A chat with Cameron Reilly from TPN and Mark Jones of the AFR at PANPA the other day.
Low camera angles definitely don't suit ...
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Who killed the newspaper?
"Newspapers are making progress with the internet, but most are still too timid, defensive or high-minded."
The Economist nails some of the problems and trends for newspapers.
But despite this succinctly presented special report the issues run deeper.
And the answers will be many.
For a different perspective on the "quality will win" view here's Michael Wolff's Vanity Fair piece on the New York Times. An internet fan he ain't:
"The premise is that, via the Internet, the Times can more easily deliver the Times. And, indeed, it's created the richest site of any newspaper in the world, a site whose depth and efficiency inevitably undermine the paper itself. At a conference earlier this year, hosted by Google, Arthur gave a talk about "real journalism," saying that the Times would succeed online because its brand had a proven record of probity—that people would always want the real thing. (His talk was accompanied by video clips of lots of older, exhausted-looking white men working in the newsroom.)
"But more and more there is the sinking sensation at the Times that the Internet isn't Kansas. It's not just the relentless reductiveness of the new medium—the Times's long version becomes fodder for everybody else's short version. Or that the Internet requires, according to one hollow-eyed reporter, "everyone to do more and more for no more money." Much more unsettling than that: the Internet, once thought of as the ideal vehicle for reaching a targeted audience, is turning into a high-volume business, super-mass-media, dependent on cheap advertising. Success demands vast numbers: tens of millions or hundreds of millions of habituated users."
I'd hazard the view that the Times' problem isn't the internet, it's the culture of the Times itself.
Update: The Oz takes umbrance with the Economist's view.
The Economist nails some of the problems and trends for newspapers.
But despite this succinctly presented special report the issues run deeper.
And the answers will be many.
For a different perspective on the "quality will win" view here's Michael Wolff's Vanity Fair piece on the New York Times. An internet fan he ain't:
"The premise is that, via the Internet, the Times can more easily deliver the Times. And, indeed, it's created the richest site of any newspaper in the world, a site whose depth and efficiency inevitably undermine the paper itself. At a conference earlier this year, hosted by Google, Arthur gave a talk about "real journalism," saying that the Times would succeed online because its brand had a proven record of probity—that people would always want the real thing. (His talk was accompanied by video clips of lots of older, exhausted-looking white men working in the newsroom.)
"But more and more there is the sinking sensation at the Times that the Internet isn't Kansas. It's not just the relentless reductiveness of the new medium—the Times's long version becomes fodder for everybody else's short version. Or that the Internet requires, according to one hollow-eyed reporter, "everyone to do more and more for no more money." Much more unsettling than that: the Internet, once thought of as the ideal vehicle for reaching a targeted audience, is turning into a high-volume business, super-mass-media, dependent on cheap advertising. Success demands vast numbers: tens of millions or hundreds of millions of habituated users."
I'd hazard the view that the Times' problem isn't the internet, it's the culture of the Times itself.
Update: The Oz takes umbrance with the Economist's view.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Newspapers online: signs of the times
Mark Glaser's Media Shift reviews some interesting new research on "The Use of the Internet by America's Newspapers" produced by the Bivings Group. The comparisons in regard to Australian newspaper sites are a little loose. Nevertheless, we're doing a lot of what they describe - and, imo, we're doing it just as effectively.
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Google's mobile traffic reports
Ross Dawson pointed out to me the other day that Google have just released live traffic maps for mobile phones in the US. The system allows mobile phone users to chose a destination within Google Maps and select "show traffic". Road conditions are highlighted in three colors: red for congested, yellow or orange for slowdowns, and green for a clear run.
It's a great idea - one many news sites would love to be have been the first to do effectively ... But then along comes Google.
The problem for Australia, though, is not just the reporting mechanisms needed to do this, but the cost of mobile data transfer. You might love the idea of getting the fastest route out of a peak hour jam, but if you live in Sydney your mobile phone bill would be through the roof very quickly.
It's a great idea - one many news sites would love to be have been the first to do effectively ... But then along comes Google.
The problem for Australia, though, is not just the reporting mechanisms needed to do this, but the cost of mobile data transfer. You might love the idea of getting the fastest route out of a peak hour jam, but if you live in Sydney your mobile phone bill would be through the roof very quickly.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
From Sydney to San Francisco
Here are some blog posts from yesterday's Future Of Media conference. There'll be video streams available tomorrow, apparently.
Also, BANGitUP TV blogged the event from Sydney and JD Lasica in San Francisco.
It was a very interesting day, though the short time frame and the nature of the topics meant that it was necessarily compressed. A number of sessions could have rolled on extensively.
The live video cross to San Francisco was something of a highlight - cross continental participants included Chris Anderson, Craig Newmark and Moira Gunn. Locally, Ian Gardiner, Ben Barron, Jack Matthews and others provided Australian perspectives.
It certainly showed a good model for conference video link ups.
Also, BANGitUP TV blogged the event from Sydney and JD Lasica in San Francisco.
It was a very interesting day, though the short time frame and the nature of the topics meant that it was necessarily compressed. A number of sessions could have rolled on extensively.
The live video cross to San Francisco was something of a highlight - cross continental participants included Chris Anderson, Craig Newmark and Moira Gunn. Locally, Ian Gardiner, Ben Barron, Jack Matthews and others provided Australian perspectives.
It certainly showed a good model for conference video link ups.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Future of Media conference
I'm chairing a panel at the Future of Media Summit this week and will have the pleasure of talking with Ian Gardner, Ross Gibson and Ben Barron about content creation - who's going to make it (and how), who's going to consume it and who's likely to pay for it.
Also taking part via teleconference from San Francisco will be Chris Anderson, Craig Newmark and David Sifry. Should be a fascinating day.
Ross Dawson from the Future Exploration Network has posted pre-conference podcast interviews with some of the participants, as well as the Future of Media Report 2006 summarising many of the trends across media useage and production, including amongst other things:
Global media market highlights and comparisons
Emerging media relationships
Content creation and usage
Media industry networks
Future of Media Strategic Framework
Five ideas transforming media
Also taking part via teleconference from San Francisco will be Chris Anderson, Craig Newmark and David Sifry. Should be a fascinating day.
Ross Dawson from the Future Exploration Network has posted pre-conference podcast interviews with some of the participants, as well as the Future of Media Report 2006 summarising many of the trends across media useage and production, including amongst other things:
Global media market highlights and comparisons
Emerging media relationships
Content creation and usage
Media industry networks
Future of Media Strategic Framework
Five ideas transforming media
Monday, July 03, 2006
Lars Rasmussen
The man who invented Google maps - not quite singlehandedly - spoke at a Sydney pub the other night about mashups and APIs and Ajax and other good things.
Here's the MP3. I managed to get most of his talk ... before the batteries in the recorder died.
Here's the MP3. I managed to get most of his talk ... before the batteries in the recorder died.
Ukrainski
This is the Ukraine Hotel where I stayed during the Moscow conference. It's directly across the Moscow River from the Russian Parliament and has a wonderfully gothic high-Soviet style design (looks like something out of a Tim Burton movie). It's one of the Seven Sisters built by Stalin as his answer to the modernist boom in the US between the wars. It reeks of cigarette smoke with the shades of old KGB and politburo spooks on every floor. And it has a great view through the smog from the platform beneath the spire on the 30th floor.
Here are some more photos from the Moscow trip, including a bunch from Cathedral Square in the Kremlin.
Here are some more photos from the Moscow trip, including a bunch from Cathedral Square in the Kremlin.
Moscow WEF
This poor blog is getting more and more part-time ... but hey, it's still good for occasional media stuff.
I used to like reading Simon Waldman's blog for that reason, but I've noticed he's moved to a new system and put a redirect on his old archives so you get a fleeting glimpse of the old "work stuff" that he says he's got bored writing about before being passed straight to his new site. Bit of a tease, really. He might have become bored with it - frankly, I don't know how he found the time to write that much anyway - but it was an interesting insight into the thinking of a senior new media guy. His explanation is that "What started out as exploration and half-baked ideas in the blogosphere have now become standard fodder for every media exec in town".
Oh well, fair enough.
Anyway, I was in Moscow in early June for the WEF sessions which, to be honest, had some of what Waldman would have hated, but a lot of other very interesting stuff around current strategies for newspapers online.
Here are some tidbits:
They are selling more newspapers and getting more traffic to the web site as a result. And they say the timeliness issue is no more a concern than running full wire copy in the paper already is, but because they save space by compressing to headlines they then have more room for reader generated stories and local issues.
I used to like reading Simon Waldman's blog for that reason, but I've noticed he's moved to a new system and put a redirect on his old archives so you get a fleeting glimpse of the old "work stuff" that he says he's got bored writing about before being passed straight to his new site. Bit of a tease, really. He might have become bored with it - frankly, I don't know how he found the time to write that much anyway - but it was an interesting insight into the thinking of a senior new media guy. His explanation is that "What started out as exploration and half-baked ideas in the blogosphere have now become standard fodder for every media exec in town".
Oh well, fair enough.
Anyway, I was in Moscow in early June for the WEF sessions which, to be honest, had some of what Waldman would have hated, but a lot of other very interesting stuff around current strategies for newspapers online.
Here are some tidbits:
- Search engine referrals to the Nytimes.com have increased 71 per cent in the last 12 months. SEO is a major tactical play for them, according to GM Vivan Schiller. She was cagey about the execution, not surprisingly.
- Traffic to Nytimes.com has increased from 16 million UVs a month to 25 million UVs a month over the last 12-18 months. They put this down to their page redesign, a new video player, better organisation of print and online newsrooms allowing more responsive publishing, and better integration and treatment of verticals - travel, entertainment, real estate etc. They've reorganised the reporting structure on the site and appointed John Landman, former metro editor, as overall boss. The NYT.com editor now reports to him and this has allowed better communications and relations between print and online.
- Both Nytimes.com and Washingpost.com are introducing personalisation. Nytimes.com in the next month, washingtonpost.com in the next couple of months. There were no details on cost. It's taken about a year to set up and they've (NYT.com) been running a limited trial for the last few months. The launch will be in beta form, a first for them. It's fully based on their rss feeds, and the expected benefit is wholly around extending time spent on the site.
- A big difference between the two sites is that the Nytimes.com don't really care about UGC, whereas it's a big focus for washingtonpost.com. According to Vivian Schiller: "The web is increasingly filled with a lot of user generated content - there's certainly nothing wrong with that - but often that user generated content is unfiltered and it's uninformed". Washingtonpost.com, on the other hand, is looking closely at Web 2.0 strategies.
- Vorarlberger Medienhaus (Austria) has been successfully experimenting with reverse publishing wire news headlines in its regional papers. The logic is that the newspaper is a perfect browsing mechanism and the web provides the depth. So they run (sometimes) hundred of headlines in dedicated sections of their world pages with pointers to the web for the full story. for local news they encourage readers to generate story ideas for the paper through the web site.
They are selling more newspapers and getting more traffic to the web site as a result. And they say the timeliness issue is no more a concern than running full wire copy in the paper already is, but because they save space by compressing to headlines they then have more room for reader generated stories and local issues.
- Canada's Globe and Mail web site has had a 30 per cent increase in UVs since it added a comment function on the bottom of each article.
- Yahoo! news currently has no way of verifying authenticity of user generated content. The BBC is trying, but theirs is a very manual process. Steve Hermann e-i-c of News interactive at the BBC spoke about how they are doing this.
- The Norwegian paper Dagbladet gets 1.6 million UVs a week from a population of less than 5 million (helluva reach). They attribute this success to their portal strategy (visually illustrated in presentation).
Saturday, April 08, 2006
What's up?
Newsmapping the globe ...
It looks good, but it's strangely out of date. Proof of concept only, perhaps? Right now Australian stories on the map are three days old, there's a 9-week old story from the Washington Post about a blogger on death row, a similarly aged story about pay rates for workers in Calgary, but nothing from today.
It looks good, but it's strangely out of date. Proof of concept only, perhaps? Right now Australian stories on the map are three days old, there's a 9-week old story from the Washington Post about a blogger on death row, a similarly aged story about pay rates for workers in Calgary, but nothing from today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)