True. Not to mention that they almost certainly don’t have the existing IT and web infrastructure to implement significant changes to their actual website without Gannett’s corporate approval. Most of that stuff is almost certainly dictated from the upper management, and I suspect they’re pretty much handcuffed when it comes to developing new initiatives.
Handcuffed? Those poor bastards are chained to their desk. I just clicked randomly on papers linked off of Gannett’s corporate site. Go ahead. You don’t have to notice the similarity in all those websites because it’s the same website over and over again.
And there’s no reason to think that the AC-T’s management even knows how to implement the blog-network model into what they do. I’d argue they really can’t, because there’s two very different content philosophies at work, not to mention two very different business models. Even if it could work in some theoretical sense, I don’t think I’d turn to a corporate chain for my proof of concept.
I could tell you a pretty awesome story about Take 5 and AC-T’s ability to take advice and be hip, but I won’t.
The AC-T is clueless, like most of the old media. At one point, they had their reporters trolling for stories on a certain other local website (maybe he was doing it on his own, I don’t know). Again, the traditional print media has spent the last fifteen years ignoring the internet, just like they tried to ignore television. It took thirty years for USA Today to be born so how much longer do you think it will be before they get a clue on this issue and, more importantly, do they have time?
Say tomorrow the AC-T decided to close do the SeattlePI thing, and close down their entire print operation, keeping only a small team of reporter/editors and a skeleton crew of IT, web and ad people. As they exist now, do they have the knowledge and talent to actually make it work? I’m deeply skeptical that they do, and I think it’d likely fail as soon as the cash reserves ran out.
But I think that the core of Xpress could survive that scenario—not that it wouldn’t be tough—and with far less impact on content from the web-reader’s point of view.
Completely closing down the print operations for a city’s hipster weekly is going to remove some local flavor, don’t you think? No one’s going to miss the local fifty cent paper boxes (except those poor bastards who make some side money off of them, but in The New Economy we don’t really care about that, do we?) but a lot of people actively seek out papers like the Xpress when they go into a new town. I know I do.
As for skeleton crews and “lean operations,” see the above comments on The New Economy. It all ties together and if the auto industry, which is centered in the American Midwest, is so important to America’s overall economy then why isn’t anyone worried about bailing out the newspapers? I wager they employ more people than the auto companies, nationwide.
The Citizen-Times will do something with its J-Lab project. Mat’s skepticism may be well founded. But doing something is essential, I think Mat & Steve would agree. Clearly information flows are increasingly networked, with citizens increasingly assembling their information mix from an enormous number of offerings. And those citizens are increasingly wanting to interact out their in those nets—generating the strange evolution of public/private information.
Mat argues that Steve’s member-derived income will be tiny. He may be right. But money itself may not be the prize. At least as important is the creation of the member group, and the interactions that ensue. I say this because, in a network, everyone’s a (potential) player, and in that they want to play, i.e. interact. I think that’s why there’s so much buzz around “social media” these days. We’re realizing that sunset is approaching on the old days of media transmitting the gospel to the silent majority. In that dimming light, anyone who aims for membership in an honest, social way seems to me to be on a good path.
And Matt’s right about the scale of income that will likely come from a paying-member model. Even in the best-case scenario, it’ll still be a fraction of the money once generated by print advertising. But that’s true of web ad sales as well. And yet there is some money there. Maybe not a lot, certainly by comparison to the spoils of having a de facto monopoly on local print news, as many newspapers have had. But I think it’s enough—even on the local scale—to create a functioning, relevant and timely local news hub.
If you turn it around and say: Here’s what kind of community-based financial support we think we can generate, and here’s what we think we can sell in online ads. If we built a blog network, here’s what we think we can add to both. Now, what kind of staff will this money buy, and how can we grow the project and the company while still keeping to the core values of the project?
In other words, what kind of company could serve the function of the AC-T—or even the Xpress—should the print industry disappear tomorrow? What can be automated, what can be done more efficiently, and what can be handed over to the users? What can’t be? And if the goal is to create a strong network of local blogs, blog-like projects, new media upstarts and valuable refugees from the old media, what’s the best way of building and funding it so that everyone benefits?
Completely closing down the print operations for a city’s hipster weekly is going to remove some local flavor, don’t you think? No one’s going to miss the local fifty cent paper boxes ... but a lot of people actively seek out papers like the Xpress when they go into a new town. I know I do.
I seek out papers like the Xpress too. What I wonder is, could the Xpress charge 50 cents? Would I have paid 50 cents, considering all the free papers? I don’t know. Probably yes, because I paid for the shitizen times(once).
I still read the Xpress print version and definitely would pay for it. One reason is because I’ve blocked all ads online. It’s not that I don’t like ads, I don’t like stuff blinking at me unless I chose to look at it. Would it work to include some content in the print version that’s not available online? just a thought…
Ashkat: What if there was some kind of exclusive online content, instead? Or what if there was some incentive—even a little star next to your user name indicating that you were a paid member and a financial supporter of the site—would you be willing to pay, say, $10 a year? That’s like 20 cents a week.
Ashkat: What if there was some kind of exclusive online content, instead? Or what if there was some incentive—even a little star next to your user name indicating that you were a paid member and a financial supporter of the site—would you be willing to pay, say, $10 a year? That’s like 20 cents a week.
Yes, I support PBS. No incentive needed, especially not publishing my name.
Don’t fixate on J-Lab’s experiment or what dailies are doing. The goal is to create a meaningful, smart, evolving collaborative network that enhances the community’s ability to inform itself, and to talk and learn together.
Our challenge in Asheville (or anywhere) is to come up with an excellent collaborative project, an information network. Make that several projects.
Some of the networks are already emerging, because they’re self-organizing (on Twitter and Facebook, for instance); others will be formally structured (ad networks? content networks for sharing, organizing, filtering, and interaction?).
And Matt’s right about the scale of income that will likely come from a paying-member model. Even in the best-case scenario, it’ll still be a fraction of the money once generated by print advertising. But that’s true of web ad sales as well. And yet there is some money there. Maybe not a lot, certainly by comparison to the spoils of having a de facto monopoly on local print news, as many newspapers have had. But I think it’s enough—even on the local scale—to create a functioning, relevant and timely local news hub.
but still enough to fund a modest site run by member/users. Mat’s just ‘against profit’ whatever that means.
If you turn it around and say: Here’s what kind of community-based financial support we think we can generate, and here’s what we think we can sell in online ads. If we built a blog network, here’s what we think we can add to both. Now, what kind of staff will this money buy, and how can we grow the project and the company while still keeping to the core values of the project?
In other words, what kind of company could serve the function of the AC-T—or even the Xpress—should the print industry disappear tomorrow? What can be automated, what can be done more efficiently, and what can be handed over to the users? What can’t be? And if the goal is to create a strong network of local blogs, blog-like projects, new media upstarts and valuable refugees from the old media, what’s the best way of building and funding it so that everyone benefits?
I suspect it might be like a well-polished version of this current site. Remember when newspapers used to sell ads by running good articles that readers were interested in, instead of relying on being the ‘only’ paper, or people subscribing out of habit?
I suspect it might be like a well-polished version of this current site. Remember when newspapers used to sell ads by running good articles that readers were interested in, instead of relying on being the ‘only’ paper, or people subscribing out of habit?
I like that approach. “Polish” and “good articles that readers were interested in” don’t bring up the spectre of “cable tv” lurking on a network and forcing “packages” of junk we don’t want.
A journalism start-up: Should I go for it?
By andrew_dunn ⋅ July 3, 2009 ⋅ Post a comment
I could look for a job at traditional news organizations. But as I read over the Knight News Challenge results, I thought about what I would do if I could get a little funding. Here’s my idea for a nonprofit start-up I’d like to create. Should I go for it?
The Idea
The Southern Online News Network will be a nonprofit incubator for hyperlocal news startups in underserved locations around the Southeast. The organization will start slowly, but will eventually provide journalist-entrepreneurs who wish to launch news sites the robust support they need as they get off the ground.
The infrastructure will start small. The point of this is to keep the support needed from the Knight Foundation for this project limited to two years. After the initial funding, the money needed to keep the project going and expand will be self-generated. The initial modest grant will show positive results across the region. ...
If Knight is anything like Gannet, I wouldn’t bother to look at it. I have the xpress for local and the Washington Post and independents for national and world news. I don’t think any of those are in danger of disappearing. I already read the latter online because of the expense of getting them in Asheville.
i know! i mean, what about the people who can’t read at all? or are allergic to newsprint? What about them? We cant have a regional/local internet hub without figuring out how to include them, or IT JUST WONT WORK! Also, making money is evil.
