get cds, i reckon, he's writing for the ft aged 15! - and maybe the fact that he can afford to get them and yet chooses to download is more worrying. i suppose the market isn't needed anymore, but if there's a general downturn in people buying cds, then every part of the market becomes more important.
Hands up, I download stuff or accept free stuff from friends I could afford to pay for if I can justify it to myself. With music it's, "I wouldn't have bought it anyway," otherwise I do buy the CD; with software it's similarly that I would have found a way round it otherwise but why bother?
As to Twitter, it was started by techies for techie things and has become bigger from that angle, I think.
(it's not an 'expert', it's a knobby intern that I find it bizarre that someone as big as Morgan Stanley are using the opinions of) says that kids today are using their XBoxes or whatever to stay in touch with their friends rather than calling or texting them.
I hope all these companies invest all their money in this twerp's ideas and end up losing all their money.
I guess it's just the same as using Skype/MSN, isn't it? Some must use it.
'"We've had dozens and dozens of fund managers, and several CEOs, e-mailing and calling all day." He said the note had generated five or six times more responses than the team's usual research.'
This shouldn't be surprising, really - the kind of people who rise to the top of these companies tend to be those kids in school who could've afforded better than Diadora sneakers, but saw no need. Still, it's always amazing how out of touch industry leaders are. That report seems to contain information that any of these guys could've got if they'd just taken the time to chat to one of their kids about something more than what they did that day at school.
(And also, Twitter exclusively seems to be used by what some might refer to as the 'media classes', so it's not really any kind of revelation that teenagers, like normal people, don't really give a damn about it.)
of why the financial sector is so royally fucked.
"The US investment bank's European media analysts asked Matthew Robson, an intern from a London school, to write a report on teenagers' likes and dislikes, which made the Financial Times' front page today."
This is exactly what I'd do if I was in a fast-moving, high pressure job and someone lumbered me with some executive's snot-noted tit of a son for a week.
"We've had dozens and dozens of fund managers, and several CEOs, e-mailing and calling all day." He said the note had generated five or six times more responses than the team's usual research.
His colleague, Julien Rossi, added: "It's an interesting starting point for debate."
Translation: "It's entirely worthless".
"The rapid surge of interest in social networking and messaging sites has prompted speculation that sites such as Twitter or Facebook could be taken over."
That sounds ominous. By who, the government?
"Teenagers do not use Twitter," he wrote. "Most have signed up to the service, but then just leave it as they realise that they are not going to update it (mostly because texting Twitter uses up credit, and they would rather text friends with that credit). They realise that no one is viewing their profile, so their tweets are pointless."
Sure, Tweets are pointless, but you can use Twitter over the internet, so they're free as well. Doing even the most cursory research on Twitter reveals this fact.
"He warned that traditional media – television, radio and newspapers – are losing ground."
1999 called. It wants it's stunning revelation back.
"No teenager Robson knew reads a newspaper regularly since..."
They can't read.
"His peers are also put off by intrusive advertising so they prefer listening to advert-free music on websites such as Last.fm to traditional radio."
Is this the same Last.fm where you eventually have to start paying if you want to keep listening to the free music?
"Teens see adverts on websites - pop ups, banner ads - as "extremely annoying and pointless," Robson said. However, "most teenagers enjoy and support viral marketing, as often it creates humorous and interesting content".
Making one statement and contradicting himself in the next would be funny in itself. But extra points for style here - 'banner ads are annoying'. Yes, okay they are - hence your support for a number of sites that use them. 'Banner ads are pointless' - hence your support for sites that use them... to remain in profitable service. Then there's the fact that with few exceptions, all the major internet concerns offering free services that have emerged in the last few years have survived due in large part to their advertising.
"He stressed that his peers were "very reluctant" to pay for music..."
Teenagers who are in full time education and therefore without high-paying jobs do not have as much disposable income as the rest of the nation. You win the NO SHIT! Award.
"Downloading films off the internet is not popular as the films are usually bad quality and have to be watched on a small computer screen and there is a risk of viruses, Robson said."
The sparkling DVD quality version of In The Loop that I watched on my big TV through an Xbox would beg to differ. But then he's probably still watching Pokemon or some shit.
I wish this guy a long and sparkling career in high finance - the sector he has shown he's most suited to.
But we've learned that we need to pay for things. Yes, it can be frustrating not to be able to buy anything you want, but frustration is a part of life you're normally forced to deal with aged 3.
Now, we have new generations used to think they can have everything for free and able not to live with frustration, which might become a BIG problem in a few years.