By Matthew Boyle | mboyle@flagler.edu
At the Society of Professional Journalists Region Three Spring 2010 Conference last weekend, speakers and panelists drilled Twitter even further into our skulls.
Not that emphasizing Twitter’s importance is a bad thing, but, I don’t think I’ve ever heard more about 140 character mini-messages in my life. Either way, it got me tweeting.
Over the past three days, I’ve tweeted 11 times. Since I opened my Twitter account more than a year ago until the March 19, I tweeted only 39 times. Expect more on-the-go tweets and regular updates from me.
Another thing the conference rejuvenated for me was my Facebook usage. I was going through a rough relationship with Facebook, a separation that brought me close to closing my account.
The SPJ Region 3 conference got me back on Facebook interacting with readers and friends, for better or worse.
Etan Horowitz, a digital media producer for CNN International, taught me and other conference attendees how to use Twitter, Facebook and other social media as a reporting tool instead of just a content promotion tool.
Horowitz showed us how to find Tweeters down to a U.S. postal code or a international city, a way to find previously impossible-to-locate sources and means to generate citizen journalism content.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Older new media poses problems for industry
By Matthew Boyle | mboyle@flagler.edu
Are e-mails still relevant and effective forms of new mass communication? I don’t know the answer to that question but one thing that does surprise me is that people still push e-mail newsletters and e-mail marketing.
I’m shocked that such an emphasis is placed on an archaic new media form. In the day and age of Twitter, Facebook and endless social media and Web 2.0 platforms as well as iPhones, iPod Touches, Kindles, Blackberries and other smartphones, why focus on the new media of old.
Imagine an activist group pushing a Myspace page. It’s outdated. Or, if a professional videographer still uses those antiquated big tapes or if a photographer still uses film for non-aesthetic reasons.
The technology has evolved and, as a society, we’ve adapted to it and developed different uses for it. We still use Myspace, however infrequently. It has become a place for bands and musicians to promote their songs and albums. We still use cameras, but have better digital technology to help us out.
In terms of e-mail marketing and e-mail newsletters, I think the Web 2.0 business needs reform. New media experts out there need to focus and specialize e-mail’s usage so as not to overload readers and subscribers but to hone in on just the right balance of content in their inboxes.
Are e-mails still relevant and effective forms of new mass communication? I don’t know the answer to that question but one thing that does surprise me is that people still push e-mail newsletters and e-mail marketing.
I’m shocked that such an emphasis is placed on an archaic new media form. In the day and age of Twitter, Facebook and endless social media and Web 2.0 platforms as well as iPhones, iPod Touches, Kindles, Blackberries and other smartphones, why focus on the new media of old.
Imagine an activist group pushing a Myspace page. It’s outdated. Or, if a professional videographer still uses those antiquated big tapes or if a photographer still uses film for non-aesthetic reasons.
The technology has evolved and, as a society, we’ve adapted to it and developed different uses for it. We still use Myspace, however infrequently. It has become a place for bands and musicians to promote their songs and albums. We still use cameras, but have better digital technology to help us out.
In terms of e-mail marketing and e-mail newsletters, I think the Web 2.0 business needs reform. New media experts out there need to focus and specialize e-mail’s usage so as not to overload readers and subscribers but to hone in on just the right balance of content in their inboxes.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Get with the program, people
By Matthew Boyle | mboyle@flagler.edu
It’s that time of year again. We, The Gargoyle staff, just submitted our web newspaper for the Online Pacemaker award to the Associated Collegiate Press.
It got me thinking, though, that there are still hundreds if not thousands of student newspapers out there still with a print-first mentality. It irks me that fellow journalism students, who read and consume the majority of their news content online, have this glorified perception of print news.
When friends and co-workers of mine at The Gargoyle ask me: “What’s going to be in print?.” I answer, “Who cares?”
A print newspaper’s distribution only has limited reach and can only contain so much information. The print reporter is also limited by publication frequency.
Online news providers, however, have virtually unlimited reach and barely any size limits. Also, online reporters can file at any time on any day.
Let me tell you again, student journalists, in case it hasn’t seeped in yet: Print newspapers are going to die.
They might not go away completely, but print newspapers will certainly not be the focus of publication.
Fellow student journalists: act now. Get on board the new media train before it leaves you behind.
I also recommend that the ACP remove completely or lower the emphasis of a “Newspaper Pacemaker.” Call it a “News Service Pacemaker.”
It’s that time of year again. We, The Gargoyle staff, just submitted our web newspaper for the Online Pacemaker award to the Associated Collegiate Press.
It got me thinking, though, that there are still hundreds if not thousands of student newspapers out there still with a print-first mentality. It irks me that fellow journalism students, who read and consume the majority of their news content online, have this glorified perception of print news.
When friends and co-workers of mine at The Gargoyle ask me: “What’s going to be in print?.” I answer, “Who cares?”
A print newspaper’s distribution only has limited reach and can only contain so much information. The print reporter is also limited by publication frequency.
Online news providers, however, have virtually unlimited reach and barely any size limits. Also, online reporters can file at any time on any day.
Let me tell you again, student journalists, in case it hasn’t seeped in yet: Print newspapers are going to die.
They might not go away completely, but print newspapers will certainly not be the focus of publication.
Fellow student journalists: act now. Get on board the new media train before it leaves you behind.
I also recommend that the ACP remove completely or lower the emphasis of a “Newspaper Pacemaker.” Call it a “News Service Pacemaker.”
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Get a workflow together to help shift to web-first newsroom
By Matthew Boyle | mboyle@flagler.edu
The hardest part of a shift from a print-first mindset to a web-first mindset at a newspaper is getting a consistent workflow set up. When we switched to web-first at The Gargoyle, we had to develop a plan on how we were going to get a regular flow of copy and multimedia content through the staff to the Web site.
In print-first newsroom, it’s simple. Your reporter or writer sends in his or her story, the photographer sends in his or her images, the editor fixes it and design staff lays out the print edition. At each spot along the way, somebody has to give something to somebody else.
In the web-first newsroom, it’s a bit more difficult. The reporters, writers, editors, photographers and design staff members often double or triple in other roles. When making the switch, which you should already be doing, outline each person’s specific roles and hold your staff to their responsibilities.
As for the specific content, have designated places for each step of the “newsroom process” for the digital files to go.
At The Gargoyle, I set up a “Copyflow” folder with three steps:
Also, two more folders are in the “Copyflow,” system: a “Published” folder for copy after it’s published and a “Spiked” folder for stuff that doesn’t make it through the editing process.
I also set up a “Photoflow” and “Multimediaflow” based on the same process.
Following these guidelines, or something similar, will dramatically help the switch to web-first.
The hardest part of a shift from a print-first mindset to a web-first mindset at a newspaper is getting a consistent workflow set up. When we switched to web-first at The Gargoyle, we had to develop a plan on how we were going to get a regular flow of copy and multimedia content through the staff to the Web site.
In print-first newsroom, it’s simple. Your reporter or writer sends in his or her story, the photographer sends in his or her images, the editor fixes it and design staff lays out the print edition. At each spot along the way, somebody has to give something to somebody else.
In the web-first newsroom, it’s a bit more difficult. The reporters, writers, editors, photographers and design staff members often double or triple in other roles. When making the switch, which you should already be doing, outline each person’s specific roles and hold your staff to their responsibilities.
As for the specific content, have designated places for each step of the “newsroom process” for the digital files to go.
At The Gargoyle, I set up a “Copyflow” folder with three steps:
- To Sections. When a reporter’s stories come in, section editors put the word documents in there.
- To Editors. When section editors are done with the copy, they put it here so the managing editor and co-editors in chief can look at it.
- To Publish. After the managing editor or one co-editor in chief proofs the copy, it goes here for any last revisions before publishing online.
Also, two more folders are in the “Copyflow,” system: a “Published” folder for copy after it’s published and a “Spiked” folder for stuff that doesn’t make it through the editing process.
I also set up a “Photoflow” and “Multimediaflow” based on the same process.
Following these guidelines, or something similar, will dramatically help the switch to web-first.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Online journalism revenue success depends on content flow
By Matthew Boyle | mboyle@flagler.edu
The first step in developing a successful online or new media advertising revenue model is to build an audience. Why should it be any different than how traditional media stream revenue?
A print newspaper’s ad sales staff will present readership and subscription numbers and statistics to potential advertisers and a broadcast venue’s ad sales staff will present viewer and ratings numbers and statistics to potential advertisers. Both systems seemed to have worked pretty well in the past, right?
Web media should do the same. Editorial operators should be building web audiences to present to potential advertisers. It isn’t much different than old media. Actually, it’s exactly the same. When online news content quality starts improving, so will readership and ad sales revenue.
To make money, web publishers need to look to reporters and editors with the highest journalistic standards and strongest reporting and writing skills to keep regular readers coming back. Then, those web publishers can take that audience and market it to community advertisers, just like a tradition media outlet, like a newspaper, radio station or television station.
On the other hand, however, if online news content quality starts suffering, expect readership numbers to decline as well as advertising revenues.
The first step in developing a successful online or new media advertising revenue model is to build an audience. Why should it be any different than how traditional media stream revenue?
A print newspaper’s ad sales staff will present readership and subscription numbers and statistics to potential advertisers and a broadcast venue’s ad sales staff will present viewer and ratings numbers and statistics to potential advertisers. Both systems seemed to have worked pretty well in the past, right?
Web media should do the same. Editorial operators should be building web audiences to present to potential advertisers. It isn’t much different than old media. Actually, it’s exactly the same. When online news content quality starts improving, so will readership and ad sales revenue.
To make money, web publishers need to look to reporters and editors with the highest journalistic standards and strongest reporting and writing skills to keep regular readers coming back. Then, those web publishers can take that audience and market it to community advertisers, just like a tradition media outlet, like a newspaper, radio station or television station.
On the other hand, however, if online news content quality starts suffering, expect readership numbers to decline as well as advertising revenues.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Stop blowing up my Twitter!
By Matthew Boyle | mboyle@flagler.edu
I don’t need six tweets on Jan. 28 about Tom Manuel’s sentencing, all in one day.
I have certain Twitter Feeds texted to my cell phone. Normally, this allows me to keep up on the big breaking stories but, lately, I’ve found it to be quite annoying.
As the Co-Editor in Chief of The Gargoyle, the student newspaper of Flagler College in St. Augustine, Fla., I follow the local daily newspaper, The St. Augustine Record on Twitter and have its tweets texted to my cell phone.
Whoever is running the Twitter account over there really needs to lay off the tweets. I’m glad your news organization is starting to incorporate social media, but I don’t need six tweets – which translate into texts for me – in one day about Tom Manuel.
Also, if you take anything from this post St. Augustine Record-Tweeter, make it: if you’re going to blow up your Twitter followers’ accounts and cell phones, it better be worth it, not old news that isn’t interesting anymore.
I’m seriously considering stopping following the St. Augustine Record’s Twitter.
Either tweet all your headlines, like we do at The Gargoyle, or tweet stories of interest. But, seriously, don’t turn off your social media followers as soon as you get them.
I don’t need six tweets on Jan. 28 about Tom Manuel’s sentencing, all in one day.
I have certain Twitter Feeds texted to my cell phone. Normally, this allows me to keep up on the big breaking stories but, lately, I’ve found it to be quite annoying.
As the Co-Editor in Chief of The Gargoyle, the student newspaper of Flagler College in St. Augustine, Fla., I follow the local daily newspaper, The St. Augustine Record on Twitter and have its tweets texted to my cell phone.
Whoever is running the Twitter account over there really needs to lay off the tweets. I’m glad your news organization is starting to incorporate social media, but I don’t need six tweets – which translate into texts for me – in one day about Tom Manuel.
Also, if you take anything from this post St. Augustine Record-Tweeter, make it: if you’re going to blow up your Twitter followers’ accounts and cell phones, it better be worth it, not old news that isn’t interesting anymore.
I’m seriously considering stopping following the St. Augustine Record’s Twitter.
Either tweet all your headlines, like we do at The Gargoyle, or tweet stories of interest. But, seriously, don’t turn off your social media followers as soon as you get them.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
New York Times aims too high with plans to charge ‘frequent readers’ online
By Matthew Boyle | mboyle@flagler.edu
According to a New York Times article on Jan. 20, the Times announced it plans to charge “frequent readers” online, starting in January 2011.
You can’t charge online readers. They won’t pay.
Although the Times will have a full year after this announcement to frame the conversation, defend its plans and wipe out any potential competitors, I don’t think the nation’s newspaper of record’s decision will work out for the better of the industry or for the Times itself.
Don’t misunderstand me. I would absolutely love for the new “frequent reader” system to work. It’s just not going to.
I don’t expect readers to pull out plastic to pay for news stories they’re accustomed to reading for free. Other national news services will continue to offer free web content and take regular readers away from the Times.
In the Jan. 20 article, Felix Salmon, a Reuters media writer, was quoted saying, “Successful media companies go after audience first, and then watch revenues follow; failing ones alienate their audience in an attempt to maximize short-term revenues.”
I agree 100 percent with Salmon. The Times will experience a quick, short-term revenue boost but will steadily lose its national readership.
The Times says it can’t find a profitable or sustainable subscription-free, advertising-supported revenue model and notes that the negative economic climate doesn’t help.
By June 2011, six months after the “frequent reader” program’s scheduled launch, I expect that the Times will have fully abandoned this proposed model and will have shifted back to something similar to what it has now.
According to a New York Times article on Jan. 20, the Times announced it plans to charge “frequent readers” online, starting in January 2011.
You can’t charge online readers. They won’t pay.
Although the Times will have a full year after this announcement to frame the conversation, defend its plans and wipe out any potential competitors, I don’t think the nation’s newspaper of record’s decision will work out for the better of the industry or for the Times itself.
Don’t misunderstand me. I would absolutely love for the new “frequent reader” system to work. It’s just not going to.
I don’t expect readers to pull out plastic to pay for news stories they’re accustomed to reading for free. Other national news services will continue to offer free web content and take regular readers away from the Times.
In the Jan. 20 article, Felix Salmon, a Reuters media writer, was quoted saying, “Successful media companies go after audience first, and then watch revenues follow; failing ones alienate their audience in an attempt to maximize short-term revenues.”
I agree 100 percent with Salmon. The Times will experience a quick, short-term revenue boost but will steadily lose its national readership.
The Times says it can’t find a profitable or sustainable subscription-free, advertising-supported revenue model and notes that the negative economic climate doesn’t help.
By June 2011, six months after the “frequent reader” program’s scheduled launch, I expect that the Times will have fully abandoned this proposed model and will have shifted back to something similar to what it has now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)