Monday, March 12, 2007
MySpace for My News?
MySpace is the talk of the Web again, this time for
speculation that it's stepping into the news biz.
Although MySpace reps haven't commented, the New York Post
and MediaPost ran stories Monday saying the social networking site will soon launch
its own news service.
The service would be a news aggregator, similar to
Digg, where
MySpace users can rate and comment on articles, and post them to their personal
pages.
I'm already wondering how this would affect sites like Digg
and Reddit, as well as news organizations' sites. "It doesn't take a genius to
figure out that this is not good news for those of us in the news business,
unless we view it as another way to get our content onto yet another platform,"
said blogger Terry Heaton, who broke the news last week citing "inside sources."
MySpace has the audience in place -- more than 100
million accounts, says the Post (which has the same owner as MySpace -- News
Corp.). Now I'm wondering how that audience would use the service -- especially
with the option for posting articles to personal pages.
What kind of news would the largely young audience post?
Would the service, as Heaton predicts, help us understand what kind of news
they're interested in? Would it help engage young people in the news?
The Post's article says MySpace (obviously) aims to keep users on the
site for news instead of going elsewhere. That also begs the question -- would
the service divert traffic away from news organizations' sites or increase it?
How are aggregators out there now, like Google News, affecting news sites' page
views?
It seems we could learn a lot from users' interactions with
the news service -- not just for getting a better picture of news consumption
habits, but for generating story ideas as well.
What would people in your coverage area post? How might that
influence your coverage? And if they could author their own work, as Heaton
reports, what would they write about?
Howard Finberg, Poynter's director of interactive learning, took a stab at answering what this combination of social networking and news might mean. But I guess we'll have to wait to
find out for sure -- until "early 2nd quarter," according to Heaton's blog.
Until then, tell me what you think.
E-mail this item |
Add/View Feedback (3) |
QuickLink this item: A119711
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Learning from Apple's WashPost Promo
By Pat Walters
Naughton Fellow
CORRECTION: Appended.
In mid-January, a video crew visited washingtonpost.com.Newsweek Interactive in Arlington, Va., to capture a behind-the-scenes look at this most innovative of major American newsrooms. They interviewed the guys who run the joint -- Jim Brady and Tom Kennedy -- as well as some of the other folks who build and maintain the stuff on The Washington Post's Web site. Here's what they came up with.
The video crew could have been from ABC, NBC or any of the major news networks. In fact, had it come a week earlier, it would have been there at the same time as a crew from PBS. Frontline was there working on "News War."
But this particular group was from Apple.
|
RELATED RESOURCES
|
Sign up to receive About the Job by e-mail:
Click here (sent Mondays and Wednesdays at 9 a.m.)
| |
By the middle of last week, the video, which was posted Feb. 23 on the
Pro section of the company's Web site, had made its way onto a number of popular journalism Web sites. The Apple flick generated buzz among journalists in large part, I think, because it gives us a peek into a newsroom that is on the cutting edge. And what it reveals is very cool.
Lively video shows staffers zipping through a brightly lit newsroom, no doubt moving so quickly because they're working on groundbreaking multimedia projects. All of this action plays to an edgy digital sountrack that makes me feel more like I'm shopping at American Eagle than taking a tour of a newsroom.
It's no surprise that the film focuses on video production, a strength that both Apple and the
Post are happy to show off. Last year
Post videographer
Travis Fox won an Emmy for his coverage of Hurricane Katrina, beating out
MTV and
National Geographic. Earlier this month, the
Post launched
"onBeing," an innovative video project that takes a stripped-down approach to telling the stories of interesting local characters.
As we watch the Apple piece, we learn the
Post has 50 reporters with video cameras. We see them using those cameras and editing their footage back in the newsroom. It's a sweet setup. And the film makes the newsroom look fast-paced, innovative and generally cool. As the camera pans across a Macbook Pro -- with
Final Cut Pro splashed across the screen -- Tom Kennedy, managing editor for multimedia, narrates:
"In the last couple years we've just really taken off with our video editing," he says, "because we've been able to do laptop editing in the field with Apple products."
And with that, we come to understand just what this little film is. "Oh yes," I remember telling myself the first time I watched it, "this
is an ad." Apple, Apple everywhere.
To be fair, it isn't quite a commercial like we might see on television. The Pro section of Apple's Web site, on which this video appears, is a showcase for interesting Apple users. The miniature documentaries feature people like music producer
Machine and pop musician
Duncan Shiek.
And then, of course, there is the
Post.
It felt strange watching
Post staffers -- professional, mainstream journalists -- endorse Apple products.
Did I say endorse? I meant promote. Or acknowledge.
Here's executive editor Jim Brady:
"It wasn't an endorsement, it was an acknowledgement that ... we use Apple products," Brady told me on the phone last week. "Our entire multimedia department looks like an Apple superstore.
"Our editorial board endorses political candidates and policy changes," he continued. "If [this] were seen as an endorsement, that'd be a problem."
I could be alone on this, but I saw it as an endorsement. When I told Brady that, he didn't sound happy, but he also didn't sound entirely surprised. One thing about the video that irked him was the editing. It was "unfortunate," he said, that certain Apple-friendly quotes made the final version. When asked if he expected that Apple would spin the film to advertise its products, Bradly said he didn't.
"From our perspective it was like doing an interview," he said. "I sat there for an hour and nobody asked me about Apple at all."
Brady wasn't asked about Apple, and he didn't talk about it. But Kennedy did. And so did vice president for product development
Rob Curley.
The
Post wouldn't be the first media company to endorse a vendor -- see this year's Super Bowl issue of
Sports Illustrated for a two-page
Canon ad that features a few of the magazine's staff photographers.
But what makes this case particularly interesting is what it says about our relationship with our audiences.
More and more news organizations are finding ways to give audience members a peek inside the newsroom.
The Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Wash.,
broadcasts its news meetings live on the Web. KPIX-TV in San Francisco
recently started a similar practice.
These videos are usually raw, brimming with banter, laughter and foul language. They show us as we really are. Sometimes we look good. Sometimes we don't. But if nothing else, we look real. And sometimes that means we look biased.
Critics will no doubt use the film to take shots at the
Post's coverage of Apple. "Ah-hah! I knew your coverage of that iPhone thing has been unfairly favorable," the Windows fans might say. "It's not
that cool."
It might be more productive, though, to ask a question. What can we learn from the film? Here are a few things. One -- The
Post uses lots of Apple products. Two -- Those products work well for them. Three --
Post staffers like them.
And here's a fourth.
Whether or not you can imagine letting a video crew turn your newsroom's love of Apple -- or Canon
or
Marantz or any other vendor, for that matter -- into a promotion, the
Post did just that.
There could be a lot of reasons for this. For one thing, the film is as much an advertisement for the
Post as it is one for Apple. But I think it also suggests that we're all getting a little more comfortable with exposing ourselves to our audiences. More than ever before, the people we serve want to see us, to know how we do what we do, to understand what we like and dislike. They want to know we are real people. And we're showing them we are.
Maybe handing the task of self-documentation over to a vendor isn't the best idea.
But watch
the Apple film again, take note of what it tells us about how the
Post produces its Web site and try to imagine some ways you might turn the camera around and point it at your own news organization.
CORRECTION: The original version of this story attributed Tom Kennedy's comments on "apple products" to Jim Brady.
UPDATE (3/7/07): Since I posted this story Tuesday, a couple particularly sharp readers have pointed out that the Apple piece isn't really a video at all. If you watch it again, you'll notice that it's done in still images. I, of course, didn't notice this, and called it a video. My editor did the same thing. And so did a slew of bloggers who linked to the piece.
So, if it's not a video, what is it? I'm told that in order to be called video, a sequence of still images must be moving at 30 frames per second. The Apple piece falls well short of that, even at its most frantic moments.
Any ideas?
E-mail this item |
Add/View Feedback (4) |
QuickLink this item: A119054
About the Job Archive
Or, go back 10 items per page: MORE >
|
Back to Top
