RSS Feed for BloggingBlogging

Introducing GrowYourNewsWebsite.com

I’ve just debuted a new website/blog designed to be a resource for ideas, tips and advice for online news publishers. It’s called GrowingYourNewsWebsite.com, and it’s NOT another industry news blog. The focus is exclusively on advice. I hope you’ll find it useful.

I soft-launched the site yesterday, so hardly anyone knows about it. I’d love it if a few of you checked it out and maybe commented on the early posts. My intent is to post a tip a day. There will be ideas on how to increase traffic and earn more money, primarily. I’m aiming for actionable tips and advice.

Obviously I don’t know it all, so I’ve made the site open to everyone to participate in and contribute to. Comment on the posts. Submit an idea of your own if you’d like me to write it up for you (and credit you). Create an account and blog to the site directly. (I will be moderating submissions.)

I’m also looking for sponsors, so give me a shout if it looks like that might be useful to you.

The Romenesko Indicator

Many of us watch Romenesko to keep tabs of the news business. The venerable media blog, which is published by the Poynter Institute, is great for giving a sense of where the industry is at.

I’ve yet to see anyone use Romenesko for research. (Have I missed it?) But I wonder if a careful analysis of all the media news that gets pumped through Jim Romenesko’s filters would turn up some trends. One I would expect to find is an increasing pessimism by traditional news organizations, and an increase in stories about news company cutbacks, layoffs, stock price falls, circulation dips, etc. — increasing over time.

For fun, I did a quick and completely unscientific survey of what was in the latest Romenesko e-mail, which covers the last 4 days of blog entries. Here’s what I found. (Note: If you tried this, you might categorize things differently. But here’s my attempt. Some stories got counted in more than one category.)

  • 26 - News personnel (announcements, awards, changes, deaths, profiles, etc.)
  • 13 - Demise/decline of newspapers
  • 10 - Ethics-related
  • 9 - Bad news about industry stock prices, real estate sales, acquisitions
  • 6 - Transition of media, online trends, user interaction, etc.
  • 6 - “Inside baseball” stuff (that only true industry geeks care about)
  • 6 - Journalism craft news
  • 5 - News about the news business (excluding the “The End Is Near” coverage)
  • 4 - College journalism, academia, research
  • 4 - Oddball stuff
  • 3 - Labor news
  • 3 - New publications, websites, programs announced
  • 2 - Stories with mixed good-bad news about news industry
  • 2 - Credentials and access issues
  • 2 - Objectivity in journalism
  • 2 - Gossip
  • 2 - Events, conferences
  • 1 - Negative stories about Internet, blogs, user content, etc.
  • 1 - Media law
  • 1 - Audience, circulation news

Perhaps someone with more time on their hands than me can find interesting Romenesko trends over time.

ESPN gets on the widget bandwagon

No sooner had I finished off a draft of my January Editor & Publisher Online column (probably to be published next week) on how news organizations must learn to share their content any- and everywhere, than did news of ESPN’s WidgetCenter arrive on my radar screen. (I think it launched last month, but I must’ve missed it then. I’ve added it in to the column.) It nicely confirms the wisdom of my advice in the column. :)

Check this out. ESPN is now offering widgets that you can put on your blog, website, social network profile, or wherever. Here they are embedded in this blog item.

To trust or not to trust Wikipedia

I was reading Howard Owens’ latest post and noticed that in the first paragraph he links to a Wikipedia entry in order to explain MBOs (management by objective).

It’s normal for bloggers to provide links to Wikipedia; I do it frequently, too — usually as a shortcut to defining a term or describing something.

But isn’t it interesting that mainstream news organizations seldom link to the “people’s encyclopedia.” I think that says a lot about the difference between old and new media.

It explains much about why mainstream media struggle with a new world where everyone can have a voice. Many mainstream news organizations still resist linking to outside sources at all (though that problem seems to be waning), and they remain largely unwilling to trust “unvetted” sources like Wikipedia. (Of course, many of us would say that the massive Wikipedia contributor community is doing the vetting of information.)

Sure, Wikipedia has its problems. But I think news organizations can and should acknowledge Wikipedia’s power in the Internet community by linking to it. There’s always the option of inserting a note of caution when linking, describing how Wikipedia is a public-driven resource and its information may not be perfect.

Are there examples of mainstream news organizations routinely linking to Wikipedia which would refute my (admittedly generalized) observation?

Twitter made even easier (using Jott)

I just discovered Jott.com, a very cool voice service that can interact with other web applications. Tonight I’ve been trying it out with RemberTheMilk, a web to-do utility that interacts nicely with Google Calendar. By using Jott, I can speak into my cell phone while I’m away from my computer and very easily add a reminder to my RTM tast list. Very handy!

Jott also works with Twitter, and I’ve been experimenting with that. The short explanation is that after you set up your (free) Jott account and link it to your Twitter account, you can use your cell phone to call in Twitter posts (tweets). Jott gives you a number to call; just speak (up to 30 seconds) and it’ll get posted to Twitter. (Because Jott recognizes the number you’re calling from, it’s super quick; just tell Jott where to send the message and start talking.)

Of course, the voice recognition isn’t going to be perfect, but it seems pretty darn good.

In earlier posts I’ve been discussing the idea of reporters using Twitter for covering major breaking stories with micro-burst coverage — that is, very short news alerts sent to Twitter as new information is discovered. Using Jott to speak to Twitter will be faster than trying to text sentences with your cell phone. It’s worth experimenting with.

Digging deeper on Newsweek.com’s Ruckus

The Media Bloggers Association and Newsweek have debuted The Ruckus, which is a group blog about politics on Newsweek.com. It’s a laudable project, because it has a very traditional news organization opening up to outsiders and publishing their content under the Newsweek brand. The political bloggers get prominent play, their photos featured, and potentially significant traffic to their blogs.

I asked MBA president Robert Cox for some details. Frankly, his answers (pleasantly) surprised me. We’re getting to a place in the evolution of news media where even a very traditional news company can open itself up to outside content, unedited, in meaningful ways.

Me: Is there any editing involved (before or after blog publication)? Does Newsweek exert any editorial control or influence over the blogs posts that appear as part of The Ruckus?

Cox: Absolutely not! This was perhaps the single most important part of the agreement between the MBA and Newsweek. It would be irresponsible for a world-class news organization like Newsweek to be anything other than very protective of their reputation and therefore very concerned about what is going out under their name. At the same time, to their credit, they realized that what attracted them to the idea of integrating blogger content into Newsweek.com was the unedited voice of genuine bloggers. I’ve been over this ground many times with different news organizations interested in working with bloggers and quite often what the news organization ends up with is a citizen media initiative that is so watered down that they’ve drained the very essence of what attracted them to blogging in the first place. From the perspective of those who care about citizen journalism, Newsweek has taken the high road and let the bloggers be bloggers.

I will let them speak for themselves but I believe a key part of what gave them comfort in proceeding with raw, unedited blog posts is the Media Bloggers Association and our growing track record of balancing the freewheeling nature of blogging with the need to abide by certain professional standards such as transparency and accountability. MBA members are required to be abide by MBA policies and under the terms of the agreement with Newsweek they are required to abide by Newsweeks editorial standards and policies. Most important of all, the MBA is going to attract a more serious-minded person as a member and so we’re able to offer a partner like Newsweek the best brand and legal protection of all — good people who care about their own reputation and the reputation of others.

Contractually, Newsweek is specifically prohibited from editing blogger content under the terms of our deal. And that’s the way it has to be because all involved were agreed from the beginning that for this to work The Ruckus had to be made up of authentic voices — real bloggers blogging on real blogs.

At the same time they are more than free to make requests of the bloggers. That happened during the beta period before we went live when Newsweek asked the bloggers who watched either of the two recent Des Moines Register debates to weigh in on them. No blogger was obligated to do that but bloggers did post on the debates. I’d chalk that up to all involved being excited about The Ruckus and wanting to work together on a positive basis rather than Newsweek exerting editorial control — and something I believe is entirely appropriate given that at the end of the day it’s their site.

Me: Are the bloggers compensated?

Cox: Yes but no one is getting rich — yet.

This is our fourth such deal. Our first was with the Associated Press for our members’ coverage of the Scooter Libby Trial. We then did two deals with Tavis Smiley Productions and PBS for the Democratic Presidential debate in June and the GOP debate in September. In the AP deal neither the MBA not the bloggers were compensated. We did that because it was more important for us to invest in getting that first deal done with a blue chip partner like the Associated Press. In the PBS deal the MBA was compensated but the bloggers were not. The Newsweek deal represent the model we had in mind when we began developing this concept of aggregating our members content and distributing via partnerships with established media companies — the MBA is being compensated and the bloggers are being compensated.

In sitting down with the folks at Newsweek, we felt that the MBA and its members had demonstrated through three high-profile partnerships we and they could be relied upon to provide authentic, high-quality blog content while respecting the editorial, legal and branding considerations of our media partners, and both the MBA and the bloggers ought to be appropriately compensated. As these deals continue to build a track record of delivering value to our partners we will, of course, always be looking to expand revenue opportunities for the Media Bloggers Association and our members. …

The model is to select a focus such as an event, a geographic region or a particular subject, find MBA members who have that area of focus in their blogs, pool them together into a feed and distribute the content through a media parter such as Newsweek or AP. A key part of the technical set up is that we use tags to pull the posts from the blogs of the contributing bloggers so that other than adding one additional tag to posts they wish to submit to the feed they do not have to do any extra work such as cross-post their content into another site or email posts to an editor or things like that. This keeps it very simple for the blogger so they can afford to take the time to participate (done right, almost zero time once we’ve set up the feed) and are not going to get tired of doing extra work, lose interest and stop contributing. Further, the partners display headlines and excerpts from each post with a link back to the originating blog.

Done right these deals are win-win-win. The bloggers get their content out to a far wider audience, they get traffic back to their site which they can monetize, and what amounts to a monthly stipend plus the branding benefit of being associated with a high-profile media partner. The partner gets exciting, dynamic content that is ideally suited for developing additional user-generated content which, in turn, means more traffic and longer dwell time on their sites which they can monetize. Perhaps more importantly, by offering authentic bloggers they can enhance the integration of their blog initiatives into the wider blogosphere. For the MBA, we get co-branding opportunities that enhance our image which allows us to take in revenue and attract new members, all of which helps us better fulfill our core mission — to protect blogger speech.

Me: How were the Ruckus bloggers chosen? Did Newsweek just pick them, or was there an application process for the bloggers?

Cox: I gave Newsweek a short list and they made it shorter.

All MBA members were eligible and I personally considered every political blogger among our members. There were a variety of factors that came into play but striving to achieve political balance was foremost on our mind. To a certain extent the bloggers selected for the launch are intended to be ambassadors from their corner of the political blogosphere. The hope being that we include them and they will include other deserving blogs through cross-linking into the feed going up to Newsweek so that Newsweek readers are being exposed to a wide range of voices.

I personally developed a list of about 100 bloggers then whittled that down to about 40 before beginning to make recommendations to Newsweek editors. We went back and forth for about two months in getting down to nine blogs. At the end of the day, they had the final say on which blogs were in the launch group. My hope is that Newsweek will be happy with this project and as the campaign continues to heat up there will be opportunities to add more bloggers and I am sure as we do we will continue to look for opportunities to bring fresh points of view to the discussion taking place on The Ruckus.

Me: Thanks, Robert!

Twittering the traffic

Over at STLToday.com, Kurt Greenbaum’s Twitter project is live: Today on Highway 40.

The idea is to use Twitter to document the driving and commuting experiences of people as a key arterial in St. Louis is closed for a long reconstruction period. Greenbaum, who is the St. Louis Post-Dispatch’s social media director, recruited 10 people (plus himself) to use Twitter to file short (140 characters) reports about what they encounter in the weeks before the shutdown and the week after. The road closes on January 2.

Here’s the list of traffic Twitter correspondents, who have begun their short reporting assignment. You can read their reports on a special STLToday page, or on Twitter itself.

This will be interesting to watch. But I’m also looking out for a good example of using Twitter for a big fast-breaking story. I’m not sure how this will work for a more drawn-out story that can be planned for. It’ll work fine, of course, but will the content be interesting enough to engage the audience? Let’s see!

Twitter-blogger-mashup correspondent guy

Yet another Twitter+journalism item. … Slate political correspondent John Dickerson is reporting from Iowa this week, and he’s filing Twitter bursts as well as blog items — and his musings are going on a Google Maps mashup. Talk about your trendy reporter!

More Twitter news implications

Jack Lail blogs about using Twitter to cover breaking news stories with a series of alerts, riffing off an earlier post by me, and cites an example of a fan “tweeting” a high school football game. That is an excellent example of a news use for Twitter. Just imagine receiving phone text alerts from someone providing Twitter posts throughout a game that you can’t be at or watch (because you’re driving, on a bus, at a concert, at work, etc.).

Lail brought up an interesting side issue, which is that while a fan may be in the clear by posting Twitter alerts during, say, an NCAA basketball game, a reporter would be prohibited by NCAA rules from doing the same thing. As Lail notes, “Journalist aren’t the only ones who need to think in new ways.”

I’ve long been annoyed by the restrictions that some college and professional sports leagues put on working journalists, which prevent them from utilizing new technologies — like Twitter. This is another example of how old organizations continue to live in the past, thinking that they have control over information about them. While they may be able to control the traditional press, there’s nothing they can do — short of confiscating cell phones at the stadium gate or jamming mobile phone reception — to prevent their fans from acting as though they are sports reporters and posting game “coverage.”

Sure, the leagues can adopt rules that prohibit using phones to report on live game action and apply them to journalists and fans. But get real; that would be impossible to police.

Group Twittering instructions

In other blog posts here and on Poynter’s E-Media Tidbits, I’ve discussed ideas for using Twitter to cover major breaking news stories (like disasters) with micro-bursts of instant news reporting. This can be especially powerful if you’ve got a team of reporters all feeding a Twitter story stream.

Alas, Twitter doesn’t allow multiple cell phones to feed content to a single Twitter account. So I asked Twitter tech support for suggestions on doing the group Twitter reporting thing. Here’s their answer:

You can’t have multiple phones updating one account, but you can create an event profile and have all of the related twitters made by others show up in the profile’s ‘with friends’ feed.

“Use Twitter’s embed code and feed that aggregates participants updates to capture the zeitgeist of the event and reflect it back out however you like: plasma screens, projectors, your web site, etc.

“First you need to set things up so that updates come to the right place. Here’s how:

  • Go to twitter.com and set up an account with the name of the event as the user name.
  • Send us an email and let us know when sign up is complete, with a link to the profile. We’ll turn on auto-friending, which means that every person who adds you as a friend will automatically be added as a friend of the event.
  • Customize your profile in settings to add the event logo, and a background design if you’d like.
  • Tell everyone to use the FOLLOW + UserName command. For example, if your event is entitled Save_Jericho, people would send: follow save_jericho to Twitter. This means they will get your updates, and if they decide to Twitter back about the event, their updates will show in the “save_jericho with friends” timeline.

“If people are new to Twitter, they may need a bit of guidance to get going. Here are some tips to pass along:

  • Instruct people to send FOLLOW Save_Jericho to 40404. If they aren’t using SMS, they can visit http://twitter.com/Save_Jericho and click follow from the web page. (The reverse of this is LEAVE+username to stop getting updates.)
  • Communicate to participants that following your event-enabled user name means their Twitter updates will be publicly viewable on the web.
  • Encourage participants to discover each other’s usernames and tell them they can text FOLLOW USERNAME to start getting that person’s text updates on their mobile.
  • Add a Twitter badge to your website or place of online promotion so that people can see what others are saying about the event, and join. If you use the “with friends” badge, people will be able to view what you and others are saying from the badge.
  • Send a note to support@twitter.com an let us know about your event; we always love to hear about cool new things people are doing with Twitter!

“More useful Twitter commands are here.”

Clicky Web Analytics