1. Opening the Gate Expanding Local Service Through Online Content Partnerships Iowa DTV Symposium 2006

2. Paradigm Comparison #1 CharacteristicMedia 1.0Media 2.0 Aggregate usageLargeSmall Audience measureEstimatedEnumerated Audience rewardsAverage usageCumulative usage Content flowLinearComplex DistributionOne-to-manyMany-to-many Dominant craftRadio, TVR, TV, audio, video Governing paradigmScarcityAbundance Limit to contentAir timeStorage

3. Paradigm comparison #2 CharacteristicMedia 1.0Media 2.0 ModePushPull Producer brandingMarginal importGreater import Professional curationOn-the-ground5,000-foot level Program usageReal timeNon-real time Program strategyHitsLong tail Revenue per user-hrSmallLarge Role: broadcasterBundleUnbundle Role: userUseRebundle & use

4. Paradigm comparison #3 CharacteristicMedia 1.0Media 2.0 Usage adds value?NoYes User conversationNilActive User curationNilKey Value horizonOften ephemeralArchival

7. Expanded local service initiative Utilize new platforms to aggregate a repository of public service media content from stations and their partners Should be seen as part of an online aggregation strategy, including calendars and community-originated text (blogs, columns) as well as audio and video A distributed, not centralized, portal

8. Think of it as a mash-up of… WGBH.org/forum PortalWisconsin.org NashvilleIsTalking.com CETconnect.org And more…

25. Prisoners of Big Craft? Weve turned necessity into a virtue to such a degree that when abundance shows up at our doorstep,its hard to recognize as an asset. We need to think of electronic media as not just radio and television, but audio and video also.

27. Contact information Dennis L. Haarsager Associate Vice President & General Manager Educational & Public Media Washington State University haarsager@wsu.eduhaarsager@wsu.edu +1 (509) 335-6530 www.haarsager.org/contact www.technology360.com www.pspblog.orgwww.pspblog.org www.omn.orgwww.omn.org