I want to talk about the transformed media landscape, and what it means for anybody who has a message that they want to get out to anywhere in the world. And I want to illustrate that by telling a couple of stories about that transformation.
Želim govoriti o izmijenjenom medijskom prostoru, o tome što on znači svakome tko želi raširiti neku poruku posvuda po svijetu. I želim to objasniti ispričavši nekoliko priča o toj promjeni.
I'll start here. Last November there was a presidential election. You probably read something about it in the papers. And there was some concern that in some parts of the country there might be voter suppression. And so a plan came up to video the vote. And the idea was that individual citizens with phones capable of taking photos or making video would document their polling places, on the lookout for any kind of voter suppression techniques, and would upload this to a central place. And that this would operate as a kind of citizen observation -- that citizens would not be there just to cast individual votes, but also to help ensure the sanctity of the vote overall.
Počet ću ovdje. Prošlog studenog održani su predsjednički izbori. Vjerojatno ste čuli nešto o tome u novinama. Postojala je određena zabrinutost u nekom dijelovima zemlje da bi moglo doći do sprječavanja glasovanja. Tako je smišljen plan o snimanju glasovanja. Ideja je bila da sami građani koristeći mobitele s mogućnošću snimanja slika ili videa snime svoja glasačka mjesta, kako bi uočili bilo kakav način sprječavanja glasovanja. To bi prenijeli na središnji poslužitelj. I bilo bi to nešto poput građanskog nadgledanja. Građani ne bi bili tamo samo kako bi pojedinačno glasovali. Već i kako bi pomogli osigurati nepovredivost ukupnog glasovanja
So this is a pattern that assumes we're all in this together. What matters here isn't technical capital, it's social capital. These tools don't get socially interesting until they get technologically boring. It isn't when the shiny new tools show up that their uses start permeating society. It's when everybody is able to take them for granted. Because now that media is increasingly social, innovation can happen anywhere that people can take for granted the idea that we're all in this together.
Dakle, to je predložak koji pretpostavlja da smo u ovome svi zajedno. Ono što je važno nije tehnička vrijednost. Već društvena vrijednost. Ovi alati ne postaju društveno zanimljivi dok ne postanu tehnološki dosadni. Kada se sjajni novi alati pojave njihovo se korištenje još ne počinje širiti u društvu. Prodiru tek kada ih svi shvaćaju "zdravo za gotovo". Zbog činjenice da su danas mediji sve društveniji, inovacija se može dogoditi bilo gdje gdje ljudi prihvaćaju ideju da smo u ovome svi skupa.
And so we're starting to see a media landscape in which innovation is happening everywhere, and moving from one spot to another. That is a huge transformation. Not to put too fine a point on it, the moment we're living through -- the moment our historical generation is living through -- is the largest increase in expressive capability in human history. Now that's a big claim. I'm going to try to back it up.
I tako počinjemo uviđati medijski prostor u kojom se inovacija događa posvuda. Prelazeći s jednog mjesta na drugo. Ovo je ogromna promjena. Bez prevelike preciznosti, trenutak u kojem živimo, vrijeme koje naša povijesna generacija proživljava ima najveći porast u mogućnosti izražavanja u ljudskoj povijesti. E, to je velika tvrdnja. Pokušat ću je poduprijeti.
There are only four periods in the last 500 years where media has changed enough to qualify for the label "revolution." The first one is the famous one, the printing press: movable type, oil-based inks, that whole complex of innovations that made printing possible and turned Europe upside-down, starting in the middle of the 1400s. Then, a couple of hundred years ago, there was innovation in two-way communication, conversational media: first the telegraph, then the telephone. Slow, text-based conversations, then real-time voice based conversations. Then, about 150 years ago, there was a revolution in recorded media other than print: first photos, then recorded sound, then movies, all encoded onto physical objects. And finally, about 100 years ago, the harnessing of electromagnetic spectrum to send sound and images through the air -- radio and television. This is the media landscape as we knew it in the 20th century. This is what those of us of a certain age grew up with, and are used to.
Postoje samo četiri razdoblja u posljednjih 500 godina gdje su se mediji dovoljno promijenili da bi nosili oznaku Revolucija. Prvo je razdoblje ono čuveno, tiskarski stroj. Pomična slova, s tintom temeljenom na ulju, cijeli sustav inovacija koji je omogućio tiskanje i preokrenuo Europu naglavačke, počevši sredinom 15. stoljeća. Zatim, prije nekoliko stotina godina dogodila se inovacija u dvosmjernoj komunikaciji. Mediji za razgovor, prvo telegraf, zatim telefon. Spori, pisani razgovori, a zatim glasovni razgovori u stvarnom vremenu. Tada, prije oko 150 godina, dogodila se revolucija u snimljenim medijima osim tiskanja. Prvo fotografije, zatim snimljeni zvuk, pa filmovi, sve je to bilo zapisano u fizičkim predmetima. I konačno, prije oko 100 godina, iskorištavanje elektromagnetskog spektra za slanje zvuka i slike kroz zrak, za radio i televiziju. To je medijski prostor kakvim smo ga smatrali u 20. stoljeću. S time su neki od nas, određene starosti odrasli, i na to se navikli.
But there is a curious asymmetry here. The media that is good at creating conversations is no good at creating groups. And the media that's good at creating groups is no good at creating conversations. If you want to have a conversation in this world, you have it with one other person. If you want to address a group, you get the same message and you give it to everybody in the group, whether you're doing that with a broadcasting tower or a printing press. That was the media landscape as we had it in the twentieth century.
No, ovdje postoji zanimljiva asimetrija. Medij koji je dobar za stvaranje razgovora nije dobar za stvaranje grupa. A onaj koji je dobar za stvaranje grupa nije dobar za stvaranje razgovora. Ako želite razgovarati, na ovom svijetu, razgovarate s jednom osobom. Ako se želiti obratiti grupi, istu poruku prenesete svakome u grupi. Bilo to pomoću tornja za odašiljanje ili tiskarskog stroja. Tako je izgledao medijski prostor kojega smo imali u dvadesetom stoljeću.
And this is what changed. This thing that looks like a peacock hit a windscreen is Bill Cheswick's map of the Internet. He traces the edges of the individual networks and then color codes them. The Internet is the first medium in history that has native support for groups and conversation at the same time. Whereas the phone gave us the one-to-one pattern, and television, radio, magazines, books, gave us the one-to-many pattern, the Internet gives us the many-to-many pattern. For the first time, media is natively good at supporting these kinds of conversations. That's one of the big changes.
I to se promijenilo. Ovo što izgleda kao da je paun udario u ekran je karta Interneta Billa Cheswicka. On prati rubova pojedinih mreža i označava ih bojama. Internet je prvi medij u povijesti koji ima prirodnu potporu za grupe i razgovore u isto vrijeme. Dok nam je telefon davao predložak jedan-na-jedan, I televizija, radio, časopisi, knjige, predložak jedan-na-više, Internet nam daje predložak više-na-više. Po prvi puta jedan medij po svojoj prirodi dobro podržava obje ove vrste razgovora. To je jedna od velikih promjena.
The second big change is that, as all media gets digitized, the Internet also becomes the mode of carriage for all other media, meaning that phone calls migrate to the Internet, magazines migrate to the Internet, movies migrate to the Internet. And that means that every medium is right next door to every other medium. Put another way, media is increasingly less just a source of information, and it is increasingly more a site of coordination, because groups that see or hear or watch or listen to something can now gather around and talk to each other as well.
Druga velika promjena je da kako svi mediji postaju digitalizirani Internet postaje i način prijenosa svih drugih medija. To znači da telefonski razgovori prelaze na Internet. Časopisi prelaze na Internet. I to znači da je svaki medij odmah pored svakog drugog medija. Recimo to na drugi način, medij je sve manje i manje samo izvor informacija. A sve više i više mjesto koordinacije. Jer grupe koje nešto vide ili čuju ili gledaju ili slušaju sada mogu okupiti i također razgovarati jedni s drugima.
And the third big change is that members of the former audience, as Dan Gilmore calls them, can now also be producers and not consumers. Every time a new consumer joins this media landscape a new producer joins as well, because the same equipment -- phones, computers -- let you consume and produce. It's as if, when you bought a book, they threw in the printing press for free; it's like you had a phone that could turn into a radio if you pressed the right buttons. That is a huge change in the media landscape we're used to. And it's not just Internet or no Internet. We've had the Internet in its public form for almost 20 years now, and it's still changing as the media becomes more social. It's still changing patterns even among groups who know how to deal with the Internet well.
Treća velika promjena jest da članovi bivše publike, kako ih Dan Gilmore naziva, sada mogu biti i proizvođači, a ne samo potrošači. Svaki put kada se novi potrošač pridruži medijskom prostoru pridružen je također i novi proizvođač. Jer vam ista oprema, telefoni, računala, omogućuju i primanje i izradu. Kao kada bi vam, pri kupnji knjige, ubacili besplatno i tiskarski stroj. Kao kada bi se telefon mogao pretvoriti u radio ako stisnete prave gumbe. To je velika promjena u medijskom prostoru na kojeg smo navikli. I nije to samo pitanje postojanja Interneta. Imamo Internet, u svom javnom obliku već gotovo 20 godina. I još se mijenja kako medij postaje društveniji. Još uvijek mijenja predloške čak i u grupama koje znaja kako se dobro koristiti Internetom.
Second story. Last May, China in the Sichuan province had a terrible earthquake, 7.9 magnitude, massive destruction in a wide area, as the Richter Scale has it. And the earthquake was reported as it was happening. People were texting from their phones. They were taking photos of buildings. They were taking videos of buildings shaking. They were uploading it to QQ, China's largest Internet service. They were Twittering it. And so as the quake was happening the news was reported. And because of the social connections, Chinese students coming elsewhere, and going to school, or businesses in the rest of the world opening offices in China -- there were people listening all over the world, hearing this news. The BBC got their first wind of the Chinese quake from Twitter. Twitter announced the existence of the quake several minutes before the US Geological Survey had anything up online for anybody to read. The last time China had a quake of that magnitude it took them three months to admit that it had happened.
Druga priča, prošlog svibnja, Kina je u provinciji Sichuan doživjela strašan potres, magnitude 7.9 stupnjeva, teško razaranje šireg područja, po Richterovoj ljestvici. O potresu je izvještavano dok se događao. Ljudi su pisali SMS-ove. Snimali fotografije građevina. Snimali video zapise podrhtavanja zgrada. Slali su ih na QQ, najveću Internet uslugu u Kini. Tweetali su o tome. Kako se potres događao obavijesti su slane. I zbog društvenih veza, kineskih studenata koji se školuju drugdje, ili poslovnjaka u drugim dijelovima svijeta koji otvaraju urede u Kini. Ljudi po cijelom svijetu su slušali, slušali ove vijesti. BBC je prvi glas o potresu u Kini dobio s Twittera. Twitter je obavijestio o potresu nekoliko minuta prije nego što je Američki geološki ured imao online bilo što o tome. Kada je posljednji put u Kini bio potres takve jačine trebalo im je tri mjeseca da priznaju da se dogodio.
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
Now they might have liked to have done that here, rather than seeing these pictures go up online. But they weren't given that choice, because their own citizens beat them to the punch. Even the government learned of the earthquake from their own citizens, rather than from the Xinhua News Agency. And this stuff rippled like wildfire. For a while there the top 10 most clicked links on Twitter, the global short messaging service -- nine of the top 10 links were about the quake. People collating information, pointing people to news sources, pointing people to the US geological survey. The 10th one was kittens on a treadmill, but that's the Internet for you.
E sad, neki bi voljeli da su to mogli napraviti i sada, umjesto gledati kako se te slike pojavljuju online. No taj im izbor nije dan. Dotukli su ih njihovi vlastiti građani. Čak je i vlada doznala za potres od svojih vlastitih građana, umjesto od novinske agencije Shinhan. Ovo se raširilo kao vatra. Neko vrijeme 10 najčešće odabranih linkova na Twitteru, globalnoj usluzi za kratke poruke, 9 od 10 linkova su bili o potresu. Ljudi su skupljali informacije, upućivali na izvore vijesti, upućivali na Američki geografski ured. 10. link je bio o mačičima na spravi za vježbanje, no to je Internet.
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
But nine of the 10 in those first hours. And within half a day donation sites were up, and donations were pouring in from all around the world. This was an incredible, coordinated global response. And the Chinese then, in one of their periods of media openness, decided that they were going to let it go, that they were going to let this citizen reporting fly. And then this happened. People began to figure out, in the Sichuan Provence, that the reason so many school buildings had collapsed -- because tragically the earthquake happened during a school day -- the reason so many school buildings collapsed is that corrupt officials had taken bribes to allow those building to be built to less than code. And so they started, the citizen journalists started
No, 9 od 10 linkova u tim prvim satima. U pola dana podignute su stranice za donacije. Donacije su se slijevale iz cijelog svijeta. Bio je to nevjerojatan, koordiniran globalni odgovor. Kinezi su onda, u jednom od svojih trenutaka otvorenosti medija odlučili odustati. Da će dozvoliti da građani dojavljuju vijesti. I tada se ovo dogodilo. Ljudi su počeli shvaćati, u provinciji Sichuan, da je razlog urušavanja tako mnogo školskih zgrada, jer se, tragično, potres dogodio radnog dana, razlog zašto su se tolike školske zgrade urušile je što korumpirana vlast uzimala mito kako bi dozvolila da se ove zgrade sagrade nekvalitetno. Tako su počeli, građani novinari su počeli
reporting that as well. And there was an incredible picture. You may have seen in on the front page of the New York Times. A local official literally prostrated himself in the street, in front of these protesters, in order to get them to go away. Essentially to say, "We will do anything to placate you, just please stop protesting in public."
izvještavati i o ovome. Objavljena je jedna nevjerojatna slika. Mogli ste ju vidjeti na naslovnici New York Timesa. Lokalni dužnosnik je doslovno legao na ulicu, pred ovim prosvjednicima. Kako bi otišli. U osnovi je rekao: "Učinit ćemo sve kako bismo vas smirili samo molimo prestanite javno prosvjedovati."
But these are people who have been radicalized, because, thanks to the one child policy, they have lost everyone in their next generation. Someone who has seen the death of a single child now has nothing to lose. And so the protest kept going. And finally the Chinese cracked down. That was enough of citizen media. And so they began to arrest the protesters. They began to shut down the media that the protests were happening on.
No ti su ljudi radikalni. Jer, zahvaljujući politici "jednog djeteta" izgubili su sve u sljedećoj generaciji. Netko tko je vidio smrt jedinog djeteta sada nema što izgubiti. I tako su se prosvjedi nastavili. I konačno su se Kinezi slomili. Bilo im je na vrh glave građanskih medija. I tako su počeli uhićivati prosvjednike. Počeli su ukidati medije na kojima su se prosvjedi događali.
China is probably the most successful manager of Internet censorship in the world, using something that is widely described as the Great Firewall of China. And the Great Firewall of China is a set of observation points that assume that media is produced by professionals, it mostly comes in from the outside world, it comes in relatively sparse chunks, and it comes in relatively slowly. And because of those four characteristics they are able to filter it as it comes into the country. But like the Maginot Line, the great firewall of China was facing in the wrong direction for this challenge, because not one of those four things was true in this environment. The media was produced locally. It was produced by amateurs. It was produced quickly. And it was produced at such an incredible abundance that there was no way to filter it as it appeared. And so now the Chinese government, who for a dozen years, has quite successfully filtered the web, is now in the position of having to decide whether to allow or shut down entire services, because the transformation to amateur media is so enormous that they can't deal with it any other way.
Kina je vjerojatno najuspješniji voditelj cenzure Interneta, na svijetu, koristeći nešto što se često opisuje kao Veliki kineski vatrozid. Veliki kineski vatrozid je skup promatračkih točaka na kojima se pretpostavlja da medije prave profesionalci, da većinom dolaze iz vanjskog svijeta da dolaze relativno rijetko, i relativno sporo. I zbog te četiri karakteristike mogu ih filtrirati kako dolaze u zemlju. No kao Maginotova linija, Veliki kineski vatrozid je bio okrenut u krivom smjeru za ovaj izazov. Jer niti jedna od ove četiri stvari u ovom okruženju nije bila točna. Medije se proizvodilo lokalno. Proizvodili su ih amateri. Proizvodio se brzo. I proizvodio se tako nevjerojatno obilato da nije bilo šanse filtrirati ga kada se pojavi. I tako je kineska vlada, koja je već desetak godina, prilično uspješno filtrirala web, sada u poziciji gdje mora odabrati dozvoliti ili ukinuti cijele usluge. Zato što je transformacija u amaterski medij toliko ogromna da se s njom ne mogu nositi ni na koji način.
And in fact that is happening this week. On the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen they just, two days ago, announced that they were simply shutting down access to Twitter, because there was no way to filter it other than that. They had to turn the spigot entirely off. Now these changes don't just affect people who want to censor messages. They also affect people who want to send messages,
To se zapravo događa ovaj tjedan. Na 20. obljetnicu Tiananmena prije samo dva dana objavili su da će jednostavno ukinuti pristup Twitteru. Jer nema drugog načina filtrirati ga osim toga. Morali su potpuno zavrnuti slavinu. Takve promjene ne utječu samo na osobe koje žele cenzurirati poruke. One također utječu i na osobe koje žele slati poruke.
because this is really a transformation of the ecosystem as a whole, not just a particular strategy. The classic media problem, from the 20th century is, how does an organization have a message that they want to get out to a group of people distributed at the edges of a network. And here is the twentieth century answer. Bundle up the message. Send the same message to everybody. National message. Targeted individuals. Relatively sparse number of producers. Very expensive to do, so there is not a lot of competition. This is how you reach people. All of that is over.
Jer je to doista transformacija ekosustava u cjelini. Ne samo pojedina strategija. Klasični medijski problem, iz dvadesetog stoljeća je kako organizacija s porukom nju može poslati grupi ljudi koji se nalaze na rubovima mreže. Odgovor dvadesetog stoljeća: Zapakirajte poruku. Pošaljite istu poruku svima. Nacionalna poruka. CIljani individualci. Relativno mali broj proizvođača.. Vrlo skupo. Pa nema puno konkurencije. Tako dolazite do ljudi. Sve je to prošlo.
We are increasingly in a landscape where media is global, social, ubiquitous and cheap. Now most organizations that are trying to send messages to the outside world, to the distributed collection of the audience, are now used to this change. The audience can talk back. And that's a little freaky. But you can get used to it after a while, as people do.
Sve smo više u okruženju gdje je medij globalan. Društveni, sveprisutan i jeftin. Sada je većina organizacija koje pokušavaju poslati poruke vanjskom svijetu, raspodijeljenoj publici, navikla na ovu promjenu. Publika može odgovoriti. I to pomalo straši. No možete se naviknuti nakon nekog vremena, kako to ljudi rade.
But that's not the really crazy change that we're living in the middle of. The really crazy change is here: it's the fact that they are no longer disconnected from each other, the fact that former consumers are now producers, the fact that the audience can talk directly to one another; because there is a lot more amateurs than professionals, and because the size of the network, the complexity of the network is actually the square of the number of participants, meaning that the network, when it grows large, grows very, very large.
No to nije stvarno luda promjena usred koje živimo. Stvarno luda promjena je ova. To je činjenica da oni više nisu razdvojeni jedni od drugih. Činjenica da su mnogi potrošači sada proizvođači. Činjenica da slušatelji sada mogu izravno govoriti jedni drugima. Jer postoji mnogo više amatera nego profesionalaca. I zbog veličine mreže, složenost mreže je zapravo kvadrat broja sudionika. Što znači da mreža, kada raste, naraste jako, jako velika.
As recently at last decade, most of the media that was available for public consumption was produced by professionals. Those days are over, never to return. It is the green lines now, that are the source of the free content, which brings me to my last story. We saw some of the most imaginative use of social media during the Obama campaign.
Donedavno, do prošlog desetljeća, većinu medija koji su bili dostupni u javnosti izradili su profesionalci. Ovi su dani gotovi, nikad se neće vratiti. Zelene su linije sada izvor slobodnog sadržaja. Što me dovodi do moje zadnje priče. Vidjeli smo neke od najmaštovitijih uporaba društvenih medija tijekom Obamine kampanje.
And I don't mean most imaginative use in politics -- I mean most imaginative use ever. And one of the things Obama did, was they famously, the Obama campaign did, was they famously put up MyBarackObama.com, myBO.com And millions of citizens rushed in to participate, and to try and figure out how to help. An incredible conversation sprung up there. And then, this time last year, Obama announced that he was going to change his vote on FISA, The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He had said, in January, that he would not sign a bill that granted telecom immunity for possibly warrantless spying on American persons. By the summer, in the middle of the general campaign, He said, "I've thought about the issue more. I've changed my mind. I'm going to vote for this bill." And many of his own supporters on his own site went very publicly berserk.
Ne mislim samo najmaštovitije uporabe u politici. Mislim najmaštovitije uporabe ikad. Jedna od stvari koju je Obama napravio, jest da su slavno, Obamina kampanja je znamenito složila stranicu Moj Barak Obama točka com, myBO.com Milijuni su građana požurili sudjelovati, pokušati smisliti kako pomoći. Tamo se razvila nevjerojatna rasprava. I tada je, u ovo doba prošle godine, Obama objavio da će promijeniti svoj glas o FISA-i, Zakon o nadzoru stranih obavještajaca (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). Rekao je, u siječnju, da neće potpisati račun koji je omogućavao teleoperaterima potencijalno prisluškivanje bez naloga američkih građana. Do ljeta, usred opće kampanje, rekao je: "Razmišljao sam dodatno o ovom pitanju. Predomislio sam se. Glasovat ću za ovo." I mnogi njegovi podupiratelji su na njegovoj vlastitoj stranici javno poludjeli.
It was Senator Obama when they created it. They changed the name later. "Please get FISA right." Within days of this group being created it was the fastest growing group on myBO.com; within weeks of its being created it was the largest group. Obama had to issue a press release. He had to issue a reply. And he said essentially, "I have considered the issue. I understand where you are coming from. But having considered it all, I'm still going to vote the way I'm going to vote. But I wanted to reach out to you and say, I understand that you disagree with me, and I'm going to take my lumps on this one."
Kada su napravili stranicu, zvala se Senator Obama. Kasnije su promijenili ime. Molimo dobro odlučite o FISA-i. U par dana od osnivanja ove grupe to je bila najbrže rastuća grupa na stranici myBO.com U par tjedana od osnivanja bila je to najveća grupa na stranici. Obama je morao objaviti priopćenje za javnost. Morao je odgovoriti. I rekao je u suštini: "Razmotrio sam problem. Razumijem odakle dolazite. No nakon razmišljanja, i dalje ću glasovati onako kako sam rekao. No htio sam vam se obratiti i reći, razumijem da se ne slažete sa mnom, i primam čvoruge za ovo."
This didn't please anybody. But then a funny thing happened in the conversation. People in that group realized that Obama had never shut them down. Nobody in the Obama campaign had ever tried to hide the group or make it harder to join, to deny its existence, to delete it, to take to off the site. They had understood that their role with myBO.com was to convene their supporters but not to control their supporters.
Ovo se nikom nije svidjelo. No tada se u raspravi dogodila smiješna stvar. Ljudi u toj grupi su shvatili da ih Obama nikad nije isključio. Nitko u Obaminoj kampanji nikad nije pokušao sakriti grupu ili ju učiniti težom za pristupanje, zanijekati njeno postojanje, obrisati ju, maknuti ju sa stranice. Shvatili su da je njihova uloga na stranici myBO.com, sakupiti svoje pristaše no ne upravljati njima.
And that is the kind of discipline that it takes to make really mature use of this media. Media, the media landscape that we knew, as familiar as it was, as easy conceptually as it was to deal with the idea that professionals broadcast messages to amateurs, is increasingly slipping away. In a world where media is global, social, ubiquitous and cheap, in a world of media where the former audience are now increasingly full participants, in that world, media is less and less often about crafting a single message to be consumed by individuals. It is more and more often a way of creating an environment for convening and supporting groups.
I to je vrsta discipline koja je potrebna za doista zrelu uporabu ovog medija. Mediji, medijski prostor kojeg smo poznavali, ma kako nam bio poznat, ma kako konceptualno jednostavno bilo nositi se s idejom da profesionalci odašilju poruke amaterima, sve brže izmiče. U svijetu gdje su mediji globalni, društveni, sveprisutni i jeftini, u svijetu medija gdje su prijašnji slušatelji sada sve više punopravni sudionici, u tom svijeti, mediji su sve rjeđe i rjeđe izrada jedne poruke koju će mnogi primiti. Sve je češće i češće način stvaranja prostora za sakupljanje i podržavanje grupa.
And the choice we face, I mean anybody who has a message they want to have heard anywhere in the world, isn't whether or not that is the media environment we want to operate in. That's the media environment we've got. The question we all face now is, "How can we make best use of this media? Even though it means changing the way we've always done it." Thank you very much.
Izbor s kojim smo suočeni, mislim na sve koji imaju poruku za koju žele da se čuje svugdje u svijetu, nije je li ovo ili nije medijski prostor u kojem želimo raditi. To je medijski prostor kojeg imamo. Pitanje s kojim se svi sada suočavamo je, "Kako najbolje iskoristiti ove medije? Iako to znači promjenu načina na koji smo to oduvijek radili." Puno vam hvala.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)