Results matching “ten trends abou”

It's a question that can get lost in all the talk of business models and content creation: how might journalism best serve the public?

In Australia, the latest group to ponder this is The Foundation for Public Interest Journalism, directed by a group of journalists, editors, academics and members of the community. Part of the Institute for Social Research at Swinburne University in Melbourne, it is setting up a project called YouCommNews, modeled on the American site Spot.Us, which will allow the audience to commission the stories they want to see.

The Editors Weblog spoke to Dr Margaret Simons, chair of the foundation, and to David Cohn, founder of Spot.Us.

Twitter has introduced a 'Local Trends' filter, which allows users to see what others are posting about on the site in their area.

The official Twitter blog explained that the trends function began as a way to see what was popular on a global scale in real-time, but this would create another way for members to discover relevant topics to them.

"The big events that come up around the world will always become a global conversation," a spokesperson writes, "but what about the big events that only happen in your world that only matter to those around you? Or the slight differences in the way Californians perceive an event, like Obama's election victory, versus those (in) São Paulo, Brazil?"

Newspapers have not only lost significant advertising revenue in the last couple of years, they have also been losing government support in the form of subsidies in the last forty years, concludes a new study by the University of Southern California.

According to Poynter, a new study of historic subsidies and emerging trends tracks various tax breaks, reductions in postal subsidies first enacted in 1792, and upcoming cutbacks in public notices that government regulations have traditionally forced into American newspapers. The study provides valuable insight, if not clear-cut recommendations for print media to follow, about the thorny issue of government funding for media.

Amid all the buzz about the potential to make money from mobile news, news agency Agence France-Presse (AFP) has become the latest news organisation to launch an iPhone app.

The application also works on the iPod Touch and costs $1.99 from the Apple store.

"It gives access to the global news agency's multimedia content in English, Spanish, Portuguese and German, including breaking world news from wars and conflicts to politics, sport and entertainment, as well as the latest major developments in health, science and technology," AFP said in a statement.

The buzz keeps growing and growing around tablets - electronic devices with a touch-screen interface, e-reader capabilities, as well as web browsing among others.

Rumors about Apple's tablet, or the iSlate, as it is now being called, have been gaining momentum as the elusive and innovative device that is supposed to look like a bigger version of Apple's iPhone, prepares to launch early this year.

Several other big high-tech players have also lined up to present their own versions of the slate. Just this last Wednesday, Microsoft unveiled the Hewlett-Packard yet to be named tablet at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.

In preparation of its spin-off from Time Warner, AOL has put the final pieces in place for its innovative news creation and searching system. 

After reporting last month that it had plans to release new editions of the paper, the New York Times has announced that its first San Francisco copy will soon be available.  

Attempting to move into the space left by the deflated Hearst-owned San Francisco Chronicle, which is expected to close if costs cannot be sufficiently cut- the new edition will feature greater coverage of the local Bay Area.

The Times said the Bay Area section will initially appear in the Friday and Sunday editions of the newspaper and focus on "public affairs, culture and lifestyles in San Francisco, the Silicon Valley, the East Bay and the region."

Fwix offers an uncomplicated service: it aggregates local news from newspapers, blogs and other sources, aiming to offer users an up-to-the minute guide of what is going on in their area by filling the gaps in what a local newspaper could offer on its own.  The Editors Weblog recently spoke to Darian Shirazi, the 22-year-old founder of Fwix, to find out more about what the site offers to news fans and what its goals are for the future.

"I think what we're offering is the ability to fill out the content in local newspapers with content that's written by bloggers in a local area," Shirazi explained. As newspapers suffer from falling advertising revenue, they might no longer be able to cover all verticals; hence Fwix combines local newspapers' news with content such as restaurant or movie reviews from blogs into one city feed. It is a real time feed, as, Shirazi put it, "things that are happening seconds or minutes ago are de facto more interesting than what was happening days ago." There are currently 77 different cities to choose from.

Fwix displays a headline linked to the original article, along with a snippet from the story, as permitted by fair use regulations. If a reader clicks through to an original article, it will take them to the content-producer's website but the page will have a Fwix banner across the bottom, allowing the user to quickly return to Fwix or share the article. The site also shows readers the 'Top Trends' of the moment and an Activity section indicates the articles that members are reading and sharing.

Shirazi originally built a simple version of the service for his personal use, as he wanted to stay in touch with what was going on in his city while he was travelling. "I realised that there was no good place that had all the information, from art exhibits to crime news, to events to new issues in politics," he explained. "I used it myself for a while and I really liked it. Then I thought, other people might like this. So I built it."

Sharing and connecting

If users would like to associate their activity on Fwix with their Facebook or Twitter accounts, they may sign in via these services and then if they choose to share a story, it will appear on their Twitter feed or Facebook profile page. Shirazi has no plans for Fwix to create its own account system: "that's not necessary, and it's a battle we are not willing to wage." Rather, he explained, "we levarage ecosystems that help people share information and then provide the news." A Fwix profile page saves everything a user reads, but they have the option to delete whatever they would like. "Really the profile is just for you to keep track of what you've shared and what you've read."

Reporting

Fwix is waiting for approval from Apple for its iPhone application, which would allow a citizen journalism element to be incorporated into the site as users would be invite to report news. The app will provide a 'report' button which users can click on when they see something that they think is worthy of attention. A camera will then pop up and the user can photograph and describe what they want to report and send it to Fwix. On the site, a pin on a map will show the user's precise location when they reported the news. The reported news would go straight into the activity section and into the individual's profile, and will be automatically vetted before it enters the main feed. The vetting process judges credibility based on the existence of similar reports.

The company plans to allow users to report from other devices in the future, but not from a web browser.

Monetisation

As yet, making a profit is not Fwix's main goal, Shirazi said. For now, it has funding from BlueRun ventures. However, when it does start to monetise, local advertising will be its revenue stream, he specified. Local businesses "are really looking for places to advertise," he stressed, "there will always be ad dollars out there." He sees a gap in the market that Fwix could fill: "the only places for local businesses to advertise right now are those like Yelp.com and there are way more ads than there is space," he explained.

What's in store for the future

The site just came out of beta. Fwix's current goal is simply growth, Shirazi said, meaning getting more people using the service. Currently the site has about 400,000 unique visitors per month and via widgets on other sites, the content network reaches about 8 million. There are about 8000 publications whose content is aggregated. Shirazi would like to expand the service internationally, but said that here is no telling when this will happen.

Fwix clearly provides a useful service for those who are looking to keep abreast of what's going on in their local area, and Facebook and Twitter users are likely to find the ease with which they can share stories appealing. Twitter's new geo-tagging capabilities might provide competition, depending on how developers take advantage of this. Fwix could also help local news outlets by sending traffic to their websites, although of course as with all aggregators, there is always the possibility that people might visit Fwix.com rather than their local newspaper's home page if it provides a more comprehensive service. Local blogs with fewer visitors are likely to appreciate the extra exposure that Fwix offers. What Fwix offers is not groundbreaking, but services such as this are changing the way that people access news as consumers move away from traditional news reading habits.

It is seeming increasingly likely that charging of online general news content may well become commonplace in the immediate future; 'within a year' according to Financial Times editor Lionel Barber. The New York Times has been surveying its subscribers to ask how much they would be willing to pay for online news, and Guardian blogger Steve Busfield pointed out that listeners of the London Times' The Bugle podcast have been asked whether they would be prepared to pay for the 'season' each week. But can a pay strategy work online? The answer has been debated at length.

The big question is, will enough people be prepared to pay enough money, via a subscription scheme or per article, for online content to compensate for and exceed the revenue generated by advertising? The answer to this was thought to be definitively negative for quite some time, but the global economic slowdown and subsequent falls in advertising revenue, particularly online, has started to change this.

Ryan Chittum, writing in the Columbia Journalism Review, has taken a look at newspaper companies' second quarter results and analysed revenue from advertising and circulation. He has found that although ad revenue is falling at companies such as McClatchy and the New York Times, income from circulation is actually increasing. Ad revenue at both companies was down 30% in the last quarter compared to the same period last year.

Revenue from circulation, however, rose 5% in the second quarter at McClatchy, to $69.4 million. The daily circulation actually fell, but price increases made up for this. And at the New York Times, Chittum points out, circulation revenues will pass ad revenues sometime this quarter for the first time ever, if current trends hold. In this year's second quarter, the paper brought in $185 million in ad revenue and $166 million from subscribers. So if the ad income continues to decline at a rate of 30% and the circulation revenue keeps increasing, the latter is likely to overtake the former any time now.

This, Chittum suggests, "points the way toward a new model" based less heavily on advertising. He suggests charging $15 a month for full access to NYTimes.com, and if half of paper's print readers and 2.5% of the website's visitors were to pay, the paper could bring in $189 million a year: enough to pay for the entire Times newsroom. And of course, the paper could still advertise. The Wall Street Journal is expected to bring in $120 million in online advertising this year despite its paywall, Chittum notes. If the Times was able to bring in a similar amount, it could easily survive in online-only format, he proposes.

Chittum disputes Jeff Sonderman's theory, recently outlined in News Futurist, that newspaper subscribers have traditionally paid for the delivery of the paper rather than for the journalism. Their money may have actually gone towards this, but the reason that people have always bought newspapers is, in fact, because of the content. Yes, people are also paying to have this content nicely packaged and delivered to their door, but it is the news that they are after. This contradicts the often-cited concept that content in itself has no value.

And this idea that people will in fact pay for quality content, though not necessarily a consensus, as concluded by The Wrap's Sharon Waxman, does seem to be gaining momentum in the media industry. As well as the New York Times, News Corp and MediaNews Group are looking at paid online content, and start-up Journalism Online is promising to facilitate this for any publishers. News Corp chief digital officer Jonathan Miller said last week at the Fortune Brainstorm conference that journalism will increasingly become a "paid model" online.

And this feeling is not only prevalent among newspapers: Disney just announced plans for a subscription-based product for the internet. "We have ample evidence both in traditional and new media that people are willing to pay for quality, to pay for choice and to pay for convenience," CEO Robert Iger said at the same conference. Barry Diller, chairman and chief executive officer of IAC/InterActiveCorp, also expressed his opinion that content on the Internet is "not free, and is not going to be."

So could revenue from paying readers online more than compensate for lost advertising?

The results of the Times of London's poll on whether people are prepared to pay for The Bugle is not very encouraging so far: when presented with different pricing options, 59% of those polled responded 'nothing.' However, of course this does not mean that these people might not be prepared to pay if forced to: it is a very different thing to be asked whether you would like to pay.

Chittum's figures for the New York Times suggest yes, although he does not claim that the numbers could support printing and distribution as well as journalism, and it is unlikely that the Times will kill its print product any time soon. And it is necessary to remember that the Times has always brought in an unusually high proportion of its revenue from circulation: in recent years this has typically been 30-35%, while many newspapers would rely on advertising for 80-85% of revenue. And a subscription is expensive, at about $770 a year for those in the US but outside the New York metro area. The paper has seemingly successfully increased its price twice within a year. It is undoubtedly seen as a product worth paying for: can the same be said for newspapers with less impressive reputations?

Journalism Online's co-founder Steve Brill has presented figures to potential partner publishers that suggest that participating newspapers would be able to keep 88% of page views and 91% of ad revenue. The company's assumptions are that 5-10% of current monthly unique visitors will be willing to pay for content; that 95 percent of those paying customers will choose subscriptions over micropayments; and that after subscribing, those readers will view 30-40 percent more pages than non-paying readers. If these numbers are correct, charging for content might well make sense.

Others believe, however, that paid online content would definitively not be able to make up for lost advertising revenue. Alan Mutter, co-founder of ViewPass, sees increasing the value of advertising by making it highly targeted is a better solution to the newspaper industry's problems. And start up CircLabs is working on creating a product that aims to up the number of page views to newspaper sites. Both of these would, however, allow publishers to make the choice to charge.

Persuading people to pay for something they have got free for many years is likely to be a tough challenge, and it is going to be risky. It is likely to take some time to discover the most effective way to do it. It has a far greater chance of succeeding if it does in fact become commonplace, and the idea that premium content must be paid for is firmly established in the consumer mindset. And although one can argue that the consumer will be benefiting from the quality content that would be supported by pay schemes, their online news experience is likely to suffer if they are confronted by frequent paywalls that stop them from roaming the web freely.

The Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is embarking on a study of online news distribution amid rising concern about the news industry's financial troubles which have been exacerbated by the global economic downturn. It is part of the Working Party on the Information Economy's ongoing work on Digital Broadband Content. Last month, to launch the study, representatives from OECD countries and interested organisations heard four several presentations on how news production and distribution is changing, and what the future might be .

Crises and a broken business model: how a news agency reacts

Eric Scherer is director of strategy and external relations at Agence-France Presse, and founder of AFP's Mediawatch blog. He explained to the OECD the nature of the crisis which he believes is taking place, and the steps that an outlet such as AFP is taking.

He sees a situation where five simultaneous crises took place, in terms of economics, business model, attention, training and authority. The economic value of the traditional press is going down as the mainstream tries to adapt to new trends. The current business model is "broken," he believes: it was based largely on advertising and a small amount of circulation revenue but in the past two to three years there has been a "historic decoupling" of advertising and newspapers as classified ads have moved online. The old media now has to run after attention as it faces competition from new. Training is a "huge problem" according to Scherer: it has to be done quickly but people at the top are not sufficiently aware of the challenges. And finally, the authority of old media is declining quickly as the top-down relationship falls apart.

What is more, Scherer believes that a process of disintermediation has taken place in news: the media has been cut out, as those who want to get their message out go straight to the people. He cited Obama's election campaign and use of new media as a "symbol" of this, pointing out that the future president used every single internet and Web 2.0 tool to communicate with the public. And the people responded: at every Obama demonstration there were attendees talking photos with their digital cameras or phones which they then uploaded and posted online. Sports stars are also speaking directly to the people, Scherer pointed out. This is the main development in the media in recent times, that the people who were deprived of production and distribution tools now have them. Hence, old media's monopoly is over, what used to be scarce, is now abundant.

The Internet has led to the "atomisation of content," meaning that readers can 'snack' on content as they are always one click away from something else, according to Scherer. Print and online are mutually conflicting business models, but going online-only is not necessarily the best idea, he explained, referring to a City University study on online-only Finnish paper Taloussanomat. 

These problems have all be exacerbated by the financial crisis, Scherer said, which makes it so much harder to finance the transition period and find a business model. Before the crisis hit, it seemed as if news outlets would have time to adapt, but now they are "below the poverty level."

So, how can news organisations finance their work? Is it possible in the current climate to find a way to finance an investigative journalism network and a Baghdad bureau? Scherer described how AFP has been tackling these challenges of the new news ecosystem. AFP produces all the main "bricks of content" and now needs to be able to link them together an add technical context. Rather than just providing editorial content, the agency now offers its traditional media customers both content and services, such as video, mobile or user-generated content platforms.

Due to the increased competition for breaking news, as the Internet means that newspapers and other outlets can effectively act as wire services and AFP's competitors are no longer just Reuters and the Associated Press, AFP has chosen to increase its national and international coverage and rely and focus on its branding. Amongst all the "noise on the internet," Scherer believes that people feel safer when they know their news comes from a trusted brand.

The Internet has also meant that AFP has become not just a business to business operation, but also has a direct relationship with the consumer, as its articles are available online under the AFP brand, via search engines such as Google or Yahoo. Incidentally, the Associated Press, which has also traditionally kept the audience at a distance, is going a step further and seeking to create search "landing pages" on news topics for its readers.

The evolution of the Internet as a journalistic tool

Thomas Crampton's presentation on the value of new technologies for communications was delivered true to style: it was recorded on a mobile phone video application while the writer went through security in a Hong Kong airport. 

Crampton's career path has developed simultaneously with the evolution of new technologies as a communications tool: as a correspondent at the International Herald Tribune and the New York Times, he always tried to capitalise on available online and digital tools to ensure that his reporting was always at the cutting edge of news provision. Nonetheless, frustration with the reticence of the traditional media to embrace alternative outlets to their full potential pushed him to leave the print industry for fear of "being left behind".  He is now the Asia Pacific Director of Digital Influence at Ogilvy. 

The responsibilities of this position convey Crampton's conviction and "passion" for the new media. In this role he works with multinationals to tap into new technology, which enable companies and individuals to reach and communicate with a huge audience. The progressive outlet of other industries reinforces Crampton's dismay with what he sees as the reluctance of news providers to work with these possibilities. 

To illustrate his conviction that technological evolution is a great but unavoidable asset for news provision, Crampton outlined the developments of the relationship between news reporting and the Internet:

• - 1995-99 Communications: During this period, the Internet facilitated the internal communications of news providers; for example correspondents could communicate with the home bureau through email, greatly reducing time. The web, however, was not at this point seen as a way to distribute or research news.
• - 2000-2004 Research: The Internet developed into an information finding tool, enabling reporters to assemble facts for stories that would otherwise be unattainable. Applications such as Google Cache allowed correspondents in the field to find elusive information and file updates, reducing their previously pressing need to continuously collaborate with the home office. Moreover, as information became accessible from anywhere in the world once connected to the web, newsrooms found that they could function without some foreign bureaus or correspondents. 
• - 2004 to present Social Media: The emergence of social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace and Twitter have affected not only the way news is reported, but how information is distributed.  As a result, traditional roles in the information stream dynamic are merging: the audience are now sharers, publishers and broadcasters as much as they are consumers of information.

It is in this current situation in which Crampton suggests news providers have lost their direction, apparently overwhelmed by the challenges thrown up by the proliferation of platforms and the attendant dissolution of information monopolies. To surmount these problems, news providers needed to proceed with a flexible, open attitude to the creation of new business models. However, Crampton indicates that their wariness led to the internal creation of limitations, citing the ongoing debate about online subsidies and paid for content as a detrimental and futile drain of resources.

Crampton felt that the traditional frameworks were restricting journalists from making "headway" in the wider field of communications and reporting. He began to "push boundaries, both externally and internally". The launch of his own blog enabled him to create his own "digital identity", establishing a persona beyond that of his employer. Indeed, the importance of 'branding' in the journalism professional was highlighted by the anecdote that when Crampton's name was typed into a search engine, whilst still at the IHT, his personal blog was listed before that of the publication. Once Crampton had left the paper, he devoted himself to diffusing information through new technologies, unrestrained by company rule and protocol. The results have been 'liberating', allowing the writer to establish a "complex and rich dialogues" with otherwise "unreachable audiences". 

Crampton offers a shining testimony to the current and potential value of new technologies in communications. It is a strong message to news providers that innovation is necessary.  Due to the use of multiple media outlets, Crampton perceives himself to be at the "front line of communication". Yet, whilst Crampton's departure from the printed press has produced exciting results, the feasibility of this as a career pathway for the majority of journalists, especially those just starting out is questionable. 

Before becoming digitally "independent" Crampton had established a reputation as a reporter, during a decade of front line correspondence for prestigious titles. These experiences, gained thanks to the printed press, would have allowed Crampton to obtain a readership, a sum of which have presumably continued to follow and recommend him as changed outlets. It may be that if reporters are to succeed on the digital and online scenes, without having the safety net of affiliation with an established publication, they need to have more ammunition than just writing ability. With the abundance of breaking news online, there is increasing demand for critical, in depth pieces written by experts.  In short, there are signs that markets are becoming more "niche" which is requiring journalists to assert their value by finding a speciality.

Could stakeholder journalism be the future?

Mark Hunter, a founding member of the Global Investigative Journalism Network and Senior Research Fellow at INSEAD spoke about what he sees as the declining credibility of traditional news and the subsequent rise of 'stakeholder journalism.' He believes that concentration of ownership has contributed to reduced credibility of traditional media as readers will increasingly question whether owners have their own agenda. Hunter sees the news industry's current problems as a vicious circle starting with this: declining credibility leads to declining audience, leading to declining revenue and hence declining capacity.

Investigative journalism is a field which is already moving out of the grasp of the media, Hunter pointed out. Sixty per cent of investigative journalism is funded by foundations rather than media, and this which leads him to suppose that stakeholder media - in other words, news generated by organisations that have an interest in the story - might be taking over the role of watchdog. Greenpeace, for example, has a long history of such journalism, such as during its confrontations with Exxon.

Stakeholder journalism differs from traditional journalism in several ways, Hunter explained. For one, it targets a different audience, focussing on informing particular communities and insiders rather than a general audience. Its expertise is narrower but deeper, concentrated on environmental or political issues, for example. Stakeholder reporting aims to accomplish a different objective: telling people what they should do, rather than just what to think about. It is transparent about where it is coming from and what it thinks is 'right,' rather than trying to present a balanced argument.

Hunter believes that the news industry will continue to shrink, and that government bailouts, for example, will not bring the public back. This will leave a growing void which stakeholder journalism will fill, heralding the return of partisan media, according to Hunter. With this comes a need for new journalistic training, as it dispels with the idea of objective media, and the need for enhanced legal knowledge. This is where OECD analysis and policy can help, he believes.

In terms of research requirements, Hunter believes that there is an "urgent need" for investigation into new business models for watchdog journalism, something which the INSEAD Social Innovation Centre and the Global Investigative Journalism Network are looking at. He also sees an "urgent need" for new codes of ethics and professional standards adapted to stakeholder media, where objectivity is no longer a core value.

Few would deny the importance of investigative journalism and the need to find a business model to sustain it. Public interest journalism, exposing wrongdoing and corruption, is clearly crucial to a democratic society. But could this be effectively carried out by interested groups rather than by an objective media presence? Stakeholder journalism has the benefit of being clear in its motives, and transparent about the fact that it is not offering a balanced argument: its bias should be obvious to readers. And more investigative stories are undoubtedly beneficial to society if they are from respectable organisations. However, it is important for the public to be able to understand both sides of a case and this is when independent, neutral third party reporting is essential. Stakeholder media can be an extremely useful supplement, but it should not replace traditional media coverage.

by Emma Heald and Christie Silk

During 2006 and 2007 Gannett's local papers underwent a transformation from traditional news centres to 24-hour, local, multimedia "information centers." One of the changes that papers were encouraged to embrace was building and using databases of local information that affects the community, such as crime statistics, salaries, road works, weather stats or property and gas prices. Such databases are a highly useful source of information for both reporters and readers, and though the information is available to the public, it is often not easily accessible online. As more and more local papers develop such databases in an effort to increase their value to communities, how can they be used?

Finding stories through databases

The local databases can generate story ideas by allowing journalists to spot trends or anomalies they might not otherwise have noticed, or draw conclusions that they would not otherwise have come to. Stories about crime reports or new businesses, for example, may well come out of studying data and will always be interesting to the local community. The databases also supply plenty of evidence with which to enhance or back up stories, acting as a supplementary interactive tool.

Reporters working with databases needed to be able to locate information, often by requesting it from government offices, and need to know what to do with it once they have it. For the first task, it is helpful for journalists to develop contacts and relationships with local authorities so as to access information more easily, and Brian Butts, Director of Digital and Technology at the Cincinnati Enquirer explained that his team has made a list of objections that reporters might encounter and how to deal with them.

For the second, some experience in computer-assisted reporting is crucial. The National Institute of Computer-Assisted Reporting trains journalists "in the practical skills of finding, prying loose and analyzing electronic information." It is a joint program of Investigative Reporters and Editors, Inc and the Missouri School of Journalism. Clearly developers are also needed to work out the best ways to display the data.

Involving readers

As well as using the databases to assist with reporting, papers such as the Cincinnati Enquirer offer freestanding database products to readers. Providing access to a local database means that the community will hopefully come to see the paper as a more useful resource for local information as well as offering traditional news stories. Taking the data that actually affects people's lives and allowing them to use it and make sense of it is a way to enhance the role that a local paper plays in the community. Data becomes really useful when it is interpreted and made accessible, and this is what journalists should try to do for their readers. Merging data from different sources is a good start, as is making it easily searchable using different criteria.

On Cincinnati.com, for example, there are both databases that directly support news stories, and those which standalone. One of the former is that which allows readers to search by lawmaker to see how much lobbyists and their employers spent in 2008 to honor public officials and organizations connected to them. Another is a database of the smoking complaints made against local businesses, which has been a hot topic following the ban of smoking in public places that came into effect in Ohio on May 3. "How much does the boss make?" is a freestanding database allowing readers to compare the salaries of executives at public companies. The data does not have to be all new, for example the Iowa-based Gazette Online offers a wide range of data including a tornado index giving details on tornadoes from 1950 to 2008.

Looking at how to make the data accessible and interesting to readers is crucial. The Cincinnati Enquirer team have developed CinciNavigator, which allows journalists to show data geographically on maps. Users can see an overview of the city or zoom in on specific areas to see, for example, who has been arrested where in the past month, the current traffic conditions, who is applying to start a new business, where to find what restaurant, compare gas prices, which properties have recently been sold for how much. Crucially, it allows readers to make geographical comparisons. The Fort Myers News-Press allows users to search different areas of the city on a map for different types of crime, for example.

Staying up-to-date

One of the potential problems with local databases is that they become out of date very swiftly, and thus need to be continually updated to remain useful to both journalists and readers. In some cases it is possible to set up an automatic update if there is an available information feed, and this is one of the areas where good relations with the community come into play, said Butts. When reporters encounter less technologically advanced data providers, they should arrange to be supplied with regular updates.

New third party tools

Potential new tools for database journalism were recently awarded grants by the 2009 Knight News Challenge. DocumentCloud, the biggest winner of the 2009 Knight News Challenge, is a project to create a primary-source index conceived by journalists and developers at the New York Times and ProPublica. Aron Pilhofer, editor of interactive news technologies at the Times and one of the project's creators, told Nieman Lab's Zachary Seward that "It will turn documents into data." Another winner was Data Visualization, which plans to use its grant to create a suite of tools that can visually depict data and statistics: something which might be too expensive for smaller news organisations to develop alone.

How to monetise

Local databases can be monetised in a variety of ways. One is simply to license the collected, merged and analysed data to others. Another would be to incorporate targeted advertising, such as security systems around crime statistics, or estate agents around housing prices. A third option would be to allow advertising within the database tools, such as letting chain restaurants appear on a map displaying a set of data.

There are many ways in which newspapers can effectively use local databases order to provide a unique service and highlight their worth as compared to national general interest papers. In itself, the data provides little value, but when it is analysed and made searchable it is an incredibly useful resource, in terms of writing stories, building a community and making money.

On Tuesday 7 July at 15.00 London time, Brian Butts Director of Digital and Technology at the Cincinnati Enquire will be speaking at a WEF webinar on "How to dig deep into the most important community stories." More details here.

There is a crisis in trust and communication between the British public and the mainstream media, a new report has concluded. The gulf between public expectations of news provision and the actual nature of articles, which oscillate between esoteric or irresponsible, leaves readers feeling confused and excluded.

The report, entitled 'Public Trust In The News' was conducted by researchers from Manchester and Leeds Universities and was published by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. It investigated the dynamics of news production and consumption, to ascertain if there is a difference in what "the public expects from news media and what journalists mean by serving the public".  The paper highlights the underlying causes of an apparent widespread disenchantment with the media and the detrimental effects this is having on the standards of reporting and civil participation in democracy. Thankfully, the report offers several propositions for a new journalistic direction, which could refresh the reader-writer compact.

As online news becomes more and more prevalent, with an unimaginable amount of information available at users' fingertips and Internet now ranked as US consumers' top way to access their news, how can media organisations make sure that readers find their articles?  Part of the answer is search engine optimisation, which is becoming an essential part of the daily life of a newsroom. For the printed product, newspapers must try to sell the paper as a whole; online, articles can attract traffic individually as readers come across them while searching for specific topics. It is therefore important that each story, rather than simply the site as a whole, is 'optimised' to appear higher in search results. Aside from highly technical aspects like HTML meta tagging, URL structure or site navigation, what can a newspaper do to optimise its content for search engines?

How to introduce SEO to the newsroom

One major potential stumbling block is that journalists might view SEO as a way to manipulate their stories and take away their true value. So the way it is presented to staff is extremely important. And indeed, it is crucial that newspapers do not get carried away with prioritising SEO above all else. Even Google advises creating content "primarily for your users, not search engines:" it is important to make your site easily accessible to search engines but still remain focused on your visitors' needs.

Clearly, it is important for all reporters to be aware of the ways that they can make each individual article more search-friendly. After all, journalists have always wanted their stories to be as widely read as possible, in print as well as online, and are likely to be willing to help make that happen. And often, the principles of SEO echo the principles of writing a good story: such as the idea that the first sentence should be a summary of the rest of the article, containing relevant concepts or keywords. One difference is that less generic, more specific works for SEO in terms of names or concepts. Google recommends shorter rather than longer titles.

Esa Peltonen, who has been working as a web analyst at the largest Finnish daily Helsingin Sanomat for three years, said that he has worked extensively with editorial staff, for example on how to use Google, to get an idea of how users will be searching and what kind of search words people are using. Head of audience development at the Telegraph, Julian Sambles, said in March that the paper was trying to give journalists "the knowledge and understanding that they need so they can apply it to their daily production process and make informed decisions about content when they're writing or publishing it." Thinking about SEO should be second nature, he added.

Papers must also consider their goals in optimising content for search engines. As Drew Broomhall, head of search at the Times explained, if you rank success by sheer volume of traffic, then you should "write the same as everyone else but more of it and more frequently updated." However, if you are looking to increase engagement on a specific subject you need more detailed keyword analysis and niche research.

One straightforward course is the need to stay ahead of the trends: predict what people are going to be talking about in upcoming months and provide appropriate content. "Fix SEO requirements into the editorial calendar," Broomhall suggests. Obviously much news is unpredictable, but there are some events that are year-in-year-out, or which are easy to prepare for in advance, such as an election or a festival. It is necessary to consider both specific, distinct events, such as religious holidays, and longer, less defined periods such as winter travel. Articles that contain links and that have been linked to by others appear higher in search results. Therefore, with annual events, it is beneficial to link to last year's coverage and make use of old content that already has inbound links to help promote the new content.

Hiring a SEO specialist?

As well as training all reporters to be aware of the principles of search engine optimisation, many newspapers have taken the step of hiring an in-house specialist. Ideally such a person would have deep technical knowledge combined with considerable journalistic experience, but such candidates might be hard to find. Peltonen comes from a business background, Broomhall from journalism and technology.

There are also many third party services available to news outlets, supplementary to the guidance of an in-house expert, such as Thomson Reuters' OpenCalais which recently announced deals made with the Huffington Post, DailyMe and the Mail Online. OpenCalais offers an 'Archive Express' feature which can tag an archive of up to 20 million documents in 24 hours. The service 'reads' and breaks down articles into their essential elements - who, what, when, where, how - and tags and sorts them so that it is easier to bring archived articles into 'related stories' sections and improve their search relevance.

Analysing traffic

A SEO specialist would be responsible for analysing traffic to a news outlet's site, looking at how readers find content, readership patterns and what methods of optimisation work best. Peltonen explained how he started off looking at basic data such as what are the top news stories, how many people are going where on the site, and started to work out how to increase traffic. His paper partnered with Microsoft to further analyse traffic data. Such traffic data analysis can be used to spot and develop potential niche verticals to focus on, for example, by looking at repeat visitor figures.  

Google keywords

Purchasing Google keywords to guarantee that news articles appear higher on search results is one of the more costly ways for news outlets to promote their content. Peltonen said that his paper frequently buys specific words, for instance for sports events, but stressed that it would be cheaper to improve the paper's SEO. Buying keywords could also raise ethical issues, depending on the words and their context. The Sun, for example, reportedly purchased the key words 'Natasha Richardson' immediately after the British actress's sudden death in March, in what appears to be a blatant attempt to profit from the tragedy. The Guardian came under considerable criticism last August when, apparently accidentally, it purchased the Google keywords "Madeleine McCann," giving any searchers the link to its coverage of the child's disappearance. The Guardian promptly relinquished the rights, and said it would review its list of keywords. Purchasing Google keywords in order to promote a product is common practice, but is it ethical for newspapers?

Evidently, SEO strategies are necessary in today's media landscape, not only to make more money but also to spread awareness of stories and help readers find what they are looking for and therefore should be embraced by journalists and editors as well as publishers. Search engine 'friendliness' should not be prioritised over good, accurate stories but it should be used to promote such content. Journalistic training is vital in order to optimise each individual article, and larger strategic steps should be taken by editors in conjunction with SEO specialists.

On Tuesday 23 June at 14.00 London time, Drew Broomhall, Head of Search at the Times of London will be speaking at a WEF webinar on "How to teach your journalists to write for the web." More details here.

The governmental and corporate document leaking site, Wikileaks, has been awarded Amnesty International's New Media Award, for its role in the production of the revelatory document, "Kenya: The Cry of Blood - Report on Extra-Judicial Killings and Disappearances, Sep 2008".  The attribution of this award is indicative of recognition of the work done by the site by bodies similarly concerned by the exposure of human rights abuses. Moreover, the accolade should function as an alert to the mainstream press to the exisitence of a penetrative and useful journalistic resource. 

The report was based on evidence provided by Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, which suggested that more than 500 men were killed or made to disappear in a police campaign.  As expressed by Wikileaks, this may have been 'with the connivance' of the Kenyan Government.  The document is not publicly available in Kenya. On Friday, a UN special rapporteur investigating the events called for the resignation of the top Kenyan officials, emphasising the political significance of the evidence revealed in the report, and the utility of the online resource in global campaigns for social justice. 

Yesterday, the recently founded Media140 held its first Twitter and microblogging conference. Held at London's Southbank Centre - a venue in the heart of the UK capital synonymous with innovation - the event largely focussed on the effects that Twitter and micoblogging are having on the news gathering process and was attended by journalists from Guardian.co.uk, TimesOnline, TechCrunch, BBC, Aljazeera, Reuters and Sky News.

Kicking off discussions, associate editor of the Sunday Herald and author of 'The Play ethic', Pat Kane, opened up the conference with a keynote presentation on the way breaking news services were dramatically changing the face of journalism: "Reading a newspaper on a street corner might be seen as banal. What's becoming just as banal is producing news on that street corner," said Kane. You can access his slideshow from the presentation here.

IHT correspondent Anand Giridharadas discussed the interesting development that due to increasing Internet usage, "foreign correspondents no longer cover one place for the exclusive benefit of readers somewhere else." The possibility to access multiple news sources online means that people do not any more just read the news specifically targeted at them, but can read news written for readers on the other side of the world. Hence, a foreign correspondent's audience has changed significantly: they are not just writing for people "somewhere else," rather "the reported-on are among the most avid consumers of what we report."

He cites Google Trends statistics which show that the phrases "new york times India" and "Washington post India" are searched eight times as much in India, proportionally, as they are in the US. He contrasts this with the situation just 25 years ago when correspondents' work would just appear in the country it was commissioned from, while the populations in question remained "for the most part oblivious to what was being said about them."

Every day, World Association of Newspapers (WAN) journalists follow developments in the global newspaper industry to provide you with the most relevant news and analysis. Offering breaking news, expert commentary and interviews with industry leaders, WAN publications cover the latest trends for Publishers and Editors, as well as Arab and African Media.

The Shaping the Future of the Newspaper Project was born to help newspapers address short-term and long-term plans to survive and thrive in the changing media environment. The SFN project identifies multiple topics of import to publishers' operational and strategic opportunities, and develops reports on these topics, which include step-by-step strategies, case studies, and analysis of trends -- in a context that is relevant to newspaper executives. The SFN Project maintains the SFNBlog to inform these executives to the most important daily news in the industry.


The Editors Weblog, a publication of the World Editors Forum, analyzes daily developments in newspaper newsrooms and new media. As the media industry rapidly transforms, shifting platform focus from analogue to digital, newspaper editors need to learn about and implement the full variety of new media in the everyday functions of their newsrooms. The combination of outstanding newspaper journalism with these new technologies enriches content and enhances the experience of the reader.  The goal of the Editors Weblog is to make sure that editors everywhere understand the effects that new media are having on journalism and to provide practical solutions for their newspapers.


Reseau Africain de Presse (RAP 21) is an electronic network for the African press that exists to facilitate the exchange of innovative ideas and the latest information about the business of newspapers, issues related to press freedom and career development opportunities. Through its website and electronic newsletter, RAP 21 provides a forum for discussion between newspaper executives and editors, journalists and other media practitioners spanning the continent.


The Arab Press Network (APN) is a digital network which supports the development of a stronger independent press in the Arab world by facilitating the exchange of ideas and experiences between newspaper publishers and editors. The network also aims to support newspapers in developing their commercial strategies by distributing leading-edge knowledge and strategies from the industry.

To say the least, 2008 proved a difficult year for newspapers in many nations. Rising printing and distribution costs, waning circulations and fragmented audiences continued to challenge a business model that seems increasingly outdated. And despite many promising advancements made by newspaper companies in Internet and mobile, revenues remain far behind those of print.

But the news is far from all negative. Below is some food for thought for newsroom executives everywhere, ways in which newspapers began adapting to the modern media landscape in 2008 that will continue through 2009.

INTERNET TRENDS BECOMING NEW TOOLS FOR JOURNALISM
2008 saw the continued proliferation of social and professional networking sites Facebook and LinkedIn, with newspapers and journalists, with newspapers and journalists, such as the New York Times well-known columnist Nicholas Kristof, creating their own profiles, applications and connecting with new audiences. User-Generated Content (UGC) continued to gather speed as well, with CNN's iReport in the US and LePost in France among many others around the world. A December report by the Bivings Group also noted that 58% of US newspapers now use some form of UGC.

But the biggest social media revelation to journalists came in the form of 140 characters. The social site, Twitter, which allows users to post short messages for all to see, officially became a widespread tool for journalists in 2008. For example, journalists covering the US Presidential Elections took live notes from conventions and rallies that readers could follow and that also helped to shape those journalists' main story. During the Mumbai terrorist attacks, "tweets", or Twitter messages, appeared as the first news of the attacks. Twitter feeds can also be aggregated, bringing all angles of those covering a certain event into one, comprehensible, instantly-updated record.

Another Internet trend is the "Personalized Web", evoked by newspaper experiments such as MyTimes and start-ups such as Netvibes that provide customizable pages based on RSS feeds and widgets. Arguably the boldest example of personalized news is the BBC's revamped homepage, released in March 2008, which allows users to create their own page based on the BBC information they use most. But personalized news seems to be picking up more slowly than social media. For one thing, Internet users are used to getting the information they seek from many Web pages and may not yet be ready to create their own pages. Secondly, search engines still rule, meaning that traffic to most news sites continues to come through Google, its competitors and their various news and alerts functions. So a customizable homepage like the BBC created, which could ultimately prove a competitor to search engines, remains to become a habit of the general Internet public.  

Personalized news and social media are just two examples of all of the innovation that is occurring in digital media. As technologies continue to rapidly develop, how are journalists and publishers going to keep up? Is it worth learning to use all of these tools if six months down the line they prove to be a fad? Are these technologies hurting or helping newsrooms gather and report news?

Chances are, in 2009 journalists everywhere will continue to experiment with the latest digital fads, and smart newsrooms will set aside R&D funds to play around with new ideas. Who knows? Despite predictions that 2009 will be a difficult year for newspapers, with a lot of hard work, calculated risk and a bit of luck, the industry could find the online golden egg that it has been seeking.

PROLIFERATION OF ONLINE-ONLY NEWS SITES
Perhaps filling in for the difficulties of the print product, more high-profile Internet-based sites began popping up in 2008. Perhaps most notably, The Huffington Post, launched in the summer of 2005, has already jumped to one of the US' top-30 news sites, bolstered by the US Presidential Elections, according to Nielsen Online. Media pundit, entrepreneur and Rupert Murdoch biographer Michael Wolff trumpeted the late-'07 launch of his news aggregator Newser as a "revolution in how people get their news." One year after Wolff's launch, he gained a competitor in Tina Brown, a former Vanity Fair and New Yorker editor, who launched her own, rapidly growing online-only site, The Daily Beast, a mixture of aggregated and original articles. And these are only the high-profile, American examples. The relatively low overhead costs of launching an online-based site combined with the ease of aggregating content and news commentary means that this trend will surely continue in 2009. But there is one problem with the sites mentioned above. Aggregation and commentary can only go so far: in an online environment, what happens to the investigative journalism that newspapers have provided for the past two centuries?

NOT-FOR-PROFIT JOURNALISM
Investigative journalism is expensive to produce. Money-wise, it has always been a loss-leader for newspapers. But with modern-day information ubiquity, investigative journalism is just a loss. Whereas once newspapers could claim ownership of a groundbreaking piece and sell papers and advertising around it, now readers are often unaware of the original source of the story they are reading on the Web. So what is going to happen to the type of watchdogging we need for democracy?

Several non-profit start-ups have begun to answer that question. In late 2007, former newspaper editor, Joel Kramer, took his print expertise and moved it online with the launch of the non-profit Minnpost.com. Former WSJ editor Paul Steiger did something similar with ProPublica. The Voice of San Diego, and other similar sites around the US, are making a name for themselves as "serious, original reporting by professional journalists," with the New York Times declaring the sites "stand out" amongst Internet news sites. Crowdsourcing site OfftheBus, a partnership between the Huffington Post and the non-profit NewAssignment.net, helped capture the 2008 Elections and the Knight News Challenge winner Spot.Us is collecting donations from the public to fund investigative stories. Even former Merrill Lynch newspaper analyst Lauren Rich Fine backed the non-profit model in 2008.

With this in mind, are the days of major metropolitan and national newspapers digging up the dirt on businessmen and politicians over? For the time being, no. But newsrooms everywhere are under extreme economic pressures and have been cutting core staff, making it even more difficult for newspapers to conduct the type of investigative journalism their communities need. Don't be surprised if more non-profit (no dividends to shareholders), Internet based (low operating costs) ventures spring up to fill the gaps.

COMPETING NEWSPAPERS PARTNERING UP
As many newspaper newsrooms are cutting staff, wire services should be in greater demand than ever. But 2008 saw a backlash against the world's biggest news agency, the Associated Press, by its members. Several publishers handed in their notice to the non-profit agency partially in response to price hikes and complaining of low value for their money.

In response to the AP mini-exodus, some papers, even those in competition with one another, began joining forces. Papers in Ohio and Florida whose geographical coverage overlaps are swapping stories and even combining bureaux. Not only will this help the papers save money, but it frees up time for reporters to cover issues not being covered elsewhere. In the current economic climate, this trend will continue, but not without its effects on the industry.

Some traditional news hounds would argue that two papers covering similar stories in a certain region add depth and uncover more facts that may otherwise be lost to readers. This may be true. But is it really worth having two reporters on the scene to gather one or two more different pieces of information when there may be other stories elsewhere? And what about the multitude of photojournalists that different organizations send to press conferences and like events where the story subjects don't move much? Is it really worth sending all of those photogs? Couldn't photos just be shared? Without a doubt, these are questions that cash-strapped publishers and editors are asking themselves right now. Expect to see more cross-corporation cooperation in 2009.

IS PRINT REALLY THREATENED?
We've said it before and we'll say it again: print is not going to die. But, considering the trend of the past year, print's reach will be considerably reduced, at least in Western nations.

During the last few months of 2008, publishers' struggle to maintain the high costs of printing and distribution has become apparent. In October, The Christian Science Monitor, a beacon of quality American journalism, announced that it would stop printing its daily edition. In mid-December, the Detroit Free Press, which recently won a broadcast award, decided to limit home delivery to Friday's and weekends while trimming the daily single-copy sale paper to one section. Most recently, the American Society of Newspaper Editors is considering dropping "paper" from its name.

What do these cuts mean for the news"paper" industry? As circulations drop across the Western world, it could mean substantial savings. Weekday papers often make a loss to begin with, so cutting the costs of printing those papers should cover any lost advertising revenue in those same papers.

Perhaps the question publishers should be asking themselves is "Do cutbacks on the paper product matter to readers"? Well, cutbacks will certainly change the face of the newspaper industry. But in the end, media houses are in the news "distribution" business, not the news"paper" business. As long as their news is published, media houses will have completed their service to the public.

The 100-year old Pulitzer prize winning Christian Science Monitor has bravely announced that it is ending its daily print format and going fully digital: it will now only print a weekly "magazine" edition. The Editors Weblog caught up with the Editor-in-Chief of the Christian Science Monitor, John Yemma, and we discussed the thinking behind this move and how on earth a nationally distributed newspaper completely restructures itself for a digital future.

This story has been broken down into two parts. Part 1 focuses on why the CSM took this step and its initial steps down this path. Part 2 looks at the nuts and bolts: restructuring the newsroom, retraining, and managing staff through change.

The CSM's decision has sparked the inevitable debate about whether this is the beginning of the end for daily printed newspapers, a debate which will run and run in the years to come. However, the peculiar nature of the CSM's subsidised business model, its relatively small print distribution run and international readership base, make it difficult to draw any firm conclusions on industry trends from this move. Nevertheless, many in the industry will be watching closely to see how the CSM manages this move and whether it proves successful or not. If the CSM is successful, then this may lead to other newspapers pursuing this business model, but these papers will have to have a distinctive and loyal readership like the CSM if they have any hope of being successful.

Why the move away from print?

Yemma (left) states that there are two main reasons behind the CSM's controversial decision to move away from the daily print model. Firstly, the CSM's publishers, "saw the writing on the wall, they knew that the Internet user patterns and reader preferences and so forth were changing the business model of print. Print was becoming increasingly untenable, especially for the Monitor, which has an international audience. We just don't have enough reach with our print product, but we have great reach with our web product. That's not uncommon in the world of publishing right now to come to that conclusion, but for the Monitor we were able to make the change a little faster, because the Christian Science church wanted to move away from subsidising the Monitor within about three to five years."

The CSM is subsidised by the Christian Science church, with the church contributing approximately 50% ($13 million) of the newspapers revenue.  The newspaper itself makes about $12.5 million in terms of print advertising, circulation, web revenue and syndication. Therefore, the publishers of the CSM felt that, secondly, this level of subsidisation could not continue forever, so the team decided to look at the newspapers various options.

How the move to digital began - where to begin?

Two years ago the CSM convened a task force to look at the possibility of dropping its daily print edition. The newspaper worked at it from all angles; from prototyping to financial analysis, and working with a consultant (newspaper consultant Chris Urban), marketing group (Kadence Associates - who organised focus groups and surveys), and a PR company (Shift Communications - who handled assisted the company in communicating this move). A former editor of the Christian Science Monitor, John Hughes, and newspaper consultant, Chris Urban, headed up this task force.

Surveying the core readership base - will they buy it?

Given the nature of the CSM and its relatively small daily print run, international appeal as a Christian newspaper and its worldwide reputation, the reasoning behind this move - no matter the financial calculations and industry trends - is sound. However, if the core CSM readership did not largely support the change, then all bets would be off. The CSM surveyed its core loyal readership base, taking sample groups to sound out their response. Yemma states that the CSM was most concerned with converting this core group as quickly as possible to reading the newspaper in a new way. Its focus groups revealed that 50% welcomed the idea of decreasing the frequency of the CSM and that of the 50% who were "on the fence" only half of these wanted to preserve it as it is now.

Once the decision to drop the daily print edition was announced, the CSM had a customer service team field all calls and emails about the decision from readers, which Yemma receives a daily report on. The accumulative report of this over the past few weeks is consistently running at just 14% negative. 35% are asking questions about this new model will work, such as price and so forth, with the rest being positive. Yemma feels the CSM has got a, "pretty good response. We expected worse."

Yemma is clear that the most important thing for them to find out is how many people will convert from buying the daily newspaper to the weekly magazine. This will not be known until the new format is marketed in the spring, and they begin selling the weekly in April. The CSM's marketing estimate is that they can covert about 80% of the people currently buying the daily to take up the weekly model. On this, Yemma says, "that is the best we can do at the moment without having perfect knowledge of the future."

Communicating with your reader

On the CSM website currently there is a web cast featuring John Yemma and the Managing Publishing, John Wells. Here they talk over the various changes and why they have come about for their reader. The site also has an in depth editorial on the changes ahead for the venerated newspaper.

"The Web is not just a paperless publishing medium, it is a totally new way of telling stories"

The move to a web focused future will, "unshackle the newsroom from print."  Yemma says "We will get to see what we can do online in a way that we have never been able to do before. I really believe that journalism in is the infancy of story telling online and that online story telling is about interactivity. I expect us to look more at intelligently moderated user generated content, crowd sourcing, and expanding the reach of CSM journalism.  We can look more at speaking to our readers, and asking them to send us their images and stories of the events hitting the headlines, and thus expand our eyes and ears. There is a non-linear way of telling stories on the web that I think has to be developed by journalists who want their stories to be told in the most appropriate way for the medium."

Yemma goes on to say, "The Web is not just a paperless publishing medium: it is a totally new way of telling stories. We can really start using the web for what it is really all about, which is this three dimensional medium getting information and providing it at whatever level you can convey it."

Part 2 - In our next article on the CSM, the Weblog talks to Yemma about reorganising the team and the newsroom for a weekly magazine and web future, retraining, and staff cuts.

Success of the Web? Try Newspaper Values With a New Twist
Caroline Little, Adviser to Guardian News & Media and former CEO and publisher of Washington Post/Newsweek Interactives, United States:

"Keep one foot rooted in the core journalism values of the core product, and one that happens to be delivering the most revenue, and with the other, stretch as far as possible to try new things in this new medium."

"The news websites share the same journalistic values as the newspapers, but the web folks also are working in a medium that's indisputably different, one that requires trying new things and sometimes going down in flames," she said. "Fear of failure can be debilitating. All we have to lose by being too conservative is everything."

Chances are you've heard all about the now-'resolved' dispute that opposed the Associated Press to social news sharing site Drudge Retort, over the fair - or unfair - use of AP quotes. Even more likely is the possibility that you've heard emotion-filled - and perhaps inaccurate - coverage of the affair. So this is an attempt to untangle some of the knots.

The four-point recap, clarifications
Lesson one: The blogosphere's outcry is heard
Lesson two: but the winner is?
Lesson three: AP - "Whither" or "Adapt"? Change the DMCA or set a legal precedent?


The four-point recap, clarifications

If you haven't followed the story, here's a four-point recap (or skip to next):

- Earlier this month, AP demanded that the Drudge Retort take down seven entries, which were in its view violating policies of fair use of content and the agency's copyright (AP wants to charge outside sources for using for excerpts longer than four words).
- Drudge Retort Web host Rogers Cadenhead consequently blogged about the takedown notice, and this created a ##-storm in the blogosphere, with many influential bloggers including TechCrunch's Michael Arrington and BuzzMachine's Jeff Jarvis calling on the boycott of AP content.
- Shortly after, on June 16, AP retreated, but didn't recant: it admitted that its request had been "heavy-handed" but didn't withdraw the takedown notices.
- Then, on June 19, AP issued a statement to say its conflict with Cadenhead had been resolved, after AP lawyers gave him guidelines to make the postings suitable, and that "both parties consider the matter closed." This really meant that Cadenhead agreed to modify the contested items and ended up not reposting them.

The guidelines discussed with Cadenhead have yet to be made public though, and the AP is working on a new set of guidelines for "fair use" of its content in general. "If AP's guidelines end up like the ones they shared with me, we're headed for a Napster-style battle on the issue of fair use," Cadenhead wrote on his blog. He told the New York Times' Saul Hansell that some of the key issues for AP related to protecting headlines and first paragraphs of stories.

First clarification: unlike what has been widely echoed on the Web and suggested by another New York Times article on June 16, AP was never supposed to meet the Media Bloggers Association (MBA) in order to draft guidelines for all bloggers, according to MBA President Robert Cox.

Another clarification: the blogosphere went ablaze when it learned that AP had filed a lawsuit against Cadenhead in June, seemingly out of the blue. According to Cox though, "Drudge Retort got on AP's radar due to the posting of entire articles with exact headlines which all parties agreed constituted copyright violations two months BEFORE the most recent spate of Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) Take Down Notices."

Lesson one: The blogosphere's outcry is heard

News of the Associated Press' June take-down notices was met with severe criticism, calls for boycott - and many profanities - by the blogosphere.

In one of his posts, entitled "FU AP," Jarvis wrote: "Bloggers, unless the AP recants and apologizes to Cadenhead, I urge you to avoid linking to the AP and to link to reporting at its source." Jarvis also encouraged bloggers to copy-paste full AP stories.

In a self-admittedly "ridiculous" post, after being quoted in an AP story, Harrington announced that "I've called my lawyers (really) and have asked them to deliver a DMCA takedown demand to the A.P. And I will also be sending them a bill for $12.50." According to Harrington this "is exactly what the A.P. would have charged me if I published a 22 word quote from one of their articles."

That short posting alone generated more than 230 comments - most of which were harshly critical of AP's stance at the time. The wildfire that spread in the blogosphere and the seemingly rapid turn-about of AP once again illustrated a known fact: blogs have gained enough traction and buzz-generating capacity to concretely influence and shape the media landscape.

Lesson two: but the winner is?    

One - erroneous - interpretation is to say that bloggers - won their battle against the traditional media Goliath, which was trying "to impose some guidelines on the free-wheeling blogosphere, where extensive quoting and even copying of entire news articles is common," - a quote from a New York Times story. (The Times' coverage of the affair was, according to Harrington, hindered by a conflict of interest, considering that the Times is one of AP's members and sits on its board of directors.)

But this isn't a victory for bloggers. "The A.P. is going to assert a much stricter interpretation of fair use than most people on the Internet are used to," reported Hansell on the Bits blog.

As mentioned above, Cadenhead had to agree to AP's proposed modifications, and ended up not reposting the material. Furthermore, this case is really a microcosm for the bigger issue of how to adapt "fair use" policies and copyright to the digital age in general.

"I'm glad that my personal legal dispute with the AP is resolved, thanks to the help of the Media Bloggers Association, but it does nothing to resolve the larger conflict between how AP interprets fair use and how thousands of people are sharing news on the web," wrote Cadenhead, following his two-hour conversation and settlement with the AP.

"I think AP and other media organizations should focus on how to encourage bloggers to link their stories in the manner they like, rather than hoping their lawyers can rebottle the genie of social news."

While Cadenhead may be right in terms of global news consumption trends on the Web, the AP was clearly in its own right under the US DMCA, at least regarding the stories posted in their entirety with the same headline. But the legal provisions concerning "fair use" of content for smaller excerpts have remained vague - simply undefined - until now, something the AP hopes to reform by setting guidelines.

"I think it would be helpful for bloggers and users of social news sites to know what the AP believes to be fair use of their copyrighted work," said Cadenhead's lawyer. But "I hope that any guidelines that are issued are not interpreted as an agreed definition of fair use" under copyright law.

Lesson three: AP - "Whither" or "Adapt"? Change the DMCA or set a legal precedent?

The Associated Press versus Drudge Retort - blogosphere - affair throws light onto two main issues:

- Does this case exemplify the 'old media' versus 'new media' divide? Is the AP's stance representative of its inability to adapt to a new context?

Yes, in the eyes of new media guru Jarvis: "I value the AP and don't want it to die. I want it to morph to a new model and a new future. But I am afraid that in its fights, we are seeing its inability to adapt."

On the other hand, few bloggers have pondered the more controversial view that the AP's approach may actually be a sign of its willingness to adapt - granted, not yet to the 'utopian' world copyright-lessness. But the AP, in its own way and after being "heavy-handed," is now attempting to define new standards that are adapted to the digital age. (Read this note on June 13 by Jim Kennedy, VP and Director of Strategy for AP.) No doubt some of the outspoken bloggers mentioned previously could be quick to shatter this argument.

- As is often the case, the law doesn't evolve as rapidly as the context it seeks to protect. The blurry wordings of the current DMCA must either be reformed quickly, after multilateral consultation, or the issue of "fair use" of content will eventually be settled in court and set a precedent, costing either news organizations or bloggers - presumably both.

This is the real issue at stake: how fast can the law be adapted to the reality of the Web, in order to avoid costly conflicts over subjective interpretations of "fair use" of content? As Hansell concluded in the Bits blog, "the unsettled state of the law makes it a gamble to take the matter to court."

A costly gamble, whether it ends in a loss for the AP or for bloggers. Or both.

Note that, just in case, no AP material longer than four words was excerpted in the above.

Bloggers: you can also watch this video by DigitalJournal.com for advice from Harvard Citizen Media Law Project Director David Ardia.



Source: Buzzmachine (here and here) - Techcrunch (here and here) - Associated Press - New York Times - New York Times Bits blog - Mediabloggers.org - The Moderate Voice - paidcontent.org

The 2008 Newsroom Barometer gathered the answers of more than 700 editors and senior news executives from 120 countries, and was conducted online in March 2008.

This was a relatively big increase from the 435 senior news executives who answered the Newsroom Barometer last year.

The goal is to conduct a Newsroom Barometer every year, in order to compare and contrast the newspaper industry's trends over a longer period of time.

Here's a quick view of this year's respondents:

Job Title / others:

A near majority of the 713 respondents were editors-in-chief (320), and there were 120 managing editors. All respondents were senior news executives, there were neither journalists nor managers, as was the case in 2006.

Three quarters of respondents were male, underlining a still existent gender gap among top newspaper editorial positions. Circulation at 28% of the surveyed newspapers decreased last year, compared to 39% whose circulation increased. These numbers are both reassuring at a time of widespread doom and gloom reports, but they also reveal the transition print newspapers are going through.

Age:

There were more younger respondents (23.5% under 40) than in 2006, although senior editors (age above 50) still constituted 42% of all respondents. The split is representative of the age range of newsroom editors throughout the world.

Type of newspaper:

Compared to 2006, this year's newspapers were more representative of the industry as a whole, as two thirds of respondents came from regional or local papers, compared to a third from national or international titles.

Print circulation:

Many editors from smaller newspapers participated in this year's survey. Nearly half of respondents worked for papers with a print circulation of less than 50,000 copies. 19% of respondents worked for papers with a circulation superior to 200,000 copies.

Website traffic:

For 66% of respondents, their daily website traffic was below 200,000 unique visitors per day, which is also representative of the world press on the whole. 6% still didn't have a website, compared to 9% last year.

More about methodology

The Newsroom Barometer is a purely online survey through the Zogby website (www.zogby.com). The poll was accessible by invitation only and was conducted in eight languages (English, Spanish, French, German, Portuguese, Arabic, Russian and Japanese). To avoid answers from people who were not senior news executives, a tailored email was sent to editors-in-chief using the World Editors Forum database (www.worldeditorsforum.org), which counts 7,000 senior news executives' emails.

Read Part 1: Presentation - main results, the integrated newsroom will be the norm
Read Part 2: Multimedia, multi-skilled and integrated
Read Part 3: The future of the press
Read Part 4: Who participated in the survey?
Read Part 5: Comments by John Zogby and WEF President George Brock
Read Part 6: Threats to newspapers, areas of investment, more results

Welcome to the 2008 edition of the Newsroom Barometer, an annual survey of editors around the world conducted by Zogby International and commissioned by the World Editors Forum and Reuters.

The global survey gathered the answers of more than 700 editors and senior news executives from 120 countries, and was conducted online in March 2008.

In last year's Newsroom Barometer, newspaper editors had revealed their overwhelming optimism about the future of their newspapers - an optimism that is still widespread today. In this edition, editors worldwide see neither their newsroom nor their journalists as being "print-only," having clearly accepted the multimedia revolution.

Do you agree or disagree that the "integrated newsroom" or "multimedia newsroom" will be the norm for newspapers in your country in 5 years?



Among the main results this year:
 
-  86% believe integrated print and online newsrooms will become the norm, and 83% believe journalists will be expected to be able to produce content for all media within five years.
  
- Two-thirds believe some editorial functions will be outsourced, despite frequent newsroom opposition to the practice.

- A plurality - 44% - believe on-line will be the most common platform for reading news in the future, compared with 41% last year. Thirty-one cited print (down from 35% last year), 12% mobile and 7% e-paper. The rest were unsure.
 
- 35% said training journalists in new media was the number one priority for investing in editorial quality. Recruiting more journalists was cited by 31%, up from 22% last year.
 
- A majority of editors - 56%- believe news in the future will be free, up from 48% from last year's survey. Only one-third believe the news will remain paid for, while 11% were unsure.
 
- Two-thirds of respondents believe the importance of opinion and analysis pages will increase.
 
- A majority - 58% - think the decline in young readership is the biggest threat for the future of newspapers.
 
"The survey shows that editors-in-chief are already multi-media minded and that they have the capacity to carry out the transition from print-only to print and online," said Bertrand Pecquerie, Director of the World Editors Forum.

The 2008 Newsroom Barometer also brought good news concerning editors' morale. Despite some (see Part 4) growing concerns as to the improvement of the quality of journalism in the future, an overwhelming majority of newspaper editors are still very optimistic about the future of their newspaper:


Read Part 1: Presentation - main results, the integrated newsroom will be the norm
Read Part 2: Multimedia, multi-skilled and integrated
Read Part 3: The future of the press
Read Part 4: Who participated in the survey?
Read Part 5: Comments by John Zogby and WEF President George Brock
Read Part 6: Threats to newspapers, areas of investment, more results

Or watch the video here.

For the full Newsroom Barometer results and commentary plus the complete, analytical guide to the monumental transformations taking place in the newspaper industry, please consult the print or PDF version of Trends in Newsrooms 2008 (http://www.trends-in-newsrooms.org/home.php), to be released May 2008. From free papers to e-papers, citizen journalism to social media and integrated newsrooms to Internet aggregators, it has everything you need to direct your paper towards a multimedia future.

About the World Editors Forum
The Paris-based World Editors Forum (http://www.worldeditorsforum.org ) is the organisation of the World Association of Newspapers that represents editors-in-chief and other senior news executives. WAN, the global organisation for the newspaper industry, represents 18,000 newspapers; its membership includes 77 national newspaper associations, newspapers and
newspaper executives in 102 countries, 12 news agencies and ten regional and world-wide press groups.

About Reuters
Thomson Reuters is the world's leading source of intelligent information for businesses and professionals.  It combines industry expertise with innovative technology to deliver critical information to leading decision makers in the financial, legal, tax and accounting, scientific,
healthcare and media markets, powered by the world's most trusted news organization. With headquarters in New York and major operations in London and Eagan, Minnesota, Thomson Reuters employs more than 50,000 people in 93 countries.  Thomson Reuters shares are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: TRI); Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX: TRI); London Stock Exchange (LSE: TRIL); and Nasdaq (NASDAQ: TRIN). For more information, go to www.thomsonreuters.com.

About Zogby International
Zogby International is a public opinion, research, and business solutions firm with experience operating in 65 countries around the globe. Led by founder John Zogby, President and CEO, Zogby International is known as a leading company with a reputation for uncanny accuracy and reliability that specializes in telephone, Internet, and face-to-face survey research and
analysis for political, corporate, non-profit, and governmental clients. The firm is  headquartered in Utica, New York, with offices in Washington D.C. and Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

 

Here's Part 2 of a piece submitted to us by Chris McGillion, former Editorial Page Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald. He currently coordinates the journalism program at Charles Sturt University in Australia.

In the following, he outlines five key points presented by some of his journalism students to top execs in the newspaper industry, who it seems would be better off heeding their advice :

Also read Part 1: The value of the journalism graduate.

Last year the Pacific Area Newspaper Publishers' Association (Panpa) invited five of my journalism students from Charles Sturt University (CSU) to give a keynote presentation at its annual conference in Melbourne on what their generation wanted from the newspaper of the future.

Newspaper decision-makers have access to the latest statistics and trends in audience research as a matter of course. But they rarely if at all have five representatives of Generation Y - the readership base of the future - holding court without interruption for ninety minutes on what they want in a newspaper and why.

My students made five major points. First, while not discounting a continuing (if diminishing) market for hard-copy newspapers, they argued that the "newspaper' of the future would have to be web-based in order to attract sustained patronage from their generation.

This is consistent with the results of annual surveys of first year communication students at CSU (200 in all of whom almost half are journalism students). These results show an increasing trend toward accessing news online (34.7% did so at least weekly in 2007) and decreasing hardcopy newspaper consumption (down to 41% at least weekly in 2007).

Further evidence of our students' attachment to web-based technology is daily usage of Hotmail accounts (60.7% in 2007), the Google search engine (72.7%), and social networking websites such as MySpace (33.3%).
 
Second, the student presenters argued that future web-based news sites would have to play a "gateway" role rather than the traditional "gatekeeper" role. Put simply, young people these days don't like to be told what news is or what they should consider important: personalised, tailored content will be the hallmark of Generation Y's media consumption.

Another side of this cultural shift is that Generation Y doesn't like to be told what to buy: they will certainly follow trends and adopt brands but both must be - or must appear to be - peer-recommended (and remember we are dealing with people who may have up to 400 "friends" on their social networking websites).

This shift has important implications for advertisers and thus the way media organizations fund their operations.

Third, the most popular news sites will allow for a degree of interactivity. Young people don't only want to know what's happening in the outside world: they also want the outside world to know what they think about what's happening and even, increasingly, to be the ones defining and providing whatever it is that is happening.

Fourth, reputable media organisations remain highly valued. This seems to be a function of information overload and the consequent need to filter what's "out there" together with attitudes ingrained from parents (and reinforced by teachers and public figures) about reliability and quality. 

Fifth, and most important, Generation Y will change the economics of the newspaper industry. In an internet age, young people do not see the need to pay for information.  But nor do they have the same concerns about privacy as their parents and grandparents. Their's, after all, is the "Big Brother' generation whose private lives have become the stuff of public consumption.

The students at Panpa then unveiled their idea for a proto-type web-based "newspaper". It was designed as a gateway to the internet: it allowed readers to pre-sort the news they received, to access email and other social networking sites, and to provide their own "news" stories, comment and photos. It also offered free mobile phones and/or phone accounts in exchange for personal information which the site host then sold on to advertisers.

I had worked closely with the students for three months on this presentation. Sitting in the audience of 300 or so (mostly middle-aged male) editors and publishers, I heard enough grumbling about what the students were saying to fear that the presentation was a PR disaster for the journalism course I run. "Free newspapers and mobile phones!" I heard one editor complain under his breath. "What else do these people want?"

Then, one by one, three international experts on the subject of trends in the newspaper industry - representing IFRA, INMA, and News Digital Media - were invited to respond to the students' presentation. Their message was clear, simple - and reassuring for me at least: in no uncertain terms they each told the audience that they ignored what my students told them to their peril.


Chris McGillion coordinates the journalism program at Charles Sturt University, Australia (cmcgillion@csu.edu.au).

If you would like to contribute your views and insight, please feel free to visit our 'Contact Us' page and send us suggestions for stories or articles.

Stay tuned, as we will shortly be resuming our 'Future of Journalism' series with interviews from editors at The New York Times and the Financial Times.

Atex, provider of mission-critical software solutions and services to the global media industry, has acquired of Polopoly, which develops web publishing and content management systems. With this acquisition, Atex hopes to provide a single global vendor for delivering news and advertising through different mediums.

John Hawkins, Atex Group CEO says, "With our roots firmly established in the print world, Atex recognises the shift from print to online and the market trends driving the shape of the industry. Atex wants to see 50% of its revenues come from web-centric, mobile and video applications by 2011."

Atex DNA is designed to "help create innovative revenue sources, reduce operating costs, and engage both younger and older audiences," according to its website. Based in Stockholm, Sweden, Polopoly AB's platform is designed to maximize efficiency in media utilization by offering tools to easily create and manage websites and providing "highly interactive, collaborative and community-focused experiences for visitors" on a variety of digital devices.  
 
Hawkins adds, "As a business partner with the World Association of Newspapers in the SFN (Shaping the Future of the Newspaper) project, we have developed a roadmap for our customers based on our Atex DNA strategy, and this acquisition of Polopoly continues to demonstrate Atex's engagement and understanding of our customers' needs going forward in bridging the print and digital media worlds."

Four editors in chief will be talking about ATEX and Polopoly in a session on content management systems at the World Editors Forum Conference which will be held in Sweden this year.

For more information on the World Editors Forum Conference, click here.

Source: ATEX through IFRA Executive News Service