Results matching “wall street jou 1”

The Economist magazine is refashioning its image through a major new advertising campaign to appeal to a wider readership. It has launched a cinema commercial, its first in eight years, to dispel preconceived ideas about the magazine's content and ethos.  

The commercial is part of a repackaging drive to boost circulation in the magazine's birthplace, the UK, and to emulate the popularity that it enjoys in the US.  The campaign calls upon the "intellectually curious" rather than any specified demographic to "let your mind wander".

The American newspaper publisher Gannett plans to get rid of somewhere between 1,000 and 2,000 positions, according to an article in today's Wall Street Journal. The job cuts will hit the company's 80 local dailies, rather than USA Today.

Former Gannett editor and reporter Jim Hopkins had previously predicted up to 4,500 slashed jobs on his Gannett Blog. He now says there will likely be 600 actual layoffs as a result of the restructuring, naming July 8 as the axe date.

Twitter asks its users one question: "What are you doing right now?" It is a simple enough concept; 'tweeters' answer this question and their response enters the real time feeds of those who follow them, but it is becoming increasingly useful for reporters and papers as the social network attracts more and more users. Essentially, journalists can use Twitter in three ways: to find stories and other information and to track events, to publicise their work, and to connect with readers.

A real time feed of breaking news and thought

Twitter is an extremely useful journalistic resource: reporters can use it to watch for breaking news, follow sources and search for information. "It's like monitoring another wire service," said Robb Montgomery, CEO of Visual Editors. It can be used to get an idea of which topics are attracting interest and what people are talking about right now. There is a list of top 'trending topics' on the Twitter home page. It is a real time search, ahead of even Google in terms of timeliness.

The useful information can sometimes be hard to find amongst multiple messages about what users had for breakfast, or what they thought about last night's TV show, but as Noam Cohen said in Global Journalist "it turns out that when a million people stare at their navels, more than a few of them will also notice that the ground is shaking, the plane is nosediving, the police are shooting." Twitter is particularly relevant during events that involve large numbers of members of the public, and a shining example of its effectiveness arose after a US Airways flight landed on the Hudson River and the first picture of the plane was posted to Twitter by an observer. Online news editor at Sky News Jon Gripton, discussing his reasons for appointing a Twitter correspondent, said "it is effectively another news feed. It helps us source eyewitnesses and photos and other people who are on the scene of an event." It is also crucial for following conferences, for example.

Applications such as Tweetdeck allow users to sort their contacts into groups and to search more and more easily for Tweets on specific topics. The custom of adopting hash-tags to make searching easier has been widely adopted: if a user is tweeting about a particular subject they can add a tag into their tweet, such as #IranElection, #Mumbai, #Gaza. The hash or pound symbol distinguishes the tag from random mentions of the same word, and is a custom developed by Twitter users.

Twitter's fame as a news source grew curing the terrorist attacks on Mumbai last November, and during the ongoing conflict in Iran following the election on June 12, Twitter has come into its own, with those inside Iran using the social network to stay in touch and communicate with the outside world while phone networks are down and many websites are blocked. News outlets turned to the service for the latest updates, as they were forced to abandon the principle of only relying on their trusted sources for information due to what the New York Times described as a "news vacuum."

Questions about the reliability of Twitter have also been highlighted by events in Iran. Clearly, it is impossible to judge the authenticity of Tweets from a non-trusted source. During 'normal' circumstances, a journalist would be able to contact the 'Tweeter' for more details and verification, but that is currently overwhelmingly difficult. Journalists who incorporate news obtained by Twitter into their reporting should always be careful to stress their uncertainty about the source.

Publishing: one-to-many

According to a Harvard Business study, there is a small group of very active Twitter users: it found that "the top 10% of prolific Twitter users accounted for over 90% of tweets."  Researchers Bill Heil and Mikolaj Piskorski concluded that "Twitter resembles more of a one-way, one-to-many publishing service more than a two-way, peer-to-peer communication network": in other words, perfect for journalists looking to publicise their work. It is simple enough to use as a publicising tool: send a link to the story with a Twitter-friendly headline, which should generally be casual and chatty, even more so than web headlines.

It is without doubt a good way to attract extra readers. One of the advantages of Twitter to spread the word is that it is viral, users frequently "re-tweet" the links that they have enjoyed. A CNN breaking news feed, not actually started by CNN but purchased by the news outlet when it gained substantial recognition, was the second Twitter feed to reach one million followers and now has well over 2 million. The New York Times main feed has 1,238,673 followers at time of publishing, and the Guardian has 25,009 on its main feed, though far more on its Guardian Tech account: 782,662. Many news organisations now have multiple Twitter feeds for their different sections. Montgomery stressed the need to "explore" the best policy for your newsroom when deciding whether to stick to one or split them

Some feeds are generated automatically, and for many journalists and bloggers it has become second nature to 'tweet' an article immediately after publishing. Robb Montgomery believes that the "more successful Twitterers have moved beyond auto-tweeting their RSS feed" to make their tweets more personal. "You want to show that there's a real person there."

A social tool for branding

As well as using Twitter as a one-to-many publishing mechanism, journalists can also take advantage of the social element of Twitter, using it to connect with their readers and to receive feedback on articles. It is a contact point between reporter and reader, making the journalist more accessible. "You can run quick polls, get a pulse, get some ideas," said Montgomery. Twitter can be used as part of a journalist's own personal branding, to develop their own network of followers, depending on their personality as well as their reputation as a journalist. This could be particularly helpful for freelance journalists and bloggers.

Newspapers' advice to staff

Many news outlets have become concerned about the way that their employees use social networks such as Twitter. New York Times executive editor Bill Keller called for a "zone of trust" after reporters Jennifer 8. Lee, Michael Luo and Brian Stelter sent 'tweets' on what executives were saying about the how the paper might charge for online content, amongst other things during a staff strategy meeting. Shortly after, the New York Times announced the appointment of social media editor Jen Preston via Twitter. She is to concentrate "full-time on expanding the use of social media networks and publishing platforms to improve New York Times journalism and deliver it to readers," including, it seems, policing Twitter use.

The Wall Street Journal's advice on Twitter in a staff memo is that "business and pleasure should not be mixed" and although "common sense should prevail," staff meetings should not be discussed on social networks. The Washington Post's guidelines also mentions its reliance on reporters' common sense. The AP's new rules tell reporters "Don't report things or break news that we haven't published, no matter the format, and that includes retweeting unconfirmed information not fit for AP's wires."

Embracing Twitter seems to be essential for journalists and newsrooms in today's media landscape. This does not mean that all reporters should be tweeting all day long, and certainly does not mean that they should believe everything they read, but they should familiarise themselves with the site and work out how they want to use it. A newsroom policy might be necessary to encourage or warn journalists with regards to how the paper would like to see it used, and if possible, a social media expert could monitor and coordinate the paper's efforts. It is not necessary for journalists to embrace every aspect of Twitter, but most who try it find something beneficial.

On Tuesday 30 June at 15.00 London time, Robb Montgomery, CEO of Visual Editors will be speaking at a WEF webinar on "How the real time web can improve your newspaper's journalism." More details here.

Who says the younger generation has no interest in traditional media? More than a quarter of Americans aged 18 to 20 reads a daily newspaper, according to the new Nielsen report "How Teens Use Media." In comparison, 45 percent of all adults pick up the paper on a daily basis.

About a third of 18- to 20-year-olds reads the Sunday paper, compared to 50 percent of all adults.

Dow Jones & Company and SBI Holdings, Inc. of Japan formalized their joint venture, Wall Street Journal Japan K.K., which will launch a Japanese-language business and financial news Web site later this year. The joint venture agreement was first announced on May 7.

Under a licensing arrangement between Wall Street Journal Japan K.K. and Dow Jones, the new site, carrying The Wall Street Journal brand, will primarily feature Japanese translations of content, including video and other multimedia, from all print and online editions of The Wall Street Journal and those of other Dow Jones publications. Wall Street Journal Japan K.K. also plans to develop mobile products and services in conjunction with the new site.

The CEO of News Corp.'s Dow Jones & Co is convinced that people will be willing to pay for digital content, a statement which will be welcomed by publishers currently developing pay models in an attempt to create revenue from digital editions of their news sites.

The Wall Street Journal, a News Corp. publication already charges for access to its online content. In the keynote speech at the official launch event for the PricewaterhouseCoopers "Media and Entertainment Outlook 2009-2013", Les Hinton suggested that Dow Jones is currently developing a technical application to facilitate the payment for the WSJ, other Dow material and some third party content.  Without offering great detail, Hinton revealed that the arrangement could include micro payments and subscriptions. 

Many newspaper readers would agree that word games are an essential component of the newspaper package. Yet, in last Sunday's edition of the New York Times magazine, the Acrostic puzzle had apparently disappeared.

The magazine has been making modifications to economise on newsprint. It has been reduced in size and the puzzle content altered: two Sundays ago the acrostic had moved page, and its original spot filled by a maths puzzle, the KenKen.

The Washington Post is restructuring its newsroom to be revolve around a cross media software concept.  The daily is the third US based publication to adopt the Methode system from EidosMedia S.p.A., following the Seattle Times and The Wall Street Journal who made the move last year. 

The adoption of the Methode is a firm indication of the convergence of the online and printed media in news provision.   The choice of software corresponds with the decision of the Post to combine its online and print operations.  The two teams will merge into a remodelled newsroom, in theory before the functioning of the new software begins. The Post is approaching the restructure with vigour: In January it appointed two new managing directors to oversee the developments, Elizabeth Spayd and Raju Narisetti.  The paper's new Executive Editor Marcus L. Brauchli, headed the previous restructure whilst at the WSJ.  The logistics of the move however, highlight the gloomier side of necessary evolution: according to Narisetti, the combined staff will measure the same or just under that of the print staff as it stood eighteen months ago.  The diminishment has been due to attrition and buyouts.

On Wednesday, Clarity Media Group announced that Rubert Murdoch had sold the Weekly Standard to Phillip Anschutz. The Huffington Post was one of the first sources of the rumor that emerged speculating that media groups News Corp. and Anschutz were discussing the transaction, more than ten days ago.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Murdoch may not necessarily "need" the right-wing political magazine, since its editorial tone echoes that of the more influential Wall Street Journal, a publication that Murdoch recently added to his media portfolio.

News publishers, moving with the irrepressible technological pull of modern readership desires, and the financial necessity of adapting to advertising changes, have shovelled huge amounts of money and effort into the development of online editions of their titles. The aim was to increase revenue from the Internet editions faster than money was being lost from the printed editions. This was a risky, but apparently necessary gamble and the final result is yet to be seen.   The latest rounds of industry analysis, however, suggest that online editions will not be able to save their printed sisters financially, as the latter's traditional sources of revenues continue to drop disproportionately to the incomes generated by new ventures.

The analysts at 24/7 Wall Street maintain that even at companies of which 15 per cent of their sales are generated by online projects, this does not provide a sufficent base to maintain a substantial editorial and business staff.  Moving content online is a palliative, which may "bring in additional sales but it will not do anything more than buy time for the industry to find other solutions".

It is becoming increasingly clear that a proportion of general news content is going to be put behind some kind of a pay wall in upcoming months. Several publishers have expressed their intentions to start charging, and several third parties want to help them do it. Journalists don't seem to want it, it seems pretty unlikely that readers would want it, so how are publishers going to succeed? Can it restore value to good journalism which is increasingly becoming a commodity? The Editors Weblog takes a look at some of the different services on offer and strategies being considered.

Journalism Online

First, Journalism Online, a start-up founded in April by industry experts Steve Brill, Gordon Crovitz and Leo Hindery, has taken facilitating charging for online content as one of its core goals. Brill made a presentation at the NAA-organised newspaper executives' meeting in Chicago on May 28 at which Journalism Online's mission was stated as enabling "news organizations to restore the optimal mix of circulation and advertising revenue necessary to finance original reporting and editing" hence giving them the chance to "realize the revenue they deserve--and can command--from readers and distributors for their digital content."

Journalism Online is marketing its proposal as an e-commerce platform. The idea is that it would make premium content from multiple publishers easily accessible to readers and allow annual, monthly subscriptions, day passes or single articles. There will also be all-you-can-read bundling options. Publishers will decide what content they want to charge for, how much to charge (though it is unclear how all-you-can-read prices will be decided) and how to charge. In the presentation, Brill suggests $50-60 a year and $5-6 a month for small to large city papers, but he stressed that this was an arbitrary choice and clearly the price would depend on how much content the publisher put behind the pay wall. He had previously suggested $15 a month for an all-you-can-read subscription.

The company maintains that implementing its system will not lead to a substantial loss in traffic or ad revenue, claiming that papers would be able to keep 88% of page views and 91% of ad revenue, as any paid content would be part of a hybrid model. In his examples, Brill demonstrates how he believes a paper could essentially double its income. Brill has also stressed that Journalism Online will incorporate lots of sampling. He told Nieman Lab's Zachery Seward that Journalism Online'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.

Overall, the company seems to be presenting its service as a chance for newspapers to focus on their best customers, offering a premium service to those who are prepared to pay. At the Chicago meeting, Journalism Online also emphasised the advantages of paid online content in terms of preserving the print product: it is "about the value proposition of print... about print subscriber acquisition and retention costs."

ViewPass

Another third party service was presented at the NAA-organised meeting in Chicago: ViewPass. It is the brainchild of Alan Mutter and Ridgely Evers, and could be implemented in 9 months at a cost of $6 million. The idea is that newspaper readers would be required to register once with ViewPass and it would then track their activity across participating websites.

Like Journalism Online, it would aim to offer readers the chance to purchase premium online content from multiple sources, with potential for subscriptions, micropayments and bundling. Essentially, the ways in which it differs is that ViewPass would be industry-owned, giving publishers the chance to (hopefully) share profits in the business itself, and it most crucially it would allow users to 'pay' for their content with their time or their information instead of with cash, because of their increased value to advertisers. In fact, ViewPass would focus on presenting readers that were attractive to advertisers for highly targeted ads. Mutter himself is not enthusiastic about charging for much online content, suggesting to Nieman Lab that it would only work for specialist content.

Circlabs

The creation of another start up was announced the day before the Chicago meeting: CircLabs, founded by Bill Densmore, Jeffrey Vander Clute, Martin Langeveld and Joe Bergeron. Its first product, code-named Circulate, aims to "offer a solution" to publishers who are experimenting with micropayments and subscriptions, suggesting that they should charge for content which is "both scarce in nature and of high utility to a segment of the audience." CircLabs is also focussed on developing opportunities for "high-value" advertising revenue, and plans to incorporate personalised news services. Further details are yet to appear.

Efforts of individual publishers

News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch has announced that all the company's newspapers would be charging within a year. It is looking at bundling content, according to chief digital officer Jonathan Miller, such as putting all the media conglomerate's New York-based content into one subscription package. One of the company's prime assets, the Wall Street Journal, is proof that paid premium content does work, although of a specifically financial nature. The paper is to expand its paid online options, with plans to introduce micropayments later this year along with a further level of premium subscriptions. Murdoch suggested that the company wants to "test" a pay model on some of its stronger properties first, and there has been speculation that the Sunday Times will be among these. The paid online content debate, although definitely present in the UK, has not been as strong as across the Atlantic, and it would be interesting to see what sort of reaction such a move would provoke.

MediaNews Group is planning to charge online under the belief that "we continue to do an injustice to our print subscribers and create perceptions that our content has no value by putting all of our print content online for free." A memo to staff from CEO Dean Singleton and president Jody Lodovic suggested that a part-paid strategy is in the works, and made it clear that the company is intending to charge for existing content rather than for new products or services.

The New York Times is apparently looking at two different ways in which it could charge for online content. The first would be somewhat similar to the Financial Times' model, whereby readers could surf the site without charge until a page-view or word limit were reached, when a 'metre' would start running and it would charge a user for the rest of their time spent. (The FT allows 10 free articles per user per month, then demands a subscription.) This would have the advantage of not putting specific content behind a paywall, and therefore not angering journalists.

The other option is a 'membership' scheme: readers would donate money and subsequently be invited into a "New York Times community," which would offer them free merchandise and other benefits. Possibly a tiered membership scheme could be implemented. When these proposals were discussed, Bill Keller told staff that a decision would be made by the end of June. The NYT is wary following its failed TimesSelect experience back in 2007 and seems determined to find a solution that will not damage its significant ad revenue.

Potential obstacles: search and antitrust

Currently many people find their news through search engines such as Google, and for articles to get good Google rankings and appear higher up in search results, they cannot be behind a paywall. Newspapers must strive to find an appropriate solution to this when they start charging: the Wall Street Journal's tactic of allowing its paid content to be accessed free via Google is clearly not fair to its paying customers, and is a definite deterrent to potential subscribers.

Antitrust regulations in the US effectively prevent publishers from coming to a joint agreement on when and how they should start charging for content. At the newspaper executives' meeting in Chicago on May 28, an antitrust lawyer was present to make sure all the discussion was legal. Poynter analyst Rick Edmonds suggested that the use of a third party "vendor" such as Journalism Online could be the solution to these concerns. Journalism Online has taken on David Boies and Ted Olson for antitrust advice.

So, is it going to work? And how?

Undoubtedly, implementing paid content is going to be a considerable challenge and is likely to involve substantial experimentation. Newspapers need to consider what exactly they would want to charge for, for example whether they could create a new paid service or put what is currently free behind a pay wall. It seems as if it would be easier to persuade people to pay for something new, rather than telling them they have to start paying for something previously free. But then people might decide that they are happy with what they get now and that they do not want to pay for anything extra. A paper with a highly developed website such as the New York Times could possibly offer basic news free but keep its interactive graphics and other more innovative content for its premium customers.

As yet, Journalism Online seems to be ahead of the pack with regards to third party services. No papers have publicly signed on but Brill told Seward that he had already spoken to about half of those at the Chicago meeting. In terms of connections and credibility of its founders, Journalism Online has a head start. ViewPass and CircLabs do seem to be onto something, however, with their focus on offering consumers as targets for higher-revenue advertising and effectively allowing them to pay for their news by looking at ads. Could these companies coexist, or is there only room for one?

A crucial factor which should not be underestimated in any attempt to charge online is ease of use for the consumer. People will be far more likely to part with their cash if doing so is simple and straightforward. For this reason, sign-in-once and all-you-can-read offers are likely to appeal. And once people are paying, the level of service should reflect this: good journalism presented attractively and accessibly. An element of personalisation would also seem worth paying for.

Can paid online content 'save' newspapers? If Journalism Online's figures are correct, it looks like it could make a significant difference to a newspaper's fortunes. The next few months will be telling in terms of experimentation and competition between proposals, but it will take some years for the definitive answer to this question to be realised.

The legal problems that could arise in the US from newspapers banding together to charge for and track online content have been discussed at some length. The Wall Street Journal has looked at the way that news publishers are seeking inspiration from the way that music publishers collect money every time one of their songs is played in public as they consider how to go about charging online.

Antitrust law forbids competing businesses to attempt to join forces in any way that might limit consumer options. Clearly, if newspapers were to collaborate on price-fixing for online news, for example, it would be limiting. The music industry has managed to fight off claims of anticompetitive practices and managed to preserve its system, according to the WSJ, partly by limiting any single entity's control over access to songs.

The I Want Media's The Future of Media: 2009 discussion held at NYU yesterday gathered the most renowned names in the new media world to present their visions of the future of information media.  Present were Gawker chief Nick Denton, Jack Dorsey, cofounder and chairman of Twitter; Bonnie Fuller, creator of Us Weekly and founder of Bonnie Fuller Media; Alan Murray, deputy managing editor and executive editor online at The Wall Street Journal; and Craig Newmark, founder of Craigslist.

Perhaps of most interest to have come from the exchange were Denton's statements about journalists' attitudes, their inaptitude for internet blogging and the pay wall debate which is currently dominating news provision dialogue.

News Corp chief digital officer Jonathan Miller has said  the company is looking into bundling its online content when it adopts a new pay model, according to the Hollywood Reporter. He also expressed his belief that paid online news is the future and indicated that the media conglomerate is willing to lead a push for change.  

Miller, speaking at the Hollywood Reporter's Digital Power event in New York, explained that "we want to see a model established" for charging online, adding that  "what works for consumers, I think - and this has to be tested - are bundles." He suggested that News Corp's various papers or various New York media outlets could be bundled. It is an idea which has proved successful for cable TV channels and which many believe could also work for news, as an alternative to individual subscriptions to general news sites, which largely failed. It is one of the options proposed by start-up company Journalism Online.

According to an article in today's Guardian Media, the Sunday Times is planning to launch its own standalone website and is even considering introducing a paywall.

Publisher News International is a subdivision of News Corp headed by Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch has expressed his desire - to see his newspapers based around the world to follow the example of the Wall Street Journal by charging readers for content - on numerous occasions.

Plastic Logic showed off its super slim, large screen e-reader prototype in a demonstration during the Wall Street Journal's D: All Things Digital conference on Wednesday. When released sometime in 2010, the device will enter into direct competition with Amazon's broadsheet Kindle DX, due to be available this summer.  

 Plastic Logic's e-reader is 0.27 inches thick, much slimmer than 0.33 inch waistband of the Amazon Kindle 2.

The e-reader has been designed primarily with the business market in mind.  The 8.5 x 11 inch E Ink touch screen display makes it seem "it seem almost like a large notepad", Wired.com enthused.  Its large screen means that users will be able to view Word documents, spreadsheets, PowerPoint presentations and PDF files and it boasts Wi-Fi and 3G cellular capacities.  Newspapers, books and other documents can be downloaded from the company's own e-commerce site.

Internet newspaper the Huffington Post has since its inception provided a means of communication and dialogue for left-leaning pundits and politicians to air their views to a predominately sympathetic audience.  So it may have come as a bit of a surprise to regular readers when blogs and comments by Republican Party members began to appear more frequently on the site, Politico reports.

Surely, to obtain an appreciative reception to criticisms of their opponents and the pitch of their plans, it would be safer for Republicans to use conservative platforms, such as the RedState blog or the Wall Street Journal?  Yet online political debate today, it appears, is all about stepping out of the comfort zone.  Controversy and argument equal greater impact, and the reach is increased hugely by stepping into enemy territory.

A panel discussion held earlier this month by the Southern Newspaper Publishers Association concerning the pay versus free online subscription models has served to fuel the debate raging over this current predicament for the newspaper industry.  This time, the benefits of the online version of the Arkansas Democratic-Gazette have come under scrutiny from media consultants and journalists wary of its pay wall model.  

The Democratic-Gazette, alongside its higher-profile counterpart the Wall Street Journal, is often hailed as a future model for newspapers looking to charge for their content.  The paper operates a pay wall system, in operation since 2001, whereby viewers must pay in order to be able to read a full article.  The supporters of this system use the example of the low-key paper as a fine example of a publication profiting from its on-going transformation into a digital product.  

Last Monday, a little over halfway into the 62nd Annual Cannes Film Festival, The American Pavilion hosted a panel discussion entitled "It's a Mad, New Media World." The six panelists in attendance were John Horn of The Los Angeles Times, James Rocchi of MSN Movies, Anne Thompson of ThompsonOnHollywood, Karina Longworth of SpoutBlog, and Sharon Waxman of The Wrap. Eugene Hernandez from IndieWIRE acted as the mediator.
 
The subject under discussion was the state of new media and its consequences for print media. Horn from the LA Times boldly asserts his opinion that trade magazines will solely and can only exist online by the end of this year. He sounds astonished when pondering how trade magazines can stay afloat as a print platform. Hernandez declared Horn to be the most powerful journalist on the panel. Hernandez credits Horn with this distinction thanks to the idea that newspapers like the LA Times, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal represent a brand.

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.

New search engine Wolfram Alpha went live on Friday, and describes itself as "the first step in an ambitious, long-term project to make all systematic knowledge immediately computable by anyone". The site collects all objective data and combines it with a search function, allowing users to search for the answers to all factual queries - and a few entertaining responses to more unusual questions thrown in for fun. The site has been billed as revolutionary, and its ability to throw up and compare data is indeed unprecedented - "if you ask it to compare the height of Mount Everest to the length of the Golden Gate Bridge, it will tell you. Or ask what the weather was like in London on the day John F. Kennedy was assassinated, it will cross-check and provide the answer."

Amidst speculation that the site could be the next Google, or is a potential Wikipedia killer, it must be recognised that the site provides a more specific function than either of the other two. It is, nonetheless, an incredible tool in its own right. A Nieman Lab report has written about the potential that Wolfram Alpha gives to database journalism, the most common problem with which is the maintenance and constant updating of the information and statistics provided. "As news organizations look to add high-value content that might form the core of paid-content sections for their sites, compilations and analysis of public information is one of the areas they're exploring."

Source: Wolfram Alpha, Nieman Lab, Wall Street Journal, Mashable

The Guardian published today the first of planned daily Chinese language translations of several leading articles to coincide with the release of its China focused mini-site, reported www.pressgazette.co.uk.

Following the Telegraph's publication of the expense claims of British MPs from the past five years, there has been much attention given to how the publication obtained their information, and if the process was indeed ethical. Whilst the Telegraph itself has so far remained silent on the matter and refused to confirm whether or not it paid for the data, there has been a stream of information about the origins of the data coming from other sources.

Two names have now been put forward as the intermediaries in the sale, ex-SAS man John Wick and Henry Gewanter, managing director of an American PR firm. Whilst Wick has so far been unavailable for comment, Gewanter has essentially confirmed his involvement. He is keen to clear up one of the greyer areas of the saga; "No criminal acts have occurred. No criminal charges can be brought. I don't deal in stolen goods... I can tell you it was not stolen"

According to the New York Observer, the New York Times is considering two different proposals for charging for content. Executive editor Bill Keller told staff about the ideas that the paper is looking at.

One is a "meter system" which would allow the reader to surf the site without charge until reading a predetermined limit - words or pageviews - after which a metre will start running and the reader is charged for the rest of their movement on the site. It is not clear whether readers would be allowed a certain limit per day, or how else this would be measured. Keller apparently warned staff at the meeting that this pay model would be "tricky" as a fine balance would have to be found: if the limit of free content was too small, readers could be discouraged and traffic would fall, while as if it was too high, there would be little improvement in revenue.