Thursday, August 21, 2008

Brian Solis Anyone can help edit Brian Solis' map of the social Web by annotating the image on Flickr.

For those of us who are visual learners, Brian Solis of Future Works and Jesse Thomas of JESS3 have created this conversation prism -- a map of the social Web landscape.

Solis debuted this image in his Aug. 5 PR 2.0 post. Its purpose is to "help chart online conversations between the people that populate communities as well as the networks that connect the social Web. The Conversation Prism is free to use and share. It's our contribution to a new era of media education and literacy."

Solis emphasizes that digital media technologies are about conversation, the ebb and flow of dialogue across technologies, and the arts of listening and sharing. A taxonomy like this helps to define the emerging landscape.

Obvious omissions like Wikipedia are being edited into a new version of the diagram, according to Solis' note from two weeks ago on his Flickr page comments.

What's also missing so far are the technologies for making sense of the conversations. These include social bookmarking tools (like Delicious), ratings portals (like Epinions), and the impact of search engines on aggregating and ranking content. Also missing are analysis tools such as tag clouds and semantic maps, which help users visualize the relevance of conversations and help drive them to new conversations.

RELATED RESOURCES

Read more E-Media Tidbits. Get E-Media Tidbits as an RSS feed: * Copy this link and add it to your feed reader Subscribe to receive E-Media Tidbits by e-mail: *Sent Monday-Friday, 5 p.m.

I'd also like to see the petals moved around a bit so that related content such as video, user-generated, or crowdsourced content appear closer together. This way, as corporations or groups use these tools for their social communications strategies, they'll be less likely to miss areas where they should to have a presence

Furthermore, I would add open-source content management systems like Drupal and Joomla. These technologies allow amateurs and professionals alike to build rich conversation portals using the basic application and a host of open-source widgets.

Acknowledging that his diagram is a work in progress, Solis invites the public's help in building out the conversation prism on Flickr by adding notes and tags of where other emerging and international technologies should go.

E-mail this item | Add Your Comments | QuickLink this item: A149120

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

people-press.org The Pew report shows that more youth are going "newsless" -- or are they? What if "news" has become so blended with their ambient environment they don't need to seek it out separately?

We see that people's news habits are changing fast, but exactly how are they changing? And how might journalists and news organizations adapt, or even get ahead of the curve?

On Aug 17 the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released a meaty report exploring this issue: Audience Segments in a Changing News Environment. The full report is 129 pages, and it's well worth reading. More than any other report I've seen lately, I think this one can help you get a handle on what kinds of news will be required to suit people's evolving needs and options -- especially as the core audience of many mainstream news orgs continues to age and shrink.

I'll be highlighting nuggets from this report over the next week as I continue to plow through it. But to start, here are some points to consider:

• Youth are less interested in news. "In spite of the increasing variety of ways to get the news, the proportion of young people getting no news on a typical day has increased substantially over the past decade. About a third of those younger than 25 (34 percent) say they get no news on a typical day -- up from 25 percent in 1998." My question on this point: What exactly are they considering "news" here? Only packaged, professional stories or headlines obtained directly from news outlets? News travels in many ways, including socially. I'd love to see research exploring the impact of alternate vectors. I suspect they're increasingly important, especially to the under-25 crowd.
• Search engines: a growing news gateway. "[Across all Web news consumers] 83 percent say they use search engines to find stories of interest -- about the same as in 2006. But a growing percentage is using search engines more frequently. Nearly a third of online news users (31%) deploy search engines to look for news stories at least three days a week, up from 24 percent two years ago and 19 percent in 2004."
• News "grazers" now the norm. "A slim majority of Americans now say they check in on the news from time to time during the day, rather than get the news at regular times. This marks the first time since the question was first asked in 2002 that most Americans consider themselves 'news grazers'."
• Incidental news encounters. "Overall, 73 percent of all online users say they come across news online when they have been on the Web for another purpose. This is largely unchanged from 2006 (76%), but a decade ago far fewer people inadvertently got news online (54 percent in 1998)."
• Mobile news growth. "Overall, 15 percent of Americans say they have a smart phone, such as an iPhone or Blackberry. More than a third of smart phone owners (37 percent) say they get news from these devices."

E-mail this item | Add Your Comments | QuickLink this item: A149051

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

NAA.org NAA's new guide to mobile site development for newspapers.

Recently the Newspaper Association of America (NAA) released its development guide for mobile sites. This guide covers mobile content, revenue, and a few case studies.

Considering that the mobile landscape is still undiscovered country for many newspapers, NAA's guide is fairly comprehensive. The case studies focus on mobile sites for the New York Times, Tampa Bay Tribune, Cincinnati Enquirer, and Reuters.

It's not just about smartphones. I was pleased to see e-readers like the Amazon Kindle and the Sony Reader covered in NAA's research. These devices use a special electronic paper technology with very low power consumption (measuring battery life in days, not hours).

NAA also included some useful resource links at the end of the guide if you are planning mobile development for your site. This is a good place to start if you are exploring the mobile arena.

(Disclosure: I was interviewed for a couple sections of the guide in reference to the Houston Chronicle's mobile growth.)

E-mail this item | Add Your Comments | QuickLink this item: A148928

Monday, August 18, 2008

Tracy Olson, via Flickr (CC license) Who will pay for journalism? That might not be the right question...

Today on PJnet, Leonard Witt poses a provocative question, which was sparked by a panel at the recent Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) convention:

"Here, I believe, is the ultimate ethical question: If the American public does not want to pay for journalism -- in other words, doesn't find value in what we as journalists do -- should we simply stop doing it?"

It's an intriguing question, but I think it contains a few fallacies.

First, it seems to me that the "American public" has never wanted to pay for journalism -- not very much, anyway. Advertisers have always been the ones who cover the bills for the vast majority of news orgs. Subscriptions and cover prices paid by readers have always comprised just a small fraction of the revenue required most news orgs. (Hence the recent proliferation of free newspapers and magazines.) The exceptions to this have been public broadcasting, and the occasional journalistic work that emerges in long-form media (books or film/video).

Second, just because people aren't willing to directly pay cash for something does not necessarily mean they don't "find value" in it. For instance, when's the last time you personally chipped in for a clinical trial? And how are you paying for that air you're breathing right now?

Some benefits are assumed to be part of the environment in which we exist. That's what it means to have an environment. If a benefit grows scarce to the point that people feel they must directly pay cash from their pocket to keep getting it, there's probably a far more dire calamity at hand than that single point of scarcity. Most people will almost always seek other free sources of a benefit first.

RELATED RESOURCES

Read more E-Media Tidbits. Get E-Media Tidbits as an RSS feed: * Copy this link and add it to your feed reader Subscribe to receive E-Media Tidbits by e-mail: *Sent Monday-Friday, 5 p.m.

I think it's important to bear in mind that people value benefits, not necessarily forms. The key benefit that journalists and news organizations have provided has been relevant, timely, accurate information that helps people make decisions, take action, and form opinions. For over a century we've established an ad-supported business model around packaging that benefit in a form known as "journalism." But that's not the only form this benefit can take, and many parts of the "American public" (and the advertising industry) are figuring that out.

...Therefore, I think the real question isn't whether we should "stop doing journalism" if people won't pay for it, but rather: How can society continue to receive the benefits of journalism, given the current media environment? Also, which players might provide those benefits, and how?

Probably that solution (or more likely, set of solutions) won't look or work like traditional journalism. It might not be done by "professional journalists" or "news organizations." It may have different values and standards. It might not even be "a business." And yes, the big risk is that society could experience harm during this transition. But society also can participate in finding new solutions.

I'm not trying to trivialize the value of traditional journalism. But the established journalism business model simply doesn't work well enough to keep as many journalists employed as before.

So which is more important: the form of journalism, or the societal benefits? Can journalists and news orgs really see past their own survival enough to consider that question fairly?

E-mail this item | Add/View Feedback (8) | QuickLink this item: A148910

Friday, August 15, 2008

huffingtonpost.com/chicago The Huffington Post has launched its first local edition: HuffPost Chicago.

HuffPost Goes Local: Introducing HuffPost Chicago: The Huffington Post just unveiled its first local edition, HuffPost Chicago. It'll be interesting to see how this works out, since Chicago's local media market is already pretty packed. One thing I really like about the Chicago local media scene is the wealth of citizen journalism there. I wonder if HuffPost Chicago will find ways to highlight and incorporate those efforts?

US: Mobile news market to be ripe (Editorsweblog): "The Times' mobile site, which drew 500,000 page views in January 2007, received over 10 million hits by December of the same year, and soared up to 19 million views in May 2008. ...Is mobile news more adapted to local news outlets that can send out locally relevant alerts to users? 'I think it is most definitely appropriate for them but by no means exclusive for them,' said NYT director of mobile products Robert Samuels. National brands can also establish themselves on the local mobile news market."

NYTimes.com also offers a free iPhone application -- which is good, because so far it doesn't auto-detect the iPhone and route you to the mobile site. More on what's in the works for the NY Times online and mobile offerings.

CBS Launches Mobile News Hurricane Center (FierceWireless): I just checked this mobile out. It's mobile-friendly, all right -- but where's the option to get text alerts sent to you for designated states or zip codes? Especially during an emergency, cell systems get jammed and text messaging is more reliable than even pared-down mobile sites. Plus, there's lots of value to "push" content in those situations.

T-Mobile to Offer First Phone With Google Software (NYTimes.com): If you publish mobile content, looks like it's time to start figuring out how do deliver your content effectively to phones using Google's Android mobile platform, since it's coming soon. "T-Mobile will be the first carrier to offer a mobile phone powered by Google's Android software, according to people briefed on the company’s plans. The phone will be made by HTC, one of the largest makers of mobile phones in the world, and is expected to go on sale in the United States before Christmas, perhaps as early as October."

E-mail this item | Add Your Comments | QuickLink this item: A148805

Thursday, August 14, 2008

One day, as Jordan Glover (a 31-year-old server analyst, aka madjordan on Twitter) walked to Chicago's Daley Center Plaza to eat lunch, he noticed more people outside than usual. He also overheard some excited chatter from four women about their "lives being in danger."

Not knowing what was happening, he called his coworker Jeff Smith (aka bobbidigital on Twitter) to see if there was more news. With no information available from any local news venue, they turned to their Twitter friends.

twitter.com/BobbiDigital Initial reports of eyewitness accounts...

twitter.com/BobbiDigital

Word of the event spread almost instantaneously. Eventually, another local Twitter user, John Skach, contacted Colonel Tribune:

twitter.com/skach Once people started tweeting, Colonel Tribun e was brought in the loop.

Colonel Tribune is the Chicago Tribune's online "persona" -- a representation of ChicagoTribune.com in the social media world. This character (a "close friend" of mine) regularly interacts with nearly 800 Twitter followers. Colonel Tribune sends news, responds to random "tweets," (Twitter posts), and host events and Twitter meet-ups ("tweet-ups").

An article in yesterday's Huffington Post explains our paper's social media strategy in greater depth.

More importantly, The Colonel is about branding. He keeps the Chicago Tribune in people's minds. When news happens, Twitter users know to look to the Colonel to learn what's going on. And if the Colonel doesn't know, he'll find out soon.

...Back to the story: The Colonel alerted the Tribune's Metro desk of the tip. About 20 minutes later, we had a story:

twitter.com/ColonelTribune The Colonel let Twitter know about Tribune breaking news coverage

A conversation sprouted immediately. People "re-tweeted" our story and link, bringing it to a larger audience:

twitter.com/zoblue

twitter.com/BobbiDigital

 

In a little while, the story hit a critical mass, receiving several thousand page views in only a couple of hours.

ChicagoTribune.com Twitter traffic helped drive this breaking story up in the site's traffic rankings

The Colonel then did what any proper gentleman would do: He thanked Jeff:

twitter.com/ColonelTribune

This resulted in a private acknowledgement from John Skach, sent via direct message to the Colonel: "Dunno if @bobbidigital got a hold of you directly or if you pieced it together, but appreciate that you gave him proper attribution!"

Bottom line: There's no longer any doubt about whether media organizations should participate in social media. But when you do, be sure to thank and credit your readers and followers when they help you out.

Guest contributor Daniel Honigman is social media coordinator/strategy for the Chicago Tribune.

E-mail this item | Add/View Feedback (4) | QuickLink this item: A148745

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Jetalone, via Flickr (CC license) The quick fix is a notable advantage of online media.

One great thing about online news is the immediacy with which errors can be fixed.

Yesterday I was reading a MidwestBusiness.com article about Legacy.com, the obituary site that's part-owned by the Tribune Co. Legacy.com faces a potential threat from Tributes.com -- a new obituary site being spun off from Eons.com by one-time Monster.com head Jeff Taylor.

The article referred to "Legacy.com CEO Hayes Ferguson" and later says, "He added in an interview... [etc]." Well, Hayes is a woman. (If you Google for her image, you may even spot one reference to "a very pregnant Hayes Ferguson" -- an old image.) Also, she's COO, not CEO.

This made me question whether the "interview" was actually an e-mail exchange or a more traditional interview -- which in my opinion implies face-to-face. Way back when, when I was a reporter, it was drilled into me that the context of the information delivered is important -- a telephone interview, an in-person interview, a newspaper or broadcast quote, or an e-mail exchange. (Oh, wait: We didn't have e-mail back then...)

I shot the writer an e-mail (two, actually) pointing out the errors. Within an hour, they were fixed. Well done with the fast correction.

E-mail this item | Add/View Feedback (2) | QuickLink this item: A148670

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Tacoda case study Like many news orgs, the LA Times has used behavioral targeting to increase ad relevance and revenue. Congress is taking a closer look at whether this practice violates visitors' privacy.

All kinds of online publishers (including news organizations) that rely on advertising for revenue are either already targeting ads to specific users, or they're considering that option. The thinking goes that if ads and content are more relevant to specific groups or individuals, then people will probably consider them more valuable and respond more in ways that support publishers' and advertisers' business models.

However, today the Washington Post reports that Congress is taking a closer look at whether certain kinds of ad targeting constitute privacy invasion, and thus should be curbed. At issue is behavioral targeting: serving ads or content based on someone's Web browsing behavior, either on the Web at large or within a particular site or site group.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee has been investigating behavioral targeting by major Internet companies like Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo. Yesterday the committee published letters from nearly 30 online giants offering responses to the Congressional inquiry. According to the Washington Post, Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) "said he and his colleagues plan to introduce legislation next year, a sort of online-privacy Bill of Rights, that would require that consumers must opt in to the tracking of their online behavior and the collection and sharing of their personal data."

While search engines and telecos are certainly major players in behavioral targeting, they definitely aren't the only ones. Many news organizations also employ this technique to boost ad response rates (and revenue). Also, this February ClickZ reported that Yahoo has begun testing behavioral and geo-targeting across its growing network of newspaper publisher sites. It's quite possible that any legislation aimed at Internet providers and search engines also could affect what happens with ad targeting on news sites.

Today on Businessweek's Blogspotting, Heather Green observed, "Until now the standard generally for data collection has been opt out. ...Opt out is optimal for companies because most people don't do it. As we wrote on Friday, in July, Yahoo said that 75,000 users -- a fraction of one percent of the traffic it sees on its network -- visited an opt-out page to refuse behaviorally targeted ads across the non-Yahoo sites on which Yahoo serves ads. The [Internet] companies believe that that is because most people actually like targeted ads. But it could also be that most people don't understand the kind of targeting that's going on. Because in surveys when they are asked about it, they don't like being targeting."

To support her last point, Green cites a March 2008 survey by TrustE which found that 57 percent of the 1,015 respondents "are not comfortable with advertisers using that browsing history to serve relevant ads, even when that information cannot be tied to their names or any other personal information." Of course, TrustE is hardly unbiased about online privacy issues -- it sells privacy accrediting services to site owners.

It's way too early to know whether Markey's planned legislation will become a reality. However, any site that uses on behavioral targeting should watch this issue closely. An opt-in requirement could not only affect the ad rates you charge, but also could be costly and complex to implement -- and probably not worth the investment, since few site visitors would probably use it anyway.

E-mail this item | Add Your Comments | QuickLink this item: A148601



E-Media Tidbits Archive

View items published between:		and
	(MM/DD/YYYY)		(MM/DD/YYYY)

Or, go back 10 items per page: MORE > | Back to Top