Newspapers having a hard time learning what readers want

Posted by John Burke on May 11, 2006 at 11:58 AM
Reading the Wall Street Journal's survey of readers who sent in their suggestions about "The Perfect News Site, 2016," a couple of conflicts of interest caught my eye which show that newspapers might not be able to rely on their readers for advice on how to hang on to them.

Editorial staff of citizen editors? Towards the beginning of the article, we read that newspapers need "highly edited coverage that makes the best use of (readers') time" or "filtered news". "I would like to receive only news that is news to me, not news that I have already read or heard," said one reader. 

A few paragraphs down, we see that one proponent of citizen journalism thinks "Editors will be a thing of the past. Instead, users will vote content to the front page."

So what will it be; one editor picking out the best content and establishing a trustful relationship with readers, or everyone voting on everything? It seems that readers can't even make up their minds between the traditional and new rating sites such as Digg. Read more on this argument here.

Advertising vs. subscription: Wall Street Journal readers seem to be adverse to advertising, especially because they pay a subscription to read the Journal online, unlike most news sites which are free to the reader. One reader suggested that papers choose only one stream of revenue so as not to annoy their readers.

The overall tone of the paragraph leans more towards the subscription model than advertising. But in choosing this option, these Wall Street Journal readers may have forgotten that there is a world of newspapers online and that subscriptions kill one of the fundamental features of Internet news reading: hyperlinking.

This also pretty much kills the idea of "filtered news" and receiving "only the news that's news to me." For example, if the Journal doesn't cover something and wants to link its readers to the news at another publication, readers won't be able to access that news unless they subscribe which for most people will be financially ridiculous, not to mention impossible.

The conclusions from the WSJ survey remind me of one of my favorite Simpsons episodes when producers of a hit cartoon gather a focus group of children to ask them how to improve upon the program. After questioning the kids, one bewildered producer concludes, "So, you want a realistic, down-to-earth show... that's completely off-the-wall and swarming with magic robots?"

If newspapers are receiving the same kinds of answers from their audiences, they should implement as many distribution options to their readers as possible, but make sure they continue to produce the quality content that will keep those readers coming back.  

Source: The Wall Street Journal

Posted in :

1 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Newspapers having a hard time learning what readers want.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.editorsweblog.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/963

» Reports from the Editors' BlogConf from New Media Musings

Lively, interesting reports out of the 12th World Editors Forum's Editors' BlogConf held in Seoul, South Korea. Dan Gillmor, Joi Ito and Andrew Nachison are among those who spoke today. Susan Mernit is there, too. Marc Canter, who just jetted off to Lo... Read More

Leave a comment