Results matching “incentive to pr”

Hundreds of managers and executives at the bankrupt Tribune Company will get bonuses as part of a $45.6 million incentive program, under plans approved by a Delaware bankruptcy judge.

This is the largest such payment in at least 12 years and will be awarded to 720 managers. Judge Kevin Carey overruled objections by the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild and the US bankruptcy trustee that the payment was too high and unwarranted, particularly considering that the company had frozen salaries for most staff. Carey found that many of the targets had already been met when he held hearings on the issue in September.

On November 27th color electronic paper and quasi-flexible black and white e-paper made its French debut from Tebaldo, a trend observer and high-tech company, AFP's MediaWatch reports. 

Princeton's "Toward Print-Less and Paper-Less Courses: Pilot Amazon Kindle Program" has failed to woo students and professor over to the e-reading device, the Daily Princetonian reports.

The program was announced last may to mild fanfare and tepid optimism, intended to reduce paper waste. Sponsored by the University Library and the Office of Information Technology (OIT) and funded by the High Meadows Foundation, the pilot program provided Kindle DXs to students in three select classes free of charge. All of the required readings for these courses had been loaded on the Kindles.

But after only 2 weeks, many of the 50 students who received the devices are reportedly uncomfortable and unhappy with them as a replacement for paper. Complaints centered around the ironically slow performance, inability to quickly highlight or add personal marks, the necessity to charge and general poor performance as an academic tool.

Professors and students have had to modify the way they teach, learn, and write when all the course materials were digitized on the device, and for the most part it has made their work slower and less efficient.

Yesterday we commented on the first three parts of the paidContent:UK/Harris Interactive poll on newsreaders' willingness to pay for online content, and today the fourth and final set of results are available. Following general feedback that very few would be willing to pay for online content (5% of 1,188 UK adults) and that annual subscriptions were the overwhelmingly favorable method of payment, comes the somewhat more encouraging data indicating that if online content were bundled with a discounted or free print subscription, a total 48% of respondents would be willing to pay. However they still remain a slight minority against the 53% who still would not pay.

This suggests that the value of a physical product, the printed news, has a higher economic value than digital news, presumably because of people's awareness of production costs and the aesthetic pleasure of reading and holding the printed word. Furthermore, publishers can use this openness to bundling to expand their core readers, who seem to currently be their best and possibly last hope. Although the study was only conducted in the UK with a relatively small sample size and the numbers don't necessarily match up to American statistics (see our previous article), publishers could use people's willingness to pay for digital/print bundles to push print sales and circulation, potentially killing two birds with one stone. The result could be a larger core audience, more loyal readers, and higher value advertising targets.

Source: paidContent:UK

How to tackle copyright infringement has recently become a hot topic in the news industry. Attributor is offering a novel solution via the Fair Syndication Consortium that aims to keep all parties happy. The Silicon Valley-based start up has developed technology capable of tracking news outlets' online content, and came together with a group of publishers to form the FSC, which plans to seek advertising revenue when their content is reused. The Editors Weblog spoke to Jim Pitkow, CEO of Attributor, about what the company can offer to newspapers in terms of increasing revenue and protecting copyrighted material.

More than 1,000 publishers have now signed up to the Fair Syndication Consortium and agreed to have their content tracked. Pitkow explained that he started to persuade some of these of the extent of the problem in January when Attributor took 250,000 articles from 25 major publishers and ran these through its system for 30 days. Attributor found that each article was reproduced fully an average of 11 times across the Internet. So the seriousness of the issue was clear, and Attributor decided that a type of ad revenue sharing scheme was the best solution.

Leave the content, take the money

Rather than ordering those who reuse content to take it down, Attributor wants "to find ways to share in that advertising revenue that's being generated."  This solution stems from the idea that the larger the audience for news, the better, and as long as the original producers of the content are able to receive revenue, it is fine for their content to be reused elsewhere. Pitkow explained that Attributor had decided to "work at the currency level" in an attempt to come up with a proposition that would mean that "everybody can still profit from the syndication of this content."

So, the Fair Syndication Consortium plans to work with advertising networks like Google's Adsense, which are used by many smaller sites to place ads, to demand a cut of the revenue generated alongside reused content for those who originally produced it. If this demand is denied, then the rights holders can order their content removed.

The sites that the FSC will target are those that "are specifically geared towards repurposing other people's content and using Adsense alongside," Pitkow clarified. As well as being more profitable for publishers, the FSC also intends to make the process of responding to misappropriation of content simple and straightforward, involving dealing with advertising networks rather than having to serve lawsuits to publishers.

For the FSC to work, it is essential to seek the cooperation of ad networks. The Consortium's first agreement has been reached, with AdBrite, and Pitkow was confident that this signals significant progress.  The company is looking to get other ad networks on board but even just one is a good start, Pitkow said. "If you have one network that participates, and the rest are going to be forced to remove their ads, it means that everybody who's syndicating content is going to move to the ad network that does."

There is a financial incentive for advertisers to take part, as well as the motivation to appear to do no evil, Pitkow emphasised. That is, if they do not participate, the rights holders might choose to remove the ads that such networks have placed.

Will the money be enough to make a difference?

PSFK, a trends research consultancy, believes that "the numbers don't add up:" smaller sites make such a small revenue per article that the effort would not generate much income for publishers, and larger sites have often noted how to stay on the right side of fair use law. Pitkow, however, pointed to comments made by Chris Ahearn, president of Reuters Media, who said that Attributor's work would make a significant financial contribution and could really help change the nature of content syndication. Ahearn told the New York Times that there was "tens of millions of dollars worth of inventory that is likely being created that we are not getting our fair share of."

As well as a means to protect copyright, Attributor's proposal could be seen as a way to more effectively syndicate content. Pitkow pointed out that licensing deal essentially consist of estimations of the value of advertising that could be generated from content, and that this is what Attributor does, but more accurately. Pitkow said that smaller sites that do not have a formal syndication team could use Attributor for this.

So will it work?

Pitkow explained that Attributor is now taking this content of 1,000 publishers have signed up to the Fair Syndication Consortium into its system and starting to monitor how widely it is being used. He anticipates that the revenue-sharing scheme could be fully operational this autumn.

The Associated Press is independently looking at ways to track its and its members online content to ensure that unauthorised use does not occur, using a microformat tagging system via what it is calling a news registry. It is not clear yet what the AP intends to do when it finds misappropriated content. Other solutions also exist, such as the WAN-IFRA backed ACAP, or Automated Content Access Protocol; however although this is a step forward in terms of a commitment to protect content, ACAP does not as yet seem to have a strategy on how it would actually make publishers more money.

And this is where the advantage of the Fair Syndication Consortium lies. Rather than simply trying to stop content being reused, it is accepting that this is inherent in the nature of the Internet and is looking at how to use this to publishers' advantage. It may well not be a solution that all publishers approve of as it does mean that their content might remain on websites that they do not support, but at least it could contribute to tackling one of the news industry's current key challenges: how to make more money from online news. 

Last month, Richard Connor finalized a deal to purchase the Maine holdings of the Seattle Times Co., including the Portland Press Herald. Now he's asking the city for some kind of financial incentive to keep the newspaper in town, rather than move to South Portland.

"We'd like to stay in Portland," Connor told the Press Herald, "but we don't want to get punished financially to stay in Portland."

In a move sure to rankle more than a few literature lovers, Amazon has filed two US patents for placing advertisements within the texts of e-books on its Kindle device. The ads would be linked to specific content and could appear anywhere within the books - at the beginning, between chapters, even in the margins.

Although not specifically mentioned in the patent applications, it is easy to see how this scheme could be extended to other media that is Kindle-compatible, such as newspapers and magazines.

Pess freedom in Italy has come under international scrutiny in recent weeks as a down-grading of the press's freedom status by US non-profit Freedom House has coincided with an increase in prime minister Silvio Berlusconi's aggression towards media outlets which oppose him. Leading left-leaning daily La Repubblica has even attempted to take on the premier directly, publishing a list of questions concerning his relationship with a young girl, to which it believes he owes answers. A Dutch politician has threatened to take action in the European parliament against the Italian leader because of journalistic constraints. Should a newspaper be demanding such information which concerns a politician's private life? Is the press freedom situation as bad as it seems?

The La Repubblica crusade

On May 14 La Repubblica journalist Giuseppe D'Avanzo published ten questions directed at the prime minister concerning his involvement with 18-year-old Noemi Letizia. Berlusconi's relationship with the girl gained mass media attention when, four days after the prime minister dropped in on the girl's 18th birthday party in Naples, his wife issued a press release accusing him of "consorting with minors" and pressing for a divorce. Berlusconi promptly went on a late-night political chat show to defend himself, but the holes in his story which have gradually emerged have attracted even more attention than the original incident. D'Avanzo's questions address these holes and ask the premier to come clean about the nature of his encounters with the girl. Berlusconi has not yet answered the questions and has given no indication that he intends to. The paper has put a timer on its website to indicate the days, hours, minutes and seconds since the questions were issued, and even offers them in English.

Berlusconi himself has tried to present the left-leaning paper's campaign as a left-wing plot to undermine his authority, accusing the paper of lying and adding in an interview on TV-channel Sky that he believes many readers will abandon the paper because of this. His office issued a statement saying referring to the "campaign of denigration" and saying that the paper is driven by "jealousy and hatred."  The prime minister has fought back as the story developed, with his lawyers applying for the seizure of photos taken at his Sardinian villa (where Letizia reportedly attended parties with other young women) before they could be published, and a journalist from Berlusconi's brother's Milan-based daily Il Giornale posing as a member of the foreign press to get an interview with Ms Letizia's former boyfriend in an attempt to discredit him.
 
 
The international reaction 
La Repubblica has defended its actions, with editor Ezio Mauro saying that "There are contradictions here and when the powers that be don't explain something, journalism has a job to do." And foreign journalists seem to agree. The paper also featured an interview with Bill Emmott, former editor of the Economist, who said that "for a newspaper, asking a political leader questions is not only legitimate, but part of its mission to inform the people." According to the International Herald Tribune, "for the first time in recent memory, the Italian press is shining a bright light into the dark recesses of a politician's personal life." The Times wrote that the premier's campaign against La Repubblica "looks ominously like an attempt to cow dissent rather than protect a private reputation" and that "his newspaper critics are performing a public service for a badly governed populace." A Financial Times editorial criticised the way that Berlusconi turned on La Repubblica following the questions, and stressed that part of the "danger of Berlusconi... is that of the media sapping the serious content of politics, and replacing it with entertainment."

Berlusconi has reacted with anger and scepticism to such foreign criticism. He seems to refuse to believe that papers might be acting of their own accord, announcing that "the international press's campaign is being orchestrated by an Italian group" and referring to it as a left-wing "plot." He insists that the foreign press is misrepresenting the Italian situation, and a rift in his relationship with Rupert Murdoch seems to be further deteriorating following the Times' article and others. He has accused the Times of writing critical editorials about him because his government is in dispute with News Corp. Il Giornale, owned by the prime minister's brother Paolo, ran a story discussing the FT editorial entitled "The left has also enlisted the Financial Times."

One of a newspaper's main goals should be to act as a watchdog over the government, but it is unusual for a paper to take on a country's leader so directly, particularly over a matter which is largely private. In the UK, the Daily Telegraph's recent campaign over MPs' expenses was firmly in the public interest, as it dealt with public money being used by members of parliament for personal gain. Berlusconi has been derisive of the media discussing what he says is his private life. Should a paper be putting so much focus on an issue that is arguably unrelated to the prime minister's ability to govern the country? Is this indicative of media trivialisation?

The Times editorial does not see the questions as intrusive, as they relate to Berlusconi's "public roles as politician and media magnate". The Independent's Peter Popham said that the media "cannot be accused of muck-raking on the issue because it was Mr Berlusconi himself who drew attention to the relationship" by attending the 18-year-old's party and not only posing for photographs but publicly giving the girl a 6000euro gold necklace. And the fact that a politician might have lied to the public is probably enough of an incentive to investigate.
 
Press freedom in Italy
 
Italy has a fairly unique media situation, which makes confrontation between a newspaper and the prime minister even more pertinent. The country's press freedom status is clearly in question. A Dutch politician who is leader of the Green Left party in the European Parliament, Judith Sargentini, has said that her party is considering taking legal action against Berlusconi because of the press freedom constraints in his country. Amongst her complaints is the fact that the premier blocks critical questions at press conferences. If a majority of the European Parliament were to agree to the initiation of legal proceedings, then the matter would come before the European Court of Justice.

US-based nonprofit Freedom House recently downgraded Italy's press freedom status from 'free' to 'partly free' for 2008. In conversation with Karin Karlekar, editor of the report, she explained that the main reasons given for this were the unusually high level of media concentration, particularly in broadcasting, threats from organised crime and others, and attacks on journalists, mainly from far right groups. During Berlusconi's former term as prime minister, the country was also given partly free ratings, and Karlekar added that the media concentration was "one of the highest levels anywhere in the world."

Daria Gorodisky, a veteran Corriere della Sera journalist who is also a union representative for the paper, told the Editors Weblog that she believes there is a "truly enormous press freedom problem in Italy" which will be "extremely difficult to resolve." She does not place blame for this directly on the government but on the fact that there are no "pure" newspaper owners, rather, those who publish newspapers also run other businesses and therefore have aims and interests aside from their papers. She also believes that the quality of Italy's journalism schools have deteriorated as more and more have sprung up. She did, however, point out that this is not the first time that Berlusconi has threatened the press.

Internet penetration is low in Italy in comparison to that of its Western European neighbours: about 48%, compared to 72% in the UK or 66% in France, for example. This low figure would suggest that many people are more likely to get their news from television and one or two newspapers, rather than the range of sources that online readers might visit. Despite this, however, Karlekar noted the country's "very vibrant and influential" blogosphere, particularly politically-orientated blogs.

Gorodisky commented that although some journalists were "very worried" by the situation, she did not think that there was enough widespread concern about Italy's press freedom status. Karlekar said that her organisation's report had sparked considerable debate and she had received both praise and hate mail from Italians. Niccolo Ghedini, lawyer to Berlusconi, dismissed the report on a TV show called Anno Zero, saying it was a private organisation and took its information from only two sources, La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera. Karlekar responded that she was "not sure where he got that" and was clear that "the range of sources is large and our authors would never just rely on one or two." She added that it was "interesting that the government felt compelled to respond in some way."
 
Karlekar did say that Berlusconi did not seem to be "exerting the same amount of influence over the broadcast media" as he did during his previous term as prime minister; there seems to be less "overt political manipulation." She was also clear that she did not think that the high media concentration had "stifled" the whole media, and drew attention to the diversity in terms of political opinion in the print sector.

Arguably there are far more important questions that the Italian press could be asking its country's leader, rather than focusing on the somewhat sordid details of his involvement with a teenage girl. But as a vital part of the press's role in a democracy is to play watchdog on the government, the fact that a paper is challenging the prime minister to clear up inconsistencies is something that must be welcomed. And even though the original issue may not be crucial in itself, the other questions it has brought up concerning use of government planes for private use, for example, are very pertinent. Given how much of the media the prime minister does control, and the fact that even the journalists who do not currently work for Berlusconi know that they may well some day, the press freedom situation could undoubtedly be worse than it is, and it is important that journalists keep fighting.

Tomorrow the Boston Newspaper Guild will vote on the proposed concession terms that the Guild has tentatively reached with the Boston Globe management. Members will vote on measures including an 8.3 percent wage cut, a five-day unpaid furlough, a freeze in pension contributions for many employees, an end to 401(k) matching contributions, and elimination of lifetime job guarantees enjoyed by 190 Guild members.

Last month, the New York Times Company threatened to close the Globe if its unions could not make enough concessions, and negotiations have dragged on for a week longer than the original May 1 deadline. The Guild is the largest and the last of seven unions to agree to concessions. Management has called this latest proposal its "last, best offer," a term which could lead to an impasse that would allow the company to declare an impasse and impose the offer.

One of the major differences between print journalism and digital journalism is the web's availability of detailed audience and traffic information: online publications know, at any time, how much total traffic they are getting, how much traffic each story is getting, how many unique visitors came to the site, how long they spent there, which sites they came from, how many pages they hit, and more. How does this information affect journalism?

While traffic figures can greatly benefit a publication by allowing it to satisfy readership, there is worry that the figures can have too much influence on the news site's content, driving editors to sacrifice quality journalism for popular stories. In a feature for the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, former WashingtonPost.com executive editor Jim Brady and Salon.com Washington Bureau Chief Walter Shapiro discuss the pros and cons of measuring web traffic.

In advance of a of gathering at Duke University's Sanford Institute of Public Policy for a series of working sessions to explore new models for non-profit ownership of media, Penelope Muse Abernathy has prepared a background paper examining four distinct non-profit options for the New York Times. Abernathy holds the Knight Chair in Journalism and Digital Media Economics at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

The NYT's financial situation

Abernathy starts by describing the New York Times' "unique" financial situation. For the last decade, its assets have been impressive, with a dual revenue stream from advertising and circulation that totalled $1.7 billion in 2008. In recent years, the New York Times Media Group has received 55-60% of its revenue from advertising, 30-35% from circulation and the remainder from other sources such as syndicating content. This is significantly different from that of many other newspapers, which typically count on advertising for 80-85% of their revenue.

According to Pew's State of the News Media 2009 report, the younger demographic, between 18-24 and 25-34 have the lowest levels of daily newspaper readership and 49% said they get their news online. Yesterday, Mark Zuckerberg, owner and founder of Facebook, announced the 200 millionth active user on the networking site, one third of which are in the young age group that has limited exposure to news on a regular basis. That said, there are two new experiments in action to get the news to young Facebook users: mndaily.com and Hot Dish. Both efforts are funded by the Knight Foundation and are powered by NewsCloud, a news sharing website.

Next week the Minnesota Twin Cities' Star Tribune begins an experiment in which it will offer certain stories to print subscribers before posting them online. While the Star Tribune will continue to publish breaking news stories online right away, readers will have to buy the paper for immediate access to investigative pieces and deeper, more exclusive content.

According to Star Tribune Editor Nancy Barnes in an editorial on StarTribune.com, the purpose of the initiative is to both reward paying print customers and also to experiment with how the publication delivers its content. "We're going to watch and measure the results, collect reader feedback, and let that drive our decisionmaking about whether this is something we want to do permanently."

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer printed its last ever issue yesterday, 17 March 2009, and is looking at an online-only future. Parent company Hearst decided it could not afford to keep the paper open in its current form after it lost $14 million in 2008, and after trying and failing to sell it, they proceeded to stop the presses but keep the website. The P-I is not the first paper to make such a move, but it is by far the largest US publication so far. What does this closure mean for the paper and the people of Seattle, and what are the implications for the wider industry: will other papers follow suit?

The cost of keeping the Seattle P-I's website should be a fraction of the cost of printing the paper: Poynter's Rick Edmonds estimates costs have fallen by 80%. Staff numbers have been reduced from 165 to 20, including just one photographer, and the site will be less like that of a traditional newspaper and more like the Huffington Post, according to the New York Times, as it will have limited original reporting and consist largely of links, advice and commentary, with several local columnists. It will repackage some health and home material from Hearst's many magazines, and has about 150 unpaid bloggers who will continue to provide content. The original reporting will focus on more hard-hitting news such as government, spending and crime, said P-I executive producer Michelle Nicolosi.

Seattle will be left as a one-paper town: the Seattle Times is now the only major daily in the city and although it should benefit from no longer having competition from Hearst's paper, it will no longer be sharing printing, delivery, advertising and marketing expenses with the P-I, as it had been for more than 20 years. P-I subscribers will automatically start to receive the Times instead.  It remains to be seen whether the paper will flourish or continue to lose money. The P-I's new most direct competition is a non-profit local news website focusing on the Northwest, CrossCut.com.

How should the web-only paper tackle the competition?

This huge change for the P-I can, and arguably should, be seen as an opportunity to revamp its site and be a front-runner in innovation. Online news leaves plenty of room for original development and possibilities for increased interaction with readers, personalisation options and linking are particularly relevant for local papers such as the P-I. It is "an adventure in journalism," according to columnist Joel Connelly. Slate editor Jack Shafer called upon Hearst to plunge into experimentation by sending in the "interactive cavalry," as everything that the publisher learns in Seattle can be used at its other newspaper sites. Examples he suggests are going hyperlocal, updating the site as much "as humanly possible," and to hire as many developers as they can. Rick Edmonds seems to be in agreement, writing that as long as losses are kept low, the P-I could be an effective "real-time test of what works and what doesn't in an online-only local site." And Nicolosi has promised that the paper will "experiment a lot, fail fast" with what is on the site: if something is not working they will cut it immediately and try something else.

Does going online-only make business sense?

The paper's online traffic is 1.8 million unique viewers per month and is usually more than its former rival/partner, the Seattle Times, which has considerably higher print circulation. And according to Forbes magazine in January, Seattle is the most broadband-connected US city: hence a place seemingly well suited for an online-only publication.

And online readership figures are high: according to the Project for Excellence in Journalism's State of the News Media in the US report just released, traditional media has not lost its audience, rather this audience is shifting online. The Pew Research Center reported at the beginning of the year that the Internet had overtaken print as a primary news source in the US for the first time. This trend is not just American: British papers reported record online readership in January: with the Guardian website boasting almost 30 million unique viewers.

Several other smaller publications have made the switch to online-only over the past few months. The most well-known is the Christian Science Monitor, which announced its intention to cut its daily print edition in October 2008, though it will not actually make the conversion until April 1 this year. The CSM reasoned that its web product had a far wider reach than its print paper, particularly due to its international audience, and that producing the print publication would become untenable as the Christian Science church was preparing to stop its subsidisation. Others include the Monitor in Canada, and the Kansas City Kansan, San Francisco's AsianWeek, Hoy Nueva York and Wisconsin's The Capital Times in the US: all for financial reasons.  

The State of the News Media report, however, argues that it does not currently make sense for suffering papers to "kill their print editions and go online-only" as print still commands "premium ad pricing" and US papers still make roughly 90% of their revenue from print and the average cost of printing and delivering the printed paper is 40% of costs. So, the report believes, why would you cut almost all your revenue to save less then half your costs?

Is online-only the future of news?

Arguably, despite many people's love of print, online is the future of news: how distant a future, it is difficult to say. But the vital, million-dollar question remains: how to actually make enough money out of all these online readers in order to support good quality, in-depth reporting? Nicolosi said that she thinks it is "possible to run an online-only local news site that serves a city's readers well while turning a profit" and that "a digital news product is a viable solution for cities whose papers can no longer afford to operate." She seems to be convinced that the paper will make money online, but gives no indication of how this will happen. With the traditional ad-based business model proving less and less effective as online advertising prices fall, will the P-I come up with an innovative strategy? One of the major criticisms of the industry in the State of the News Media report was the lack of innovation in the sector in terms of business models. Nicolosi has assured readers that she is willing to try out new things on the site, but will the paper be as experimental in terms of business models?

For an online-only operation, the incentive to try to make money from Internet readers is surely greater than for a print publication with a website. And if the P-I does manage to find a way to support itself, whether through being successful enough to generate sufficient advertising revenue, or by adopting some kind of paid content system, the model will undoubtedly be looked at very carefully by other suffering papers around the world.

Given the financial difficulties that the traditional media are facing, it would seem a perfect time for citizen journalism outlets to flourish, as they can try to fill in the gaps left by reporting cuts. And indeed, citizen journalism venture AllVoices seems to be taking advantage of this: launched last year, the site passed the million unique visitors mark in January, not a small feat for a site with only six fulltime members of staff. The Editors Weblog spoke to AllVoices founder Amra Tareen about the reasons for AllVoices' success and her vision for its role in the journalism world.

AllVoices places its contributors' reports alongside aggregated stories from mainstream media: each section is clearly distinguished by colour and title. Any of the sites' thousands of users, once they have created a profile, can upload a report or other content. Stories are categorised according to topic, and given a credibility rating out of five. They can later be added to, commented on or ranked by other users. Tareen was passionate about her project, explaining that the aftermath of 9/11 and the US's decision to go to war in Iraq had persuaded her that the views of the mainstream media were not always enough, and she was inspired to create a global news network that would "provide a 360 degree view" and allow people from all over the world to communicate "around real issues that impact all of us." She made the valid point that an eyewitness account will always be coming from a different view point to one written across the world.

News without editors

AllVoices does not have a member of staff editing the site; it relies purely on its proprietary algorithms and its community. Tareen described this as the "YouTube principle," and emphasised that producing an edited product was not the aim of the site, rather "our goal is to publish what people want to create and to provide multiple points of view." She was confident that the site's users were capable of "making their own decisions as to what they want to believe in." The site is not trying to provide authoritative news, rather to offer different points of view and allow readers to come to their own conclusions about what is actually happening. Staff only check content if it is flagged by another community member.

So rather than an editor choosing articles for the front page of the site, the decision is based on a variety of criteria - credibility, popularity and whether the news is breaking - which are assessed by algorithms. Initially, the algorithms identify a contributor's location based on the computer's IP address or mobile phone network: "we code to city level," Tareen specified. The system also carries out contextual analysis to decide on a topic category for the report, such as business, politics or entertainment. Algorithms then assess a report's credibility based on whether other people both in and outside of the community are reporting on similar issues, on whether other members of the community are adding to it, and on other users' ratings. Contextual analysis can also highlight problems such as copyright violation, for example, and the algorithms will assess whether a story is breaking news. The algorithms and other technology is being constantly refined by AllVoices staff, which includes three engineers, and two professors from Northwestern university who advise.

The algorithms, though extremely useful in establishing reliability, are only 80% accurate, explained Tareen: "You need some human interaction and this is what we are trying to get the community to do, to put the icing on the cake." So users are actively encouraged to rate other contributor's articles, and those pieces which are ranked highly by both the algorithms and the people will be more visible. Stories start off on a city page, chosen based on the geo-coding technology, and then can move up to regional and global pages if they "catch momentum" by receiving many hits and high rankings.  

Citizen journalism melds with social networking

All contributors must create a profile, which also is the basis for the community's social networking feature. There is a personal messaging system for communication between members, where Tareen feels is crucial for forming a community, as is a certain level of engagement in the site: the ability to add comments or further content such as pictures. There is also a recommendation engine, which will show users what mainstream media and other bloggers are saying about the news on which they are writing.  

Cash for the best articles

AllVoices started an 'Excellence in Citizen Media Incentive Program' in August which allows contributors to earn cash when they reach a certain number of readers and a high level of credibility for their articles. Tareen explained that she had been astonished to discover that "there were many freelance writers out there who don't even get paid," and so decided to do something about it. The six month programme is intended to "attract and incentivise great writers." Tareen clarified that a contributor whose articles had been viewed over a million times and had met other criteria could have earned USD 10,000. Users can keep track of their earnings on their profile page. As well as the money, AllVoices helps to promote good content through "social media marketing and search engine optimisation."

As yet, the project is not financially self-sufficient, and Tareen explained that she is working on a proposal for another round of funding. The site was launched with $4.5million of equity funding. The hope is that the site will make enough money from advertising to cover costs and become profitable, and as the site offers "niche communities within communities" there is significant potential for targeted advertising. But until the site reaches seven or eight million unique visitors per month, Tareen clarified, advertising revenue will not be sufficient. For now, the AllVoices team is keeping marketing and other costs as low as possible. "Once we become a really big site then monetising will not be a problem," added Tareen, but until then "we will have to be very creative and make sure that the viral marketing aspects kick in."

An alternative to traditional media?

Tareen vehemently stressed that AllVoices is not aiming to replace mainstream media in any way, rather she sees AllVoices as an alternative voice to complement traditional publications, and a way for anybody who chooses to have a chance to interact with a global audience. "There are some people who want to hear what other members of the public are saying, and there are other people who will always want to go to professionals," she believes. "I don't think one will replace the other, I think we augment."

Citizen journalism can indeed play an important role in supplementing traditional reporting and contributing to a global dialogue on news, if its credibility can be maintained. More and more citizen journalism sites, such as Citizenside, are using proprietary technology to judge the authenticity of user content. While the algorithms' ability to effectively assess reliability is impressive, AllVoices' decision to eliminate the eye of a human editor does mean that the site will always be lacking that professional touch which could lift it from an informative and engaging community to a valuable news source.

As the economic climate worsens and print advertising decreases, newspapers are struggling to find the dollars to cover their costs. Ethan Zuckerman explores the role of the advertising industry in the media and asks, "what if ad supported journalism is only viable in a world where we radically overvalue the worth of ads?"  

Zuckerman presents the print and early online advertising pricing model, CPM (or cost per thousand) and compares it to how effective advertising is based on its cost, online versus print.  His thesis is that online advertising is much more effective and much cheaper.  Why?  Because online advertising is targeted to those it may appeal to. Example, you are searching a site for the latest books on foreign policy, the ads that pop up are all related to foreign policy books or other sites that feature subjects similar to the one you are searching for.  In contrast, a front page ad of the New York Times will cost you about 10,000 times as much and everyone of the 1 million plus who read it will see it - however, few will actually find it of interest.

Bertrand Pecquerie wrote in an article in Le Monde yesterday that the French newspaper industry is in crisis and, worryingly, turning to the State for help. Newspapers have been subsidized in France for the past ten years and, in those ten years, the situation has not improved, it has actually worsened.

Pecquerie believes that there are four core problems facing the industry and these are not being addressed. The four core issues are method, diagnosis, objective and means.

Lowell Bergmann is a ground breaking investigative reporter, a producer/correspondent for the PBS documentary series "Frontline" in the US and spent 14 years as a producer with CBS's "60 Minutes".

Bergman shared a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service with The New York Times in 2004 for "A Dangerous Business," (which detailed a record of egregious worker safety violations coupled with the systematic violation of environmental laws in the iron sewer and water pipe industry) and is a Professor at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. Furthermore, he is a co-founder of the Centre for Investigative Journalism and a consultant at ProPublica, an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest.

The story of Bergman's investigation of the tobacco industry for 60 Minutes was chronicled in the 1999 Academy Award-nominated feature film "The Insider", in which Bergman was portrayed by Al Pacino (below left).

The Editors Weblog contacted Lowell Bergman - who was an early adopter and advocate of the multimedia model - to discover his views on the key issues facing investigative reporting and its future.

EW: What do you see in the future for investigative journalism? Do you still see it as having a home at newspapers?

LB: Investigative journalism in America has always been done by magazines and in books as well as in newspaper. For many years newspapers were not doing much of it. It was a 'freelance' occupation usually with writers like I.F. Stone and others who left newspapers because they were too restrictive. Personally, I have been using the web and been 'online' for more than a decade.

But it remains true that it is newspapers and traditional news organizations that produce almost all the new information everyday.

Pure web based operations with a few new exceptions recycle information they get from those organizations. We will see web based sites becoming the providers of more and more news and quality information in the future, but the transition will take time.

EB: What do you see as the key issue facing your profession?

LB: I am not sure it is a 'profession' in the traditional sense. In this country it is open to everyone. It is not licensed. Right now the transformation of the media endangers the collective experience of news people who chose to make gathering, investigating and presenting quality information their life work. That is why non-profits and educational institutions [Universities] will become more and more important. They do not have the same pressures. Its a time of transition, a kind of "Middle Age", that will not see a resurgence of real reporting until the economic questions are resolved.

EW: How has new media changed the way you work?

LB: Obviously, the availability of databases, newspaper archives and all sorts of information on the Web makes many things easier. But the old techniques and standards have not been replaced. To do investigative or in depth reporting you have take the time to meet people, and not meet them in a chat room.

Confidentiality on the internet is virtually impossible. It depends on trust. And trust is the weakest link in terms of the reliability of information offered up on the Web by so called 'new media'.

EW: Do you think there is more pressure from editors with the advent of the 24-hour news culture? Are investigative journalists getting the time and resources necessary?

LB: At a certain point you are a stenographer, if you don't have enough time to do the kind of reporting that advances what we know. This is not just true of 'investigative' reporters.

All good reporting involves asking some skeptical questions and not assuming what you are told is true. When I think of 'investigative reporting' I mean reporting in the public interest that looks deeply into a subject or story. Often it involves developing sources or hunting for documents or both and having the time to explore what they mean. At the same time in the best of all world's your editor is happy if you come back and say there is no story, or the story you originally went in pursuit of changed.

So, in answer to your question the pressure of a failing economic model by definition means there is less time. Prior to the decline of newspapers, broadcasters in the U.S. freed from the strictures around licensing that once forced them to present programming in the public interest along with operating with the threat of punishment created worldwide news gathering organizations. They had the incentive to do documentaries and present them even if the ratings were far below those of entertainment. That is no longer the case so you have less in depth reporting on the air as well.

EW: Is the law now having an impact on your profession? Is the law becoming more restrictive for journalists in general, and investigative journalists in particular?

LB: Not really. There has been a squeeze on the confidential source privilege, but it appears that Congress and a new President will sign a federal 'shield law'. The issues surrounding what is called national security reporting and/or criminal cases where a prosecutor or defendant has no where else to turn for information are unlikely to be resolved by the legislation. It is more of a question of the attitude/discretion of the prosecutors.

EW: Do you feel protected by the law?

LB: I never expect 'protection'. My sources do.

EW: How do you think an editor should best manage an investigative reporting team or reporter?

LB: Briefly, they should provide insight, encouragement and support, especially when the going gets tough.

EW: Who are the main competition to newspaper investigative reporters now? What are your thoughts on groups such as ProPublica?

This work is non profit. I have even called it 'anti-profit' by its very nature. So ProPublica, I am a consultant, or the Center for Investigative Reporting, I am one of the founders, are non profits working the public interest. Basically, that is what a very good newspaper newsroom does: report stories without fear or favor, and without considering the resources needed to do that. It is at its root a non-profit activity.

India's new financial daily, Mint, was launched in February last year and since then has expanded from 80,000 to 122,000 copies (see our previous interview with its editor here). As the Financial Times readies an Indian edition, it is unknown as to how it will be accepted in the market.

In an interview with famed newspaper designer Dr. Mario Garcia, Mint's editor, Raju Narisetti, said he was uncertain whether "there is real room for more than a couple of business dailies" and that there is "a bubble quality" to the "segment" issue.

According to Narisetti, there has been growth in business media such as financial channels and dailies. However, how the FT/TV18 paper will be accepted is not yet evident. There is a question of time and appetite with regard to readers.

Until recently, the FT has been excluded from India "thanks to a brazen misappropriation of its brand." Narisetti said, "If the FT/TV18 paper can raise the bar on Indian business journalism and also bring in strong ethics and journalistic standards, it would be a good addition to Mint."

Narisetti mentioned that non-business newspapers like the Hindustan Times and DNA are investing the most in business coverage. Other local newspapers have not shown the incentive to bring forth a "sizable increase in resources being devoted" for it.

Narisetti is also a World Editors Forum Board member.

Source: www.garciamedia.com through IFRA Executive News Service

Yesterday, following a historical newsroom strike at the print paper on April 14 (in the wake of a planned 129 layoffs), Le Monde's board discussed projects to save 1,000 pages of content per year.

According to CBNews, this will be achieved by a better distribution of pages between the mid-week and weekend print editions, as well as the "rebalancing" of supplements.

In reality, Le Monde will simply have less staff to produce content. Of the 129 job cuts, 89 will affect the newsroom, including 45 for staff in charge of producing written content.

Although many papers around the world have been forced to trim down their print editions in an effort to cut costs, the situation in France is critical: every year, quality papers cut back on content, thus giving less incentive for readers to buy them, leading to decreased revenues and further cost and content cuts...

Some of London's freesheets already carry more content than many of France's quality, paid-for dailies.

Le Monde's plan to restructure could also call on the currently non-integrated journalists to work both for the print paper, supplements and the online edition.

Update: Journalists at Le Monde voted in a general staff assembly today, on April 16, to stage their second one-day strike in a week, protesting against the planned layoffs. Le Monde is scheduled not to appear on Thursday, April 17.

Source: CB News (link in French), AFP

Many startups such as Local Edition and Backyard Post are attempting to claim the "hyperlocal" news market. OurTown is the newest player, which boasts 70,000 hyperlocal websites across the country. George Blake, former editor and 20 year veteran of the Cincinnati Enquirer is now chief news officer for OurTown.

Blake believes that the best definition of "hard news" is the news "most important to your readers." Thus, editors must discover what people want to read and respond accordingly: if people want local entertainment and activities, provide a community calendar, if people want school, church, kids sports news, provide links to their specific-interest site. There will also be chat rooms for people to discuss local issues, according to Blake. He hopes that this very local content will distinguish OurTown from bigger local sites such as Yelp.

"You want to know about the local festival 10 minutes from your home, not the one 50 miles away," said Blake. " When you go to your OurTown website, you will read stories about places and people you recognize in your community."

Local editors, who are from the community they represent, oversee the content of their sites and keep almost all of their local ad revenue, which Blake hopes to be enough incentive for them to make their site "the best it can be." Editors will also receive help from an advisory board of journalists and will receive updates on what is working and what can be done to make the sites better. Their licenses can be pulled if the site is not regularly updated or contains inappropriate content.

Blake hopes that OurTown websites will attract local advertisers who want to build close-to-home businesses. "Unlike the daily newspaper that needs to sell the $100,000 ad contract, OurTown editors can sell $100-a-month contracts and create significant income," he said.

OurTown is marketing through "word of mouth" and through sites like Google, Yahoo, Craigslist.

Blake stated that while OurTown does not plan on becoming a social networking site, it will connect people with common interests and common goals.

"Everyone will be able to go on their OurTown site to see what all those sirens were about last night, or if their neighbor's kid threw the winning pitch in that little league game," Blake said.

Source: OJR through David Black

Steve Lopez of the LA Times is inviting readers to help him write a serial novel. His column in next Sunday's paper will be the first chapter of "Birds of Paradise: A Novel Collaboration." Readers will write the following chapters with a chapter a day appearing in the Times and on the Times's website into the L.A. Times Festival of Books on April 26 and 27 at UCLA.

Each day, a panel of judges will pick the winners, who will be invited to the book festival to read their chapters.

This "novel collaboration" is a good example of participatory media by engaging readers into the writing process, though the content is not exactly news worthy. Not only does it encourage quality writing, but also provides more incentive for people to pick up the Times to see their/friends'/family members' writing in print.

For contest rules and more information, go here.

Source: LA Times

Mobile may be the future of the web and news, and Myspace has embraced this possibility by launching a free-access mobile version of its website, which is monetized by ads. YouTube had made this move in January.

Currently, Myspace is using subscription-based, carrier-specific applications, but the new mobile site will be offered on any network.

Some news sites, such as The New York Times, offer mobile news through text messages, while others such as CNN has for now rejected the idea of changing its content for mobile phones. If the world's number one social networking site succeeds with its mobile site, perhaps it will give news site an incentive in going mobile.

Source: Mobile Burn.com through I Want Media

What if newspapers were liable for content published by users? This could happen if the US Congress takes away the protections of Section 230, if newspapers continue to encourage anonymous - and abusive - comments.

Section 230 for Internet postings protects providers and users of an "interactive computer service" that publishes information provided by others.

"Section 230 is important to our industry. It gives us a greater latitude in creating community than we would have without such protections. Losing that protection would be a serious blow to our audience growth prospects," write journalist and media blogger Howard Owens.

However, as many newspapers open up online comments with little incentive for users to register or provide real identification, or with insufficient guardrails, they are potentially jeopardizing their Section 230 protection.

Newspaper consultant Mark Potts offers tips to promote healthy online interaction, in light of Philly.com's recent (re)opening of comments, after having shut them down at the end of last year.

"Anytime a newspaper has problems with comments, it doesn't take long to figure out why: It happens because the site managers allowed anonymity, or they didn't think to employ a profanity filter, or they didn't put "report abuse" buttons on the comments to let readers self-police the feature."

Potts also warns of excessive moderation, citing The New York Times, which screens every single comment editorially, but this can become a huge cost, especially considering that "99.9 percent of comments are fine if you have the proper protections in place."

Philly.com has established an array of new protections to safeguard it from abusive comments, including:

- Required registration with a confirmable email address.
- Unique usernames, preferably real names.
- Automated profanity filters.
- "Report Abuse" buttons that enable the community to police abusive comments.
- An explicit commenting policy for all readers.
- Enabling comments a story-by-story basis. Some items and themes, such as immigration or race, will systematically lead to abusive reactions.
- Don't moderate all comments but react swiftly when any abuse is reported.

Source: Recovering Journalist - Howard Owens through journerdism

Follow the Media’s Philip Stone takes a look at ACAP, the recently launched Automatic Content Access Protocol designed to help publishers control the way search engines crawl their content. Unfortunately, while many publishers support ACAP, major search engines have yet to adopt it.