A quick thought on: “Readers, reporters, editors: you are in the digital zone”

The Irish Times

To start with, I commend The Irish Times and Hugh Linehan for bringing this debate into the mainstream and putting it before the audience, too often these discussions are confined to industry conferences and publications. That said, at some point we need to stop reminiscing for a time that’s gone and simply won’t come back, make the necessary and smartest changes possible and move ahead. We have to accept that many newspapers and media organisations will not persist into this new era. They have, and will continue to fall victim to this process of change and disruption.

I’d like to add a few comments on a few of the points that Linehan has articulated.

Linehan writes that:

“Even the New York Times, it seems, despite its digital talk, is having difficulties walking the digital walk, with online journalists still often regarded as second-class citizens and print continuing as the dominant force.”

What this misses is that the digital revenue of the New York Times is in the region of $300m per annum, which would cover the existing newsroom of 1300 journalists and associated costs with or without the printed newspaper.  The problem the New York Times has is not that it cannot finance a significant and impressive news organisation from digital revenues, and potentially make a small profit, but that the decline of print means that it will be forgoing another $1.1bn in revenue and it does not wish to do this yet (who would!). Crucially though that’s a business issue not a journalism or a financing of journalism issue as it is so often represented as. Other newspapers with less status may struggle to achieve the kind of results the New York Times has but that doesn’t mean that you cannot finance impressive journalism through digital revenue.


“Too often in the past, media organisations treated their digital publishing operations as an offshoot or an afterthought, shovelling newspaper articles online in an unsatisfactory manner, bolting a “breaking news” operation on to the side, and ignoring the fact that this was a different medium for a different audience with different requirements.”

I’d contend that this practice is by no means in the past, especially in Ireland. Look at many legacy Irish media organisation’s desktop and mobile output any day of the week and a user will find content that has been duplicated or at best repurposed for a digital audience with little consideration of how a user is consuming it. Unfortunately for many journalists, even a younger generation of Irish journalists, the print byline or TV report has much more allure than something web first.

“Let’s start the conversation” may sound like a nice slogan at a marketing meeting, but can be a profound ethical and intellectual challenge for journalists and editors if they are to take it seriously. The logic of accountability and transparency inherent in digital discourse should in theory sit well with journalistic principles; that this is not always the case is telling.”

Nobody in Facebook , Twitter  etc is worrying about the “profound ethical and intellectual challenge” of working with its audiences and enabling community. Conversation, UGC and community are not optional for media organisations they are necessities and ones that should be embraced wholeheartedly and enthusiastically. Why are media organisation so focussed on the challenge rather than the opportunity? Why are they calling their audiences a challenge, and after doing that why would they expect their audience to engage with them? The web facilitates conversation, UGC and community everywhere if the audience can’t participate in some way on a media website they will simply do so elsewhere.

Again, it’s great to see this debate surface properly in the Irish media world but I would caution about too much open navel gazing. Place your attention on the user and their experience. The biggest battle journalism is facing is for the users’ attention, the more of that we hold the easier it will be to solve the other issues. Make compelling content, integrate your audience into what you do and be willing to change and change fast.

Photo: JrGMontero/Flickr

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 thoughts on “A quick thought on: “Readers, reporters, editors: you are in the digital zone”

  1. Some really good points there Blathnaid, particularly with re: audience & experience.

    Was chatting on Twitter last night on this very subject, and the example of Farmers Journal as a media biz that understands its audience to an impressive level was raised. IT could do worse than taking a look at that model.

    For me, unbundling is needed if I’m to pay for an IT subscription.

    • Thanks Shane.

      Must look back over that Twitter conversation. I think the Farmers Journal is fortunate because it’s operating within a vertical and has a defined user who to an extent relies upon it to supply information that is hard to get elsewhere.

      • That’s almost exactly word for word what I said too!

        However, I think that’s why unbundling is so important. I won’t pay for a John Waters troll attempt, in fact, they should be paying me to read it.

        What I will pay for is a well thought out Jim Carroll piece, bits of food content, exclusive scoops and sports writers like Ken Early, Malachy Clerkin, Keith Duggan etc.

        That shouldn’t be a difficult thing to accomplish, and would ensure people can pay for ‘passion point’ content, rather than a one size fits all model for everyone.

  2. I think the IT has upped its game in terms of online content. Probably a good example, I think better than the NYT, is the Guardian which has some really top class writers who publish when they want. The entire Snowden issue, for example, was ran at all hours of the day and night. when something was ready, it was printed. The IT is showing that they have realised, finally, that they are no longer a newspaper but a news publishing company.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s