I do appreciate the efforts of the founder of Spot.Us. I think it is noble to take risks in this current journalism crisis to find an alternative that will survive. I do not, however, think this is an appropriate business model that is going to work. I could be completely wrong, but honestly hope that I am not. I don't feel comfortable with news organizations strictly producing content based off of what the consumer is willing to pay for, isn't that what got us into this mess? Of course no one can really peg what created the Britney Spears-style news coverage. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? But I feel that creating content based off of a $10 donation just isn't going to cut it. And yes, he does point this out in the article that this model may not work, which for the sake of figuring out one that does work I'm glad Spot.Us is out there, but I don't think it is something that I would want to use.
In "Curating the Web" I'm not exactly sure what is going on. Maybe would could discuss this more in class. From my understanding, and I could be right or wrong on this one, is that this author's business model is to just have a Web site that links to various sources around set topics. This makes sense to me, and I agree that it would shake up the boring AP wire that most news organizations rely too much on. But I'm not sure what Korr was talking about when he said individual journalists could do this also. I see the importance of linking to related stories on a journalist's blog but I'm not sure if I was following it all.
In "No Time Left..." I thought the AP's willingness to understand young readers fascinating. I love that they used anthro. studies to figure out reading patterns -- very smart. I was a little surprised by their finding that readers wanted more. I've always been under the impression that young readers like short, concise blog posts that were updated constantly. But I can see that there is a lacking of background information that is needed to understand the constant stream of information coming at us all the time. I think that in many business models this could be helped by updating archieve abilities and linking to related stories.
In "A Retired Newspaper Journalists..." I was excited to read about the hyperlocal site that he started up, in Final Draft that is what we are hoping to do. Though, I am sure there must be a way to make money off of it. I really enjoyed this piece, as it pertained to what we are hoping to accomplish. I did take notice of what he said about not getting local writers or comments like he wanted to, I hadn't really thought of that happening. Being young, we just assumed that everyone would want to participate so I guess we'll have to come up with alternative plans to combat that when it happens. Perhaps we'll stick with our original Plan B in all cases -- hire lots of interns to work for free. Lots of them.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Feb. 18
In "the wisdom of the crowd," I have to admit I was a little nervous of the idea of "crowdsourcing." This sounds even more threatening than "citizen journalist." I am not surprised to find that when asked to ordinary citizens did not want to write feature length articles, and to be honest who would have wanted to read them anyway. One of my biggest problems with using user-generated content on the Web is the amount of comments and articles you see that have no bearing on the larger community. But it is interesting that the Q and As turned out productive. As for Gannett, I find they do too much "crowdsourcing," and audience created content. It clutters the page and makes me go someplace else for my news.
In "when journalists blog," I think our media outlet could utilize the blogging by journalists. I like the idea of being able to "put out the call" to readers when working on a story. I also really like the idea of updating a story every time the journalist makes a phone call, finds out something new. It lends itself to the immediacy of news on the Web, allowing readers to be informed without having to wait for a writer to compose a pyramid story and then have it go through edits, copy and design. The idea of also have shorter blogs is good. I think that is what mainstream media blogs tend to miss -- that advid blog readers like their information in short bursts and quick.
In "Digging into social media" I found it interesting that only 40 percent of a newspapers traffic comes from a reader typing in a specific URL, I'm one of those readers. I never knew that there was really any other way because I seem to be in the dark ages these days. I love the idea that a newspaper can have a social network alter ego, and we will definitely be using this. Using social networks was something Final Draft had decided to do already but this is just a great way to use it.
In "Ethical Values..." I completely agree with the idea that community bloggers have to be questioned about ethics, just like any journalist. The Web is a new free medium and the idea of a "page-view whore" is real and out there. And yes there needs to be a "truth alert" for editors who use citizen journalists, but of course there isn't. I think ultimately it is up to the readers to use their best judgement in deciding if a story is credible or not.
In "Suggest a topic," I think the idea of creating a brand out of your media outlet is a smart business model to use. I have to admit, I think this idea that a story is a growing thing, no longer a product, is kind of a hoax -- a myth of the online world. I see some Web sites do it, but not affectively. I'm not buying it yet.
In "when journalists blog," I think our media outlet could utilize the blogging by journalists. I like the idea of being able to "put out the call" to readers when working on a story. I also really like the idea of updating a story every time the journalist makes a phone call, finds out something new. It lends itself to the immediacy of news on the Web, allowing readers to be informed without having to wait for a writer to compose a pyramid story and then have it go through edits, copy and design. The idea of also have shorter blogs is good. I think that is what mainstream media blogs tend to miss -- that advid blog readers like their information in short bursts and quick.
In "Digging into social media" I found it interesting that only 40 percent of a newspapers traffic comes from a reader typing in a specific URL, I'm one of those readers. I never knew that there was really any other way because I seem to be in the dark ages these days. I love the idea that a newspaper can have a social network alter ego, and we will definitely be using this. Using social networks was something Final Draft had decided to do already but this is just a great way to use it.
In "Ethical Values..." I completely agree with the idea that community bloggers have to be questioned about ethics, just like any journalist. The Web is a new free medium and the idea of a "page-view whore" is real and out there. And yes there needs to be a "truth alert" for editors who use citizen journalists, but of course there isn't. I think ultimately it is up to the readers to use their best judgement in deciding if a story is credible or not.
In "Suggest a topic," I think the idea of creating a brand out of your media outlet is a smart business model to use. I have to admit, I think this idea that a story is a growing thing, no longer a product, is kind of a hoax -- a myth of the online world. I see some Web sites do it, but not affectively. I'm not buying it yet.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Feb. 11 Reading
The author of "multitasking in the news," brings up some interesting points about how audience members consume the news. With short attention spans most readers don't get past a story's headline and lede. I must admit that I find myself most morning quickly reading the headlines on the New York Time's Web site, or scanning over the headlines on Twitter. Rarely, maybe twice a day, do I actually click on a story to read. I think this comes from being bombarded by information, after awhile I become immune to news. In our news organization we've talked about how to cater to our readers who can only consume short bits of information but also how to stop this culture of distraction. We've discussed keeping the daily reporting short and sweet, while having a few reporters focus on longer pieces for weeky investigative reporting.
In "Tracking behavioral changes on the Web," I think the idea of calling readers promisciuos is funny and true. I've never thought of myself in that way. I like to think I'm a regular reader of certain publications Web sites, but on the whole I am willing to check out other sites because there is so much information out there. The whole idea of "bouncing" is true to. That is the beauty of the Web, you don't have to commit to anything for a set period of time. I suggest that our online site take advantage of this need to bounce from one site to another and allow users to access other sites of interest as a sidebar, not like advertisements but more like additional places to get information. Or making sure there are tons of hyperlinks.
In "Mapping out the Blogosphere," creating a "flow map" is an appropriate way to not only generate a certain type of user and guide them to other sites similar to your own, but also could be a useful tool in advertising. Using both static and dynamic links is one way to make sure you build a steady readership. Keeping things that are static, or look similar can make a reader feel comfortable. While using dynamic capabilities can keep a site new and exciting.
Miel's article I thought the idea of losing faith and conversion was a funny, yet well articulated label to the whole new media crisis journalism students are going through right now. I also much prefer the term "participatory media," to "citizen journalist," it just sounds friendlier to me...it also sounds like I haven't wasted four years in journalism school. To be honest I wasn't really sure where he was going with this article but I do like the idea that when we're building our online media outlets we should bring the community together, not try to build a whole new one. I think this mantra would be a good one for the Final Draft group.
In his conclusions I really found this to be interesting: In the changing media environment, news consumers risk relying on news sources that are neither credible nor comprehensive.
This is really important and crucial, new media is not picking up after mainstream media like its suppose to apparently. Something we should all think about.
In "Tracking behavioral changes on the Web," I think the idea of calling readers promisciuos is funny and true. I've never thought of myself in that way. I like to think I'm a regular reader of certain publications Web sites, but on the whole I am willing to check out other sites because there is so much information out there. The whole idea of "bouncing" is true to. That is the beauty of the Web, you don't have to commit to anything for a set period of time. I suggest that our online site take advantage of this need to bounce from one site to another and allow users to access other sites of interest as a sidebar, not like advertisements but more like additional places to get information. Or making sure there are tons of hyperlinks.
In "Mapping out the Blogosphere," creating a "flow map" is an appropriate way to not only generate a certain type of user and guide them to other sites similar to your own, but also could be a useful tool in advertising. Using both static and dynamic links is one way to make sure you build a steady readership. Keeping things that are static, or look similar can make a reader feel comfortable. While using dynamic capabilities can keep a site new and exciting.
Miel's article I thought the idea of losing faith and conversion was a funny, yet well articulated label to the whole new media crisis journalism students are going through right now. I also much prefer the term "participatory media," to "citizen journalist," it just sounds friendlier to me...it also sounds like I haven't wasted four years in journalism school. To be honest I wasn't really sure where he was going with this article but I do like the idea that when we're building our online media outlets we should bring the community together, not try to build a whole new one. I think this mantra would be a good one for the Final Draft group.
In his conclusions I really found this to be interesting: In the changing media environment, news consumers risk relying on news sources that are neither credible nor comprehensive.
This is really important and crucial, new media is not picking up after mainstream media like its suppose to apparently. Something we should all think about.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Feb. 4
In "Serendipity" the author points out a theme we read about last week, the overwhelming amount of news readers have to choose from online. Ethan makes an interesting connection between the "birds of a feather..." concept and how people consume media. It is true that readers will take a cue from their peers; read stories e-mailed to them, vote on stories and develop their own communities online. I also agree with that losing the "serendipity" of stumbling across a story I would not normally read would be tragic to news. It is our job, as journalists, to expose readers to stories, issues that they might not have been interested in. In my group, I would suggest we utilize some of these network sharing tools, such as e-mailing stories and voting on contests to engage readers and allow the "birds of a feather to stick together," but I would also caution against a completely user-generated Web site.
In "Passion Replaces the Dullness..." I have to say that I grew nervous over a professor who was thrilled his students' main chosen source for news was "The Daily Show." I've always cowered in the corner when these mainstream-media mudslinging discussions come up. I'm afraid to admit that I'm not completely sold on this idea of a world informed only by bloggers and independent, biased media outlets. But reading further I found that I did agree with his argument that there needs to be more passion in the newsroom, in journalists in general.
"Accepting the challenge," starts off with the same old story I've read a thousand times -- you know how to use that crazy-flying machine, the Internet! You'll be saved, we'll all be saved! Ok. But later in the article he offers some good advice for our group's idea, "content and community." This is basically, I think, what we have decided to create by doing a hyper-local site. But adding Twitter, as suggested, might not be a bad idea.
In "Journalism and Citzenship..." there were some interesting and concrete numbers concerning our generation and our relationship to news. It's sad to think only 20 percent of us read a newspaper everyday, and I have to admit there are days when I am not a member of that percentage myself. Developing a news habit is crucial, and I must admit that my love of the Washington Post came from Scully's insistence that we read it while studying in Washington. But I wonder, how can news organizations make their readers read? Is it up to schools and colleges to pick up where journalists are failing? Scary thought... In the end I agree that we, as journalists, need to push forward and return to the days when ratings and circulation didn't matter as much as telling the stories. That's the only way we can gain readers trust back.
In "Passion Replaces the Dullness..." I have to say that I grew nervous over a professor who was thrilled his students' main chosen source for news was "The Daily Show." I've always cowered in the corner when these mainstream-media mudslinging discussions come up. I'm afraid to admit that I'm not completely sold on this idea of a world informed only by bloggers and independent, biased media outlets. But reading further I found that I did agree with his argument that there needs to be more passion in the newsroom, in journalists in general.
"Accepting the challenge," starts off with the same old story I've read a thousand times -- you know how to use that crazy-flying machine, the Internet! You'll be saved, we'll all be saved! Ok. But later in the article he offers some good advice for our group's idea, "content and community." This is basically, I think, what we have decided to create by doing a hyper-local site. But adding Twitter, as suggested, might not be a bad idea.
In "Journalism and Citzenship..." there were some interesting and concrete numbers concerning our generation and our relationship to news. It's sad to think only 20 percent of us read a newspaper everyday, and I have to admit there are days when I am not a member of that percentage myself. Developing a news habit is crucial, and I must admit that my love of the Washington Post came from Scully's insistence that we read it while studying in Washington. But I wonder, how can news organizations make their readers read? Is it up to schools and colleges to pick up where journalists are failing? Scary thought... In the end I agree that we, as journalists, need to push forward and return to the days when ratings and circulation didn't matter as much as telling the stories. That's the only way we can gain readers trust back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)