Political Blogs

I missed this from biz school prof Kevin Dooley back in August, 2008:

[H]ow are polit­ical blogs the same or dif­fer­ent from MSM? Through Wonko­sphere, we have noticed that polit­ical blogs are con­sumed in much the same man­ner as main­stream media is, which indic­ates that read­ers treat polit­ical blogs not as sep­ar­ate from, but rather as part of, main­stream media. Wonko­sphere traffic is greatest on Monday, and tends to peak before break­fast, lunch and din­ner, i.e. when people are cruis­ing on the net to end a por­tion of their work day. Blogs act as news­pa­pers for most. Con­tinue read­ing

What would Jeff do?

In case you hap­pen to be a journ­al­ist and Jeff Jar­vis still has you think­ing that news­pa­per prob­lems are your fault, take a look at the New York Times from July, 1980 (and if you like catchy head­lines, they don’t come much catch­ier than this):

First U.S. Exper­i­ments in Elec­tronic News­pa­pers Begin in Two Com­munit­ies; 13 News­pa­pers to Be Added The Need for News­pa­pers A Com­mu­nic­a­tions Devel­op­ment Tele­phone, Cable and Air­waves A Warn­ing on Reg­u­la­tion [pay access]. Con­tinue read­ing

The New York Times strategy…

Strategy at the New York Times? Goes a little some­thing like this…according to their earn­ings call:

There are four key ele­ments to our strategy –
  • intro­du­cing new products and ser­vices, both in print and online;
  • aggress­ively man­aging our costs;
  • rebal­an­cing our port­fo­lio of busi­nesses both by mak­ing acquis­i­tions and by divest­ing prop­er­ties that no longer meet their fin­an­cial tar­gets or fit stra­tegic­ally within the Times Company;
  • and build­ing our digital research and devel­op­ment capability.

[BTW cf. McClatchy:

We are focused on four major areas:
  • driv­ing new rev­en­ues, with a par­tic­u­lar emphasis on online advertising;
  • focus­ing on grow­ing total audience;
  • provid­ing high qual­ity pub­lic ser­vice journalism;
  • and redu­cing our cost structure.]

How else does it look for the Times?

The national print cat­egor­ies where we saw the largest declines were tele­com­mu­nic­a­tions as wire­less car­ri­ers reduced advert­ising; trans­port­a­tion, as inter­na­tional and domestic air­lines cut back their spend­ing due to a rise in fuel costs; and national auto­mot­ive, which saw advert­ising declines from domestic car manufacturers.

Clas­si­fied advert­ising decreased in all three major cat­egor­ies, real estate, recruit­ment, and auto­mot­ive. [Ouch]

Retail advert­ising rev­en­ues were down due to decreased advert­ising from depart­ment stores, home fur­nish­ing stores, and mass mar­ket advertisers…

New products tar­get­ing lux­ury cat­egor­ies helped off­set some of the ad rev­enue declines in the quarter.

In total, our digital busi­nesses grew nearly 12% in the quarter and gen­er­ated $82.9 mil­lion, or 11% of the company’s rev­en­ues. [And at that growth rate, it will take until 2026–7 to reach the his­toric 2007–8 rev­enue figures…]

Inter­net advert­ising rev­en­ues increased 16% in the quarter.

In April, the rate of decline in advert­ising rev­en­ues is expec­ted to be in the mid single digits. This is an improve­ment from our March per­form­ance and is due mainly to shifts in the tim­ing of Easter and in the pub­lic­a­tion of Key magazine.

…it is clear that the Wall Street Journal is pos­i­tion­ing itself quite dif­fer­ently in regard to its over­all cov­er­age, broad­en­ing it very much into the inter­na­tional and polit­ical arena, and with the launch of their magazine enter­ing into broader life­style coverage.

…the page view growth itself is obvi­ously some­thing that we intend to mon­et­ize and we mon­et­ize it in two ways, both through our premium dis­play sales force, which obvi­ously gets the best rates, and … we do get very sig­ni­fic­antly higher rates than most web­sites do in the aver­age. And we also mon­et­ize it through rela­tion­ships with a broad vari­ety of ad networks.

There are a lot of web 2.0 com­pan­ies look­ing for exits now but very few of them have the kind of rev­enue or cash flow that we would look for to have a mean­ing­ful impact on our business.

[from Seek­ing Alpha]

Stretching credulity across platforms…

More Can You Trust The Media? trust fod­der from the Online Journ­al­ism Sym­posium.

A paper titled “A Medi­ated, Inter­act­ive Call to Action: Audi­ence Per­cep­tions of Cred­ib­il­ity and Author­ity for a Times Journ­al­ist in Print vs. Online” picked on the NYT’s Nick Kris­tof and asked people to rate his cred­ib­il­ity as a colum­nist and video reporter.

Guess what? He’s a more cred­ible colum­nist than he is a TV reporter.

People watch­ing the video described Kris­tof as someone who is “annoy­ing,” “sen­sa­tional,” and “arrog­ant,” and who “talks in a mono­tone voice.”

People believed the story more because Kristof’s video provided proof. On the other hand, … [s]eeing and hear­ing Kris­tof made some people recoil, instead of boost­ing his credibility.

Accord­ing to the author:

people who read Kris­tof con­sider him to be an omni­scient being telling the story as a prin­cipled activist…

In con­trast, people who watch Kris­tof inter­view­ing his sources and wit­ness him run­ning all over the Sudan as his voi­ceovers nar­rate the vic­tims’ tales have more of an oppor­tun­ity to con­sider Kris­tof as a per­son and a reporter, and thus, to judge him accord­ingly (and more harshly, it seems).

But first the news…

Scott Karp has an inter­est­ing sug­ges­tion for news­pa­pers online. Put news first.

[L]et’s look at the New York Times. It’s homepage is arranged, like most tra­di­tional media brand sites, by what is most important.

Here’s the prob­lem — if you visit the New York Times through­out the day, and no import­ant news has broken, the homepage remains largely unchanged, static, like a print newspaper.

Organ­iz­ing news by import­ance as the default makes sense when you’re only deliv­er­ing the news once a day (and the “default” is all you get). But when news pub­lish­ing is con­tinu­ous, it’s not the best way to server fre­quent news consumers.

The prob­lem remains — as it does for blogs — draw­ing atten­tion to your archive mater­ial. Do you just have to leave it to search engines…

How to argue in circles

Writing in the FT, Pablo Eis­en­berg provides a great example of fuzzy think­ing on journ­al­ism. And also a les­son in how to write in circles.

For a dec­ade, the print media have been the only effect­ive mech­an­ism for keep­ing non-profit organ­isa­tions open and account­able. The out­stand­ing invest­ig­at­ive work of the Boston Globe, the Wash­ing­ton Post, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times and many other papers has uncovered hun­dreds of found­a­tions and char­it­ies guilty of inap­pro­pri­ate expendit­ure, cor­rup­tion, self-dealing, con­flicts of interest and excess­ive compensation.

This cov­er­age has had impress­ive res­ults: con­gres­sional hear­ings and legis­lat­ive activ­ity; more effect­ive fed­eral and state reg­u­la­tions; increased scru­tiny by state attorneys-general; bet­ter audit­ing and enforce­ment pro­ced­ures by the Internal Rev­enue Ser­vice; and more self-reform efforts by non-profit organisations.

Yet without con­tin­ued media focus on the non-profit sec­tor, char­it­ies and found­a­tions are likely to revert to old habits. Scand­als, inap­pro­pri­ate beha­viour and excess­ive compens­ation are still a regret­table part of our non-profit world.

So what has driven news­pa­pers away from such invest­ig­a­tions, accord­ing to Eis­en­berg? Why the pur­suit of profit.

Twenty years ago a news­pa­per was happy to make a profit of 10–15 per cent. Even though daily news­pa­pers today earn between 10 and 20 per cent in pre-tax profits, that is no longer good enough for Wall Street and investors, who demand much more, no mat­ter what the cost to journ­al­istic integ­rity. Busi­ness interests have trumped the pub­lic interest.

Is there any hope for a resur­gence of high-quality, mission-oriented journ­al­ism? Non-profit own­er­ship of select daily news­pa­pers could offer a prom­ising new begin­ning, and phil­an­thropy could make it happen.

I like it. Non-profit own­er­ship as the solu­tion for news­pa­pers fail­ing to provide invest­ig­at­ive scru­tiny of non-profits? A com­plete circle. (And have you noticed how things were always bet­ter twenty years ago? There must a twenty year rule: another post, another time)