Articles tagged “journalism”
Neighborhoods don't scale
Sunday, 1 March, 2009 — business journalism social+media
There is so much cross-pollination between starting a neighborhood site and running a small business. Jeff Jarvis posted about CUNY and the New York Times beginning a partnership for a network of hyperlocal sites. Howard Owens, formerly of Gatehouse Media, is taking over The Batavian as owner and got into an interesting argument with Jarvis. He expanded on his point of view in a full post, “VCs chasing fool’s gold in funding ‘hyperlocal’ projects that 'scale’”:
Now scale is being applied to “hyperlocal” start ups. And the meaning in this context, as I take it, is that a “hyperlocal” business needs to have the capability to expand in multiple towns and neighborhoods rapidly at a very low cost.
…
The “hyperlocal” approaches that supposedly “scale” don’t scale in one very important aspect: building new audience for community news.
Sure, they might appeal to a segment of the population that is already involved in a community, but they’re not tackling the “Bowling Alone” problem.
From the number and visibility of venture-backed, industry-supported hyperlocal flameouts, it’d be tempting to think that there isn’t money/eyeballs in being hyperlocal. Heck, the Washington Post failed to make a go of it. But it seems like all of the existing big media companies and venture capital-backed startups are trying to attack the problem the same way. Throw money at building a platform, put it in a lot of places. When it doesn’t work, it’s a failure. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a solution. Just that the way a lot of people have been trying to go about solving it isn’t working.
One of the things Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson of 37signals talk about frequently is doing only those things you absolutely have to do. Trying to instantly scale the platform is premature and distracts from learning what the business needs to work and executing on it.
I was ecstatic to read David Westphal’s piece at OJR.org, talking to various local sites and how well they’re doing:
Local news sites come in all sizes and shapes. Some are non-profits. Some aren’t trying to live off the operation. But for those who are, some survivable wages are being earned.
Tracy Record and Patrick Sand, another husband/wife team who operate West Seattle Blog, are getting revenue in the high five figures. Debbie Galant, co-owner of Baristanet, earned more from the site than she did from her free-lance writing business last year. And Bob Gough, who runs Quincy News, pockets $1,000 a week in wages from his startup that serves an Illinois community of only 40,000.
Right now, there are a lot of companies predicting doom and gloom and continuing to do exactly what they’ve done. There are also entrepreneurs who “don’t know” that they’re not supposed to succeed at providing a service and earning money where others have been before. But why are these sites succeeding?
Success for these sites looks different than it does for an established media company. They’re focused on solving a smaller problem and making it the problem they’re addressing. They’re risking the business on solving it. They’re climbing Everest by climbing Everest, not thinking about how they’re going to summit then climb K2 or the Matterhorn or Denali in the exact same way with the exact same tools and the exact same resources. They’re all mountains in the way that Raleigh, Miami, Paris, Mumbai and Houston are all cities.
Within those cities, distinct areas and boundaries. I’d pursue a site covering SoMA in San Francisco differently than I would one covering North Beach or the Sunset. In Paris, the Marais is different than the 5éme arrondissement. In Raleigh, Glenwood South isn’t North Hills or Oakwood. Sure, there are similarities, but you can’t treat them as the same thing. Neighborhoods don’t scale.
I suspect beyond the stories these sites are writing, they’re solving the advertising needs of smaller businesses, the sorts of businesses that live in smaller spaces along city blocks and next to strip mall anchor stores. These are, coincidentally, the sorts of businesses that don’t tend to buy any or much advertising at the major daily. Why not? Well, drawing on my own case, buying a print or section-specific ad at a typical newspaper would be beyond budget. I’m not going to reach the right people for my business, either. A neighborhood site is a much easier way to draw and address a specific audience. Plus, it’s far more likely I can see and talk to who’s selling me the advertising. With not a whole lot of luck, they’re probably a customer, too.
Maybe there is a way to abstract a platform and aggregate neighborhood sites, but, just as mountains have their own weather, neighborhoods are unique and not taking the time to dive into them and understand them is a mistake. The large, monolithic approach is not the workable one. There’s no rule saying there must be a way to build and sustain a larger business out of “hyperlocal” content.
Three newspapers that Twitter well
Tuesday, 10 February, 2009 — twitter journalism
Last week, I talked about flaws in how some newspapers operate on Twitter. As part of looking for counter-examples for that post, and picking up a recommendation from a coworker, I present three papers that Twitter well, in order of how well they represent how I would like a news organization to approach Twitter.
First is the Chicago Tribune’s @ColonelTribune. The Tribune apparently has what they term “unmanned feeds.” But the Colonel is where they shine. Namely, there are live people that embody the Colonel. How many, I don’t know, but that’s not important. What is important is, there’s personality. Sure, there are links to the news, but it’s in a conversational way. The Colonel feels “real.” Plus, what the Colonel chooses to link is definitely stuff people would be interested in. For instance:
A famous N. Side bakery has been closed for several health code violations. http://tr.im/fhvh
The Colonel isn’t afraid to retweet. The Colonel live tweets (as happened during President Obama’s prime-time press conference last night). The Colonel sends the reader away with links to local blogs and (as I saw today), the Sun Times.
Chase announces it will double its minimum monthly payments andcharge a $10 monthly fee for some customers. http://bit.ly/vQOX via @suntimes
Another nice thing? The Colonel will message followers with a word of thanks for a RT or via tweet of something the Colonel posted. This is supposed to be social media, and while it’s possible to get down right middle school with drama over who’s retweeting or not, it seems like news orgs default towards aloof. Right now, aloof is not the strategy to sustain the news industry. @ColonelTribune gets the balance right.
The second paper I’m highlighting is the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (disclosure applies), @startelegram. One of my coworkers, @1918, brought them to my attention a couple of days ago:
I’d like to give a shoutout to my friends @startelegram, one of the few newspapers that seems to get twitter - they don’t just dump headline [sic]
What’s to like? It’s locally focused, it leans toward things that people want to know about, like severe weather, that traditionally, newspapers seem to do their best to ignore. TV stations can go overboard with Doppler porn, but I still like knowing when and where the weather’s coming. This is ideal:
http://bit.ly/14sMt Latest on tonight’s dallas-fort worth weather: bad stuff coming between 8 and 10 pm
I also like that there’s no fear about not being “objective”:
So ARod says he did it. Does anyone in Texas really care what he says anymore? http://bit.ly/RHCr
This is what a lot of people want to see with their hometown paper, a willingness to show some emotion. Not writing about emotions in clinical terms. To have them. There’s also a tweet about some of the top stories for tomorrow. None of it’s overbearing or worked to death.
My final paper is The Oregonian, @oregonian, the first paper I recall coming across when I joined Twitter. In contrast to @ColonelTribune and @startelegram, this feed is a headline dump. But it’s smarter than your average bear. The tweets are headlines, and headlines only. They stand alone as complete tweets. @oregonian also respects followers by posting at a reasonable pace. Tweets can be separated by 20 minutes or 23 hours. That’s really a nice choice. Music wouldn’t be music without space between the notes (hat tip, Debussy).
So, I submit, when a paper wants to take Twitter seriously, these are three solid examples of what can be done.
Other reading to consider in the context of newspaper twittering:
- My friend and remote coworker, Marc Matteo, submits “Newspapers could actually try online,” in which he laments that, for many papers, there still isn’t a good online strategy.
- Rands talks about the three design decisions behind Twitter and their implications. Decision number three, with a twist: Newspapers shouldn’t get a karma boost on Twitter just for being there.
Understanding and addressing automated Twitter feed flaws
Tuesday, 3 February, 2009 — twitter journalism
It was about halftime during the Super Bowl when I saw a score, via Twitter from The Sacramento Bee:
Steelers lead 3-0 in first quarter of Super Bowl http://tinyurl.com/dxp4j7
A day or so ago, I got a flood tweets from the News & Observer, like this one:
Live Nation ticketing a rough start: If you tried to buy Jimmy Buffett tickets online when they went on sale Sat.. http://tinyurl.com/a9vwuk
What frustrates me – as a reader, not an employee – about these specific tweets, is it shows some newsrooms aren’t completely grasping Twitter’s promise. I’m frustrated as a result.
First, “breaking news” needs to be breaking. Timely and relevant. If we’re not seeing the first quarter score until halftime, I’d rather do without. Twitter can simply be informative. Links are nice, but not required. If there’s not a specific story to link to, how about just tweeting the score? If a link is a must, link to a scoreboard. Either way, don’t hold information back from Twitter because the story isn’t ready yet.
Second, please drop Twitterfeed. When a large batch of stories publishes, anyone following that Twitter account gets link-bombed. Just dumping content to Twitter misses the opportunity to build interest for stories since interesting stories get buried under an avalanche of content. But it’s worse than just that. In the N&O example, the tweets are incomplete. The tweets seem like songs ending on bad notes because they’re headline and lede pulls, not something tailored for Twitter’s format.
This isn’t to say automated feeds are all bad. They aren’t. Consider, though, limiting what gets pushed to the feed, then tailor the headlines into something tweet-worthy. There’s a balance to strike that benefits both Twitter and the regular website, since some story index pages aren’t going to have the lead paragraph, just a headline.
So, “Live Nation ticketing for Jimmy Buffet concert off to rough start,” is not only a better, web-friendly headline, it’s a complete tweet. Add a URL, and it’s golden.
Still, just rewriting headlines misses the point. Get the staff involved with the twitter account. Set up section or topic accounts. Ask questions. Answer questions. Reward readers for following the Twitter account instead of passively consuming the RSS feed. See @ColonelTribune for a hint of what a paper’s social engagement via Twitter could look like.
Pilot pwns press
Saturday, 31 January, 2009 — technological-failure journalism
Pwned by an expert
Salon’s “Ask the Pilot” columnist, and airline pilot, Patrick Smith absolutely pwns lazy coverage of U.S. Airways Flight 1549 (emphasis his):
I fail to understand how after decades of reporting on aviation incidents, the press cannot make it clear that at least two fully qualified pilots – a captain and first officer – are in the cockpit of every commercial jet. The captain is in command and ultimately responsible for the plane and its occupants, yes, but the first officer, or “copilot,” if we must, is not merely along as a backup or helpful apprentice. Tasks are split 50/50, including all hands-on “flying” duties. A copilot is at the controls for just as many takeoffs and landings as the captain, in both normal and abnormal operations, including many emergencies. (The Associated Press is habitually the worst offender in this regard.)
Following the US Airways crash there has been an outpouring of appreciation for Capt. Chesley Sullenberger. The first officer, Jeffrey Skiles, has gone mostly unmentioned (a nod here to Alan Levin at USA Today, for giving Skiles his due). Sullenberger took over the aircraft from Skiles, who was flying at the moment of the bird strike, but skill was not the issue. Rather, with both engines out, by design, the flight instruments on the first officer’s side would have failed. For all intents and purposes, Sullenberger had to take over. But regardless of whose hands were on the controls, both pilots, together, faced a serious emergency, and both needed to rise to the occasion.
Smith goes to explain what happens during a two-engine shutdown considers heroics vs. professionalism and adds context about other water landings.
A larger point: For some reason, stories seem predisposed to focus solely on single people as heros, in business or real-life. CEOs, for instance. Capt. Sully in this case. It’s lazy reporting. Sullenberger did a wonderful job, to be sure, and Smith’s critique is not aimed at him. Instead, it’s the abject failure to recognize he wasn’t the only one there.