Do newspapers have 6 more months?
By Steve Outing on Nov 15, 2008 in Business models
After 50 newspaper company CEOs met behind closed doors at the American Press Institute on Thursday for their “Crisis Summit,” I was tempted to comment, but wanted to wait to see what would come out of the meeting. Would some participants write what transpired that day? The API staff did publish this summary, but it’s pretty thin on detail. There was this at the end, under the heading “Next”:
“Participants agreed to reconvene in six months, and to explore additional collaboration. Some spoke of joint investment in research and development of both technologies and products, others of more formal means of sharing information.”
Well, I wasn’t the only person taken aback by that statement. On his News After Newspapers blog, Martin Langeveld, who recently retired after a long career in newspaper publishing, wrote what I too was thinking in “Busted Flat In Reston“:
“Six months? What are they thinking? They’ve laid off more than 10,000 people in the last six months — what will be left six months from now? They need to launch a Manhattan project to blow up their industry and start over. Now, not six months from now.”
Langeveld is right. The industry’s leaders keep putting off drastic change and hoping that incremental change will do the job. It won’t reset the trajectory to upward and it hasn’t so far.
The API staff reports that turnaround specialist James Shein, who addressed the 50 CEOs and who had researched the basic financials of the public companies represented at the summit, “concluded that as a whole the industry is at or approaching full-blown crisis stage, though individual companies are in various phases on the continuum. And he is pessimistic about their ability to halt their fall without outside help.”
I’m still eager to hear from some of the API summit’s participants (full list was published by E&P); perhaps there’s more to come out of Thursday’s meeting that’s not so discouraging. But from what we know so far, this still looks like an industry in denial about how much it must change, with many leaders whose heads are still high on Shein’s crisis curve (below) while their enterprises are much further down.
 |
So, 50 newspaper CEOs, is there more to the story of what went on behind those closed doors? Because from outside, it’s not looking promising that you’re going to lead a reversal to the slide down that nasty-looking graph. If all that was accomplished at the Crisis Summit was to get everyone to accept that the problem really is big and agree to tackle the how in 6 months, that’s clearly not enough.
on 
on 
On Nov 15, 2008, camccune
said:
Looks like U.S. newspaper chains have a lot in common with U.S. auto companies. Both misjudged the rate and depth of change in consumer behavior. They thought they could keep “milking” their “cash cows” a while longer. They were wrong.
On Nov 17, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
I think the newspapers are all about to go online. In fact, I have received word that The Knoxville News Sentinel is headed that direction. This could be false news, but it comes from a reliable source. This is good for us folks who have spent a lot of time in the internet industry. It also indicates safety for editors. Content developers, different in style from copy writers will be hired either as consultants, or they will replace the writers. The good companies, however, will send their writers to school to learn about content development. Internet marketing specialists, such as myself and several of those I know, will have plenty of jobs and I think these newspapers will downsize tremendously in the production department and liquidate their machinery and possibly lease out some of their commercial space or possibly liquidate that as well. That’s what I see happening which in the end would be good for people in my industry looking for a job, but not so good for the economy, as it will require less of a force to handle an online publication than it would print. I think this will be good for the green movement however. We shall see.
Jesse Olive
President/Sensible Business Solutions
Owner/Sensible Marketing Services
http://www.sensiblemarketingservices.com
865.585.7459
On Nov 17, 2008, Robert MacMillan
said:
We jumped in on this one too. Twice.
http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2008/11/14/newspapers-not-out-of-the-wood-yet/
http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2008/11/07/when-the-going-gets-tough-newspapers-clam-up/
On Nov 17, 2008, Glenn Puit
said:
I worked in the mainstream newspaper business for 14 years. I loved it, and I love all the people at the paper I worked at.
However, I now work for an online non profit that performs journalism as a public service, and it is quite successful with a broad reach. I hate to say it, but the only solution I see is to stop printing newspapers completely, go completely online, and publish meaningful, in depth journalism that you can’t get anywhere else. I’m not sure that will ever happen with most of the big papers because the profit margins simply aren’t there. Chasing the daily stories is a dead formula. It was hard for me to come to terms with it until I started working for the online operation. I get it now, and I say that with great pain.
I’m hoping things work out for all the great, hardworking people in the newspaper industry.
On Nov 17, 2008, allen
said:
As one of the participants in the API session noted, it is only a cyclical problem, so why worry. When the economy recovers, newspapers will recover. We’ve seen this before.
On Nov 17, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
Allen,
I completely disagree. News was already shifting to online before all of this started to happen. People are subscribing less because of the accessibility to the same news online and the ability to find alternative perspectives. It has been talked about quite a bit that CEOs of many companies have gotten too comfortable (GM with the big gas guzzlers) and too out of tune with the consumer. Either a shift has to happen, or these companies will surely perish, and those that get with the times will prevail at the least. The thing that is cyclical is the stock market. Some industries are affected by that, but others have much deeper seeded issues and the complacency of these companies is a partial contribution to the state of the economy.
Jesse Olive
President/Sensible Business Solutions
Owner/Sensible Marketing Services
http://www.sensiblemarketingservices.com
865.585.7459
On Nov 17, 2008, BailoutMistake
said:
@allen You are being facetious right? Classified income is almost gone – most people under 25 don’t buy a newspaper… ever. Many of the rest of us are doing much the same. I’m not sure where the market for this ‘recovery’ is going to appear.
On Nov 17, 2008, Dave Winer
said:
And maybe at some point before they shut the whole news industry down they’ll let independent bloggers into their process so we can get some ideas into their ecosystem. It’s time to think about degrading gracefully, passing the baton to amateurs to do what the pros used to do, and not in a condescending way, do it as if our civilization depended on doing it well.
These people are only thinking about themselves, they need to start thinking about the function they perform. That’s what I’ve been thinking about all the time blogging has been booting up. They think our contribution is over, that they’ve usurped blogging. This is wrong — they’re going down, and it’s terrible, but we need to be left with a news system after the collapse.
On Nov 17, 2008, tom mangan
said:
There is still no business online … newspaper websites have zero content acquisition costs because they get everything free from the newsroom.
Factor in actual content costs plus ads that pay 10 cents on the dollar compared to print and you have the most drastic change of all: insolvency and liquidation.
On Nov 17, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
If I understand Langeveld’s “Manhatten Project” analogy, the atomic bomb that can be dropped to win the war.
It’s a good analogy in that it exposes what I think the wrong thinking. The war can’t be won with a big blast. It’s an everyday thing, with the troops on the ground given missions to go after individual targets, time and again, until the war is won. There is not even going to be a big battle, much less an atomic bomb. Today newspaper publisher must deploy their troops carefully, moving their people in the field into each community, house to house in some cases, securing the market.
Enough of that analogy. I’ll use another. Langeveld and many others in the newspaper biz are looking for what we in the online world call a “killer app.” I will say this to that: Don’t even try. They are going to invent another package like email or even a Google. That is not their biz.
What the newspapers have is a powerful, powerful brand. In my way of thinking a brand reflects trust and trust comes from offering competence, integrity and caring. For all of the ills, newspapers have trust and most all are working hard maintain it. That’s building the brand.
Now, how to exploit this brand? (“Exploit” is not a nice word, but it the right word. The publishers have got be aggressive.)
And, so while disagreeing wit the Manhatten Project analogy, I’ll say that Leageveld and you both are right on with the need to move fast. (And, for those of us who have worked on the edit side of the biz, that’s a weird thing to say about newspapers.)
Reuters’s MacMillan posted the list of recommendations, saying they didn’t sound like anything new, but noting that they did sound right. I agree. They sound very, very right. Here they are:
* Act like an entrepreneur; stop thinking first about why a new approach won’t work.
* Create a portfolio of initiatives; recognize that some will fail and kill those quickly.
* Don’t wait for every data point before taking action. “Ready, fire, aim” should be the operating principle, Shein said.
* Use downsizing as a tool when necessary to achieve a larger strategy, not simply as a cost-cutting goal.
* Figure out how to leverage core competencies into new directions and new niches.
* Be honest with employees, and get ideas from those on the front lines.
* Don’t sit and cower and weep about your problems. Inspire.
* Collaborate with outside entities that can bring expertise or resources.
* Pay attention to, and leverage, the brand.
In the past entrepreneurs like me who offered small money-making products have had a tough time getting attention for many of the reasons outlined above.
There is no single killer app. But there are a lot of little niffy ideas that brought together under a powerful brand that could build an audience. It might work, kind of like having comics, news, editorials, puzzles, want ads, recipes, …..
On Nov 17, 2008, Mark
said:
Maybe if they stop the liberal bias, newspapers would recover.
On Nov 17, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
Charles Batchelor,
My thinking exactly. I was just at breakfast, well a few hours ago, and was discussing this blog post. I wish I were in touch with a CEO of a major newspaper. I could make them a fortune, with our line of thinking.
Jesse Olive
President/Sensible Business Solutions
Owner/Sensible Marketing Services
http://www.sensiblemarketingservices.com
865.585.7459
On Nov 17, 2008, Solitude
said:
If only the slide rule industry had dropped an atomic bomb of change in how they sold and promoted slide rules…they could have prevented their replacement by calculators.
Or maybe their product was just inferior in the eyes of most consumers.
Same principle here.
On Nov 17, 2008, Steve Outing
said:
Mark: The liberal bias argument is BS. If that were the cause for newspapers’ troubles, then we’d see conservative newspapers doing just great, eh? The simple answer is that it’s a structural change in media, and newspaper leadership hasn’t been able to respond adequately. Then add a recession to speed things up into what’s looking like a death spiral.
On Nov 17, 2008, bigyaz
said:
Hey Jesse: How about just discussing the issue, instead of a constant promotion of your little business?
On Nov 17, 2008, Tumblemoose
said:
Allen,
Are you serious? You can’t really believe that. Newspapers have been in a downward spiral now for a while.
Here’s my own perspective:
There are two problems and I don’t believe any newspaper will be able to stay the same course and still be able to solve either of them.
The first is that rather than even attempting to keep a sense of objectivity, many newspapers insist on keeping their editorial slant. I refuse to read our local paper even if it’s in the Doctor’s waiting room because their slant is so liberal and biased, it’s almost illegal. (Or should be).
Second: One word, folks. Craigslist. Why on earth would I pay $150 for five lines for four days with no picture when I can go to Craigslist, post it with pictures and sell it, probably the same day?
I believe newspapers are heading the way of the horse and buggy.
Cheers
George
On Nov 17, 2008, Gianni
said:
I too think that the liberal bias story is BS; we in Europe have exactly the same situation, only worse because of market fragmentation; tycoons such as Murdoch and Berlusconi can easily dominate swaths of the media industry and when they decide to enter politics, we must hope that online media are a viable source of independent information.
Notice I didn’t say unbiased: I, like a bunch of other people, am intelligent enough to read two sides of a story and make up my own mind…
On Nov 17, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
First of all, my post had more to do with the issue than your “little” wize crack bigyaz. In fact, I don’t recall promoting my business at all with exception to my signature. Of course, I am going to take advantage of certain aspects of blogging, but I have great interest in this topic and have been adding this article everywhere. My point was I think I could help people. I’m not talking about marketing. But now, I AM OFF TOPIC. So, thanks for the distraction. To get back to the point, I really think “Charles Batchelor” and I share the same thought process. Liquidation and downsize for shifting and future growth. Utilize capital for acquisitions, partnerships and new ventures. Maintain throughout the process, preserving the brand. Utilize the brand to give competitive edge or to draw credibility for such ventures.
In response to publications being liberal, I think that depends on where you are from. Knoxville News Sentinel was a relatively conservative paper, but they acquire Metro Pulse which is an extremely liberal publication. They maintained the integrity of both brands as far as their target audiences are concerned. I know the topic at hand is editorial slants, but to me, that is just an example of the many exceptions the decision makers of these publications will have to make when moving forward with trying new things. Not only will they need to maintain their own brand’s integrity, but the integrity of the brands they work with. It’s a challenge, but as I said it was done here very successfully. I think I’m being redundant so… I will leave it there.
Jesse Olive
President/Sensible Business Solutions
Owner/Sensible Marketing Services
http://www.sensiblemarketingservices.com
865.585.7459
On Nov 17, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
“Maintain throughout the process” left out the word integrity.
On Nov 17, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
It’s fun to see here a marketing person such as “Jesse Olive” look at the liberal/conservative/objective discussion. He’s got it right–it’s a matter of hitting your target market.
But, the remark about bias is important, only I’d call it “tone” or “focus.” And it’s a tough, tough call. Most media firms are developing several different channels, each with different focus or tone or bias. I think it the only way to go. I’ll miss the “newspaper” that “everyone” read and, boy, the local newspaper companies sure miss being “the” place to reach a local market.
But, back to the publishers: If you can’t make it being the one place with one product, be several places with many products. Because it’s still about pulling together a large share of the market. This is nothing new, but with the web (and print) it’s more important than ever.
Tie it together. So create a lot of small “products” build a big market,.. so a soccer Mom moves from something weird such as WuduPlz.com to read about the movie stars, then from there reads about the school board…and the “newspapers” control them all, putting their brand on all of them.
(Still, my marketing friends have to be careful about this “branding” talk in the media biz. As I learned in my first class in J-school in the 1970s, people remember the information, but they don’t remember the source–that’s basic media theory. It’s why ads work. So, “newspapers” have GOT to have the services and information their readers want and need, not blow about being The Daily Bugle.)
On Nov 17, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
Ah, I just (tried to) read Chuck Peter’s (CEO of the Gazette Co. in Cedar Rapids, Iowa) live blog of the API meeting (see link on e&p’s blog). A strange read, but I got this:
Newspapers need to become a “connection utility”
That makes sense. (Of course, that fits with my biz model, so take that with a grain of salt. But, that doesn’t mean I’m wrong.)
It is very interesting how ISPs like Comcast and Verizon are trying to get into the “content” business while the newspapers are trying to get into the “connection utility” biz.
But, they’re both right. And newspaper should have an edge.
“Connection utility” sounds so much nicer a lot of other things people are saying. And it links up with that old that old idea of convergence we used to talk about. Remember convergence?
On Nov 17, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
Yup, Verizon has been marketing their network for a while. Network equals connectivity.
On Nov 17, 2008, Donna Barrett
said:
I am one of the CEO participants and an executive officer of API. The API report got it wrong. No newspaper executive in the room suggested that we wait six months to meet again. When someone said we should have a timely follow-up, the facilitator said, “Like in six months?” and was quickly told by the participants that it needed to be much sooner than that. There are other problems with the report. It is a poor reflection of the event, which I believe was over-hyped from the beginning. The forum was a constructive dialog between newspaper executives, period. This is all anyone should have realistically expected to accomplish in seven hours.
On Nov 17, 2008, Bill Densmore
said:
The Donald W. Reynolds Journalism Institute is kicking off The Information Valet Project with a convening Dec. 3-5 in Columbia, Mo. It’s just the sort of blow-up-the-industry solution that’s need — a complete change of perspective away from a focus on a product — the newspaper — and to a new relationship with users. For more information see: http://www.ivpblueprint.org
On Nov 17, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
I’m not trying to sound like a jerk, but I would think a lot more could be accomplished in 7 hours. No definitive decisions, but much more than that. A low rate of production are issues I have always had with the corporate atmosphere. Of course, that means more jobs, but a corporation needs to operate as efficiently as possible if it wants to sustain growth. Getting Real by 37 signals is a book I think those running corporations and those in management in many corporations should read. The .PDF used to be free, but you can still read it for free at their web site at… https://gettingreal.37signals.com/.
As far as the topic at hand goes, I think our speculations and suggestions are somewhat trumped by this forum for the creating of an “information valet”. I’m curious as to how they think they will avoid the same issues they are having now, and that is maintaining ownership and possibly security of unique content.
I think they need to begin thinking in a more entrepreneurial manner. The social media (network) is a start. They could go far with that. However, I am curious to see how large they can make such a concept. I would really enjoy being at this event. Wish I could go.
Jesse Olive
President/Sensible Business Solutions
Owner/Sensible Marketing Services
http://www.sensiblemarketingservices.com
865.585.7459
Jesse Olive
President/Sensible Business Solutions
Owner/Sensible Marketing Services
http://www.sensiblemarketingservices.com
865.585.7459
On Nov 18, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
Sorry, Jesse, but I agree Donna–both the media firms’ issues the organizations involved are too complex to get a handle on in one meeting.
And, look, these guys are competitors in more than a few cases. For example, Gannett is starting up MomsLikeMe.com web sites in most every market in the US, no matter if they have a newspaper there or not.
I spent three days at NEXPO in Washington DC last winter. I talked with dozens of vendors and newspaper executives. The entrepreneur-like attitude was not difficult to find. These are smart, thoughtful people.
One serious dilemma the newspaper chiefs face is having their staffs work on both the traditional product and new channels at the same time.
I think it’s a mistake to create too many products–to sell print and then sell web, then email newsletters, and then sell directories and then sell magazines… The advertisers want and need to hear about communicating to markets.
What I have been told works is to start with a target (the Smithville area, or soccer moms) and offer one channel (say, a targeted web service), then have that ad buyer expand by offering another channel (say a tightly target print print to tie into the web service) and then start talking about building the brand in the newspaper. A good–but not great–example that is not me might be Gadzoo–a service that builds a web site about pets.
And the best way to communicate this approach is with an example.
This is nothing new. We have been going this direction for several years. But, the speed in which our advertisers have moved to this has caught many newspapers off-guard.
So, I can see why Steve and you want newspapers to move “faster.” And, yeah, they should try a lot of new and different things (I’m counting on it!). But, to be a “company” serving specific markets better, the newspapers have to make sure they can tying all of these “new and different things” together, at least a little.
I said Gadzoo is not a great idea. And it might not work everywhere. But, it’s a start. It’s worth a try.
And, soon if you reach local pet owners, parents, seniors, foodies, tennis players, salespeople, dentists, teachers, jazz freaks, and several more sub-groups in your area–and each time you’re feeding them some news headlines, too– and, whoa, you soon THE way to reach the market in the area. Again.
On Nov 18, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
No problem Charles! I invite the push back. If anything, I read too much into Donna’s comment, “The forum was a constructive dialog between newspaper executives, period. This is all anyone should have realistically expected to accomplish in seven hours.”
Constructive, to me, is a very general term and the type of term that frustrates me. As I said, nothing definitive, but vague bothers me. I think I am guilty of wanting to know more. Still, I agree that these things should take time and I believe that the CEOs have to be smart people to have gotten where they are, but that does not mean that complacency hasn’t caught up with them as it has with many industries.
With that being said, I can’t imagine that this would be their first time to sit down and discuss things. If so, there is truth again, to the existence of complacency or maybe simple lack of action. Or, this meeting was more in depth than what I assumed.
Either way, they are doing something about it now, and that is what matters. I am simply responding to the time factor within the title of this article.
To me, I think it would be wiser for the the Newspapers to pick a broader audience. Something that will hit the masses (like the newspaper used to). Something that will be as big as a Facebook in the social media world. (I have an idea too!) They have the advantage to do it. When Facebook and Myspace came out, it had to grow virally. Heavy advertising came later (and I don’t know if I would even call that heavy).
However, one major publication could launch a useful web site (or buy one out) and get tons of free press (and I am not simply talking about the fact they ARE the press! Ha! But that doesn’t hurt either).
This large collaboration event is interesting. It sounds like they are heading the right direction. My biggest concern is as follows.
Typically, a social media web site starts out simple and has a unique feature that people need. It gives people time to get used to the application. True, the average end user is becoming more advanced after exposure to other social media, but still, this concept seems as though it could be too complex not only to keep the end users coming back, but also to get it done properly fast enough for it to balance out what is happening to the industry already.
You don’t have to have some super sophisticated idea to reach the masses. Myspace didn’t and neither did Facebook. It just hast to be usable by most.
I would think they could still focus on the news world. Targeted audiences through informational sites is a good idea too Charles, and it seems to ride with their concept. But again, I would think they need to hit the masses with this concept. I dont’ think they have time to ride out one site as a model. I would think they could buy out or some heavy traffic news blogs and informational sites as a package. There are many high traffic sites that I believe could be acquired at this time inexpensively (relatively speaking)those could be small building blocks, or part of a package of sites.
They could also partner or even sponsor some heavy traffic sites looking to get that extra push. By doing so, there could be shared revenue in advertising and the News Paper Companies could take immediate advantage by only getting their feet wet in many areas. Not having to beef up a staff, not having to invest too much, not having to jump into an industry they are just beginning to understand and that is just beginning to take shape. Another advantage of a preexisting entity is obviously, not having to reinvent the wheel and in a market where your competitors have already forced you to make a move away from print. So… buy out those that have been most successful (sorry for using that term).
Partnering or sponsoring would also give publications time to work out a deal where they absorb the preexisting entity. Giving the owner stock options, career opportunity, etc.
You also mentioned magazines. Not a bad idea, but I do like the optimism regarding sticking with the print format. People still love it. But, I think there would have to be a lot of synergy and a new approach. There would have to be incentives for reading. Advertisers would get advertisement via both print and web. I could go on forever. Either way, a packaged move (for lack of better terms) would give the advertiser immediate benefit as opposed to one site here and there.
But, still, social media and the idea that I have I think would really help some people make it big. The guys at bizjournals have been on top of things for a while. Bizjournal.com is in most major metro areas.
I’m somewhat rambling here. Full of ideas that I do not have the time to tailor or articulate the way I would like to. I save that effort for my clients. Uhoh, sounds like I’m advertising again. Sorry!
On Nov 18, 2008, Jeff
said:
Has anyone tried a news blitz? Ad blitzes have driven revenue, will news blitzes drive readership?
We all see what happens on election night. Look at the effort from your newsroom. Did you notice the executives modified their hours to be there at night? If the newsroom can blitz on election night, why can’t they do every night? Does news only happen on the weekdays? Why are there skeleton crews on weekends?
So I’m sure the response will be we don’t have the resources anymore. Well you had them at one time and didn’t use them. Are you using what you have now? Where is the blitz? Where is the meaningful content that drives readership?
The problems aren’t just economic. For sure the model has changed. I’ve never worked in a multipaper town but I have to believe that there is a competitive environment that blitzes every night. Are newspapers too comfortable to blitz?
On Nov 19, 2008, jane stevens
said:
Here at the Reynolds Journalism Institute, we fellows are focusing on the future (as noted in fellow Fellow Bill Densmore’s post on the upcoming Information Valet Project).
Here’s a list of suggestions for any news organization that’s moving into Webworld, as noted in a post on ReJurno — http://www.rejurno.com.
1. Merge news and digital.
2. Publish to Web first, mobile second, print/TV/radio third. Change or ditch the print version.
3. Focus resources around core “community” issues and what you still own, and make the community the engine that drives the issues, topics and beats.
4. Integrate local businesses and services into a searchable community marketplace that links to information and stories. (The Lawrence Journal-World has done this with Marketplace.)
5. All journalists are multimedia journalists. Minimum requirements for this medium: using a videocamera (or video-equipped cell phone) as a reporter’s notebook.
6. Coverage moves away from traditional one-off stories to blogging the beat, creating contextual Web shells chock-full of community aggregation, blogs, group discussions, and links and resources useful to the community, providing iconic contextual multimedia stories, and sending all this content to other platforms.
7. Transform the copy desk into a distribution desk, which massages the content for different platforms.
8. Distribute decision-making to reporting groups. Build the organization around these reporting groups.
9. Establish and integrate social networking into all beats or issue coverage. As Dan Gillmor says, the community knows more than we do.
10. Try anything and everything. Make lots of mistakes.
11. Ditch Wall Street. Put Web-savvy journalists back in charge. Being beholden to shareholders instead of the communities that journalists serve, and putting MBAs with no journalism background in charge was an odd idea to begin with.
On Nov 19, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
BEAUTIFUL! I still have an idea! Haha. Seriously though, this sounds right on. BUT, do they acquire existing entities or create one from scratch utilizing their own web site?
On Nov 19, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
Jane, that not bad, but your list needs more examples to explain what you are talking about.
Your example of what the Lawrence Journal-World has done with their Marketplace is good. I visited with them at NEXPO last winter and was impressed. It should be noted that they are selling this package to newspapers and it’s very reasonable. Still, APT Yahoo deal many papers are in (which looks very promising to me) might get in the way. But, maybe not.
On Nov 19, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
Is THIS journalism?? I say, absolutely.
Ladies and gentlemen, from the New York Times, the interactive-with-the-user Poguematic:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/11/18/technology/personaltechspecial/20081118-pogue-o-matic.html
And, here’s another fun interactive-with-the-user package that is being offered to local newspapers (by me):
http://www.wuduplz.com
These are not traditional ways of thinking about media, but they can enhance a newspaper’s brand with both readers and advertisers.
On Nov 19, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
This is a great approach. Great for advertisers. Informational. Good way to partner with CNET. I also think it is the proper use of audio/video. It is more for personal use and not business. It can be a risk to use audio/video in b to b sites, due to not complimenting typical office environments.
On Nov 20, 2008, BMWood
said:
The big dailies need to reconsider placing all their expensive to produce content (news!) on their web sites for free. The Wall Street Journal model may be a more viable alternative. Even new owner Rupert Murdock hasn’t dropped the paid subscription wall like he originally planned.
They are chasing the 10 cents of revenue on the web per pair of eyeballs verses the dollar in revenue earned in the newspaper. Content is king and if readers want the local news that’s exclusive to the newspaper (and not on AP), they’ll read it where ever they can find it.
On Nov 21, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
BWWood, you mean like music and movies? Right!
But, while I hate it that journalists are not getting paid for their work, but as someone who just canceled the WSJ.com subscription after 7+ years and also convinced one weekly newspaper publisher to try going paid on the web only to see it crash and burn, I can tell you what you’re recommending just doesn’t work. If there was justice in the world, it would.
If only there were a way to get the ISPs to market news and information like movies…
On Nov 21, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
Charles, that is probably because the newspapers have ONE site that this content is posted on. They need to have a central site, but, in fact I thought YOU mentioned this, also have more targeted web sites that are out there and that rank high on the search engines. If done properly, that would not only increase the exposure of the content and main entity, but it would also add value to advertisers as the ads could be more related to content, in turn, creating more targeted advertising. Or, they could advertise whatever across multiple avenues (web sites). Thoughts?
Jesse Olive
President/Sensible Business Solutions
Owner/Sensible Marketing Services
http://www.sensiblemarketingservices.com
865.585.7459
On Nov 21, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
Search engine rankings mean little to local newspapers. They MUST be the place–print or otherwise–where local people turn for local information. And they often are. But not often enough.
I misplaced my barber’s phone number today and needed to make an appointment. I googled it. Bingo. That’s the problem. And, funny, I have a local community web site with that info myself.
I can get local movie time for here in Virginia at NYT.com, but I go to my newspaper instead. It doesn’t have to BE local, but it just has to feel local. That’s part of the power of the local news and info brand. And that is what advertisers are seeking, which is part of our logic behind Wuduplz.
On Nov 21, 2008, Jesse Olive
said:
If you are strictly talking about their web site yes, but remember I am talking about newspapers owning niche web sites with high traffic. SEO is very important, but honestly, they should just start by acquiring top sites in specific areas, determined by performing analytics and discovering what type of searches are conducted most. For instance, REAL ESTATE.
Jesse Olive
President/Sensible Business Solutions
Owner/Sensible Marketing Services
http://www.sensiblemarketingservices.com
865.585.7459
On Nov 21, 2008, Charles Batchelor
said:
Right. Real estate is a great example of “local” branding that I forgot.
Zillow.com and many local newspapers are forging relationships to the benefit of both. But, no one newspaper should have to do what Zillow did. But, the newspapers can bring more power to Zillow–and they were doing very well as it was. A classic win-win.
And,as I noted, while I have no first hand info, I hear many publishers are very pleased with the Yahoo deal.
The local newspaper brand is feeling pain right now, but they are getting their act together as info utilities and will come back.