How UK news editors view user-generated content
Posted by Jean Yves Chainon on February 26, 2008 at 4:35 PM
According to research by Neil Thurman of City University London, news websites are struggling to make the most of readers’ contributions despite their ostensible emphasis on user-generated content (UGC). Editors will have to learn how to balance between moderation of UGC and letting it organically grow.
There are at least three key findings:
- Editors and publications have no fundamental prejudice against UGC and are looking to expand that type of content. Editors understand the possible benefits of UGC to complement news coverage.
- However, editors have remained until now in a gatekeeper relation with UGC, deemed important to uphold their brand and quality standards (this may also turn out to be a brake to the unbridled nature of UGC) .
- Despite many efforts to include UGC, it is a costly operation and actual traffic has yet pay off.
“Despite the seemingly heavy emphasis on UGC at mainstream news websites, questions remain about the extent to which users are interested both in participating themselves and viewing other readers' contributions,” reported AlphaGalileo.
Exemplifying this, BBC News websites’ ‘Have Your Say’ feature only got contributions from 0.05% of the site’s daily unique audience, and generated about one fifth of the page views that a popular news story gets.
Due to UK-specific legislation, many editors have been cautious in their approach to UGC, worried over possible legal liabilities.
In most cases, editors and publications have insisted on upholding moderation because of concerns over spelling, grammar, decency, duplication, unbalanced views or lack of newsworthiness.
The high costs of moderation were another deterrent to the boom of UGC on news websites – most UGC experiments still don’t cover the costs of maintenance.
"By becoming gatekeepers of UGC, editors are on familiar territory and can protect their brand's value - a key aspect of their job. But it is a delicate balancing act. Too much filtering and control could frustrate the supply of UGC - something that is not in the interest of editors or users," said Thurman.
For his research, Thurman spoke to online editors from, among others, The Times, Telegraph, BBC News, Financial Times and The Independent.
Source: AlphaGalileo through IFRA Executive News Service
There are at least three key findings:
- Editors and publications have no fundamental prejudice against UGC and are looking to expand that type of content. Editors understand the possible benefits of UGC to complement news coverage.
- However, editors have remained until now in a gatekeeper relation with UGC, deemed important to uphold their brand and quality standards (this may also turn out to be a brake to the unbridled nature of UGC) .
- Despite many efforts to include UGC, it is a costly operation and actual traffic has yet pay off.
“Despite the seemingly heavy emphasis on UGC at mainstream news websites, questions remain about the extent to which users are interested both in participating themselves and viewing other readers' contributions,” reported AlphaGalileo.
Exemplifying this, BBC News websites’ ‘Have Your Say’ feature only got contributions from 0.05% of the site’s daily unique audience, and generated about one fifth of the page views that a popular news story gets.
Due to UK-specific legislation, many editors have been cautious in their approach to UGC, worried over possible legal liabilities.
In most cases, editors and publications have insisted on upholding moderation because of concerns over spelling, grammar, decency, duplication, unbalanced views or lack of newsworthiness.
The high costs of moderation were another deterrent to the boom of UGC on news websites – most UGC experiments still don’t cover the costs of maintenance.
"By becoming gatekeepers of UGC, editors are on familiar territory and can protect their brand's value - a key aspect of their job. But it is a delicate balancing act. Too much filtering and control could frustrate the supply of UGC - something that is not in the interest of editors or users," said Thurman.
For his research, Thurman spoke to online editors from, among others, The Times, Telegraph, BBC News, Financial Times and The Independent.
Source: AlphaGalileo through IFRA Executive News Service
Posted in :
Related Entries
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: How UK news editors view user-generated content.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.editorsweblog.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/6255
Leave a comment