Technology360

The Reconstruction of American Journalism

This is the title of a new report by former Washington Post executive editor, Leonard Downie, Jr. and Professor Michael Schudson, The Journalism School, Columbia University.  They begin:

... Newspapers and television news are not going to vanish in the foreseeable future, despite frequent predictions of their imminent extinction. But they will play diminished roles in an emerging and still rapidly changing world of digital journalism, in which the means of news reporting are being re-invented, the character of news is being reconstructed, and reporting is being distributed across a greater number and variety of news organizations, new and old. ...

Some lengthy comments on public broadcasting begin on p. 5 of the online version (p. 12 if you make a 39-pp. pdf of the document).  Their recommendations for public broadcasting begin on p. 14 of the online version (p. 33 of a pdf) and look to reorienting public radio and television "to provide significant local news reporting in every community served by public stations and their Web sites."  I've given shortcuts to pubcasting material, but it's important to read their analysis and recommendations in context.

Link:  Columbia Journalism Review.  Thanks to Vivian Schiller for the link. 

Update: 28 October 2009:

The "atomic" version of Current newspaper has a page one overview of this report by Karen Everhart.  It's not yet on current.org.  Also on page one but not on the site is a report on the forward-looking Chicago News Cooperative.  WTTW-TV is a founding partner and the article says WBEZ-FM may also join the partnership.  I'll try to remember to add links when they appear.  --Dennis

Data is the new "content"

... says Terry Heaton:

... One of the cornerstones of Media 2.0 is data, and local media companies are facing the dawn of the database age with no idea of its requirements, scope or the tools necessary to compete. This needs to change and change quickly, ‘lest all local media companies find themselves at the wrong end of the online value chain. The making of expensive content is not the best revenue position for tomorrow. That seat belongs to those who manage the data of the local market. ...

Link:  Terry Heaton's PoMo Blog.  Very interesting take on the web economy.  --Dennis

Radio tunes out Google (and vice versa)

Having already gotten out of the newspaper ad business, the Wall Street Journal reported today that it's also getting out of the radio ad business.  Jessica E. Vascellaro writes:

... radio tripped up Google. The company is pulling the plug on its attempt to automate radio-ad sales on May 31, exposing how far Google is from its goal of grabbing a big chunk of the multibillion-dollar business of off-line ad sales.  ¶  A look at what went wrong shows that Google misjudged the capacity of its technology to work beyond the Web, and underestimated the human side of the business. Radio stations refused to turn over airtime to a computer algorithm that set prices far lower than their own rates. Big advertisers steered clear.

Link:  Wall Street Journal.  The radio industry, for some reason not enthused about the "dollar a holler" financial return, didn't buy in.

For more analysis, see Charlene Li, Why Google's One-Trick Pony Struggles to Learn New Tricks.  She writes:

But Google faces a tough situation in that, in 2008, 97% of its revenues come from Web advertising, and 68% of that advertising is on its own Web sites. That's down only slightly from 69% in 2007. This is a problem because while Google has been on a torrid growth pace for the past few years, it's essentially a one-trick pony: search advertising. Make no mistake, it's a very nice trick, but one that has little upside outside of organic growth. And Google isn't likely to grow much more in search advertising given its dominance, especially in advertising-rich markets like the United States.

Link:  Harvard Business Publishing.  --Dennis

True/Slant, a different approach to online journalism

In last Thursday's (Apr. 6) Wall Street Journal, tech columnist Walt Mossberg reviewed the "alpha" release of True/Slant.  He writes:

... True/Slant is run by a former news executive at America Online who worked at a variety of publications, including The Wall Street Journal. It covers a wide range of topics, such as politics, culture, sports, business, health, science and food.  ¶  It is launching with 65 journalists, or “knowledge experts,” assigned to specific topics. Each of these contributors gets a page to house their journalism and, it is hoped, an active social network of followers who will regularly discuss the articles they read there. Each page also will feature headlines of stories elsewhere on the Web selected by the contributors. These “headline grabs” link back to the originating outside site.  ...

It's an ad-based business model, but approaches it in a new way that's worth watching.

Link:  D|All Things Digital.  --Dennis

Google and the news business

Nicholas Carr has a thoughtful essay on the impact of Google as "middleman" between content producers and content consumers, extracting trillions of tiny tolls in the process.  He takes a particular look at the impact of this on newspapers, writing:

... When a middleman controls a market, the supplier has no real choice but to work with the middleman - even if the middleman makes it impossible for the supplier to make money. Given the choice, most people will choose to die of a slow wasting disease rather than to have their head blown off with a bazooka. But that doesn't mean that dying of a slow wasting disease is pleasant. ...

He goes on to argue that the news business needs to massively reduce supply to consolidate traffic.

Link:  Rough Type.  Thanks to Clay Shirky via Twitter for the link.  --Dennis

Consumers crave individualism and personalization

Allison Muller, CRM manager for Accenture, has some interesting observations on how new technologies are making it easier for retailers to individualize and personalize for consumers.  She writes:

... Phenomenon like YouTube and MySpace give young consumers a stage for voicing their opinions and showing off their social lives and it's influencing how they shop. Some companies are reacting by offering customers avenues for personal expression, like personalizing a Heinz Ketchup bottle or Kleenex box with personal slogans and pictures.  ¶  More sustainable ideas include MyTwinn.com that produces dolls that are exact replicas of real girls, allowing them to celebrate their identity through their toys. And, for an extra charge, you can get specific freckles or birthmarks painted on the dolls. ...

Link: Accenture.  --Dennis

'Better Than Free' revisited

At the end of January, Kevin Kelly, one of the founders of Wired and formerly publisher/editor of Whole Earth Review, posted what I think was the best essay of 2008 of relevance to us in the media -- Better Than Free -- in his blog called The Technium.  The post has also attracted a number of good comments in the months since.  I linked to it at the time and compared it to Chris Anderson's upcoming writing on the same topic.  The essay is now available as a "manifesto" in pdf form at ChangeThis.

On this topic, also see his People Want To Pay and Where Attention Flows, Money Follows, from which comes:

"... Free is always a fine way to win a flow of attention. As Chris Anderson's clever parsing of the four types of free shows, whenever a free product or service is given, the free is exchanged for attention. Without the flow of attention back to the producer, the free is meaningless. A producer might as well dump the free things in the woods if attention from customers did not count...."

--Dennis

Web Sites That Dig for News Rise as Watchdogs

Our new SVP & GM Digital Media at NPR, Kinsey Wilson, sent around the following email to a few of us this morning.  With permission and  thanks, I'm sharing it with you.  --Dennis

As you dig into the morning papers, I'd call to your attention an interesting article in the NY Times today that describes how small, independent, not-for-profit local news web sites are springing up around the country -- further evidence of the growing number of players that hope to lay claim to the local news franchise as papers come under increased financial pressure.

This line in particular caught my attention: "[F]financially, VoiceofSan Diego and its peers mimic public broadcasting, not newspapers. They are nonprofit corporations supported by foundations, wealthy donors, audience contributions and a little advertising."

If they succeed, they could gradually compete for the audience, allegiance and charitable giving that traditionally has sustained public radio. The audience for terrestrial public radio isn't likely to go away anytime soon. But as younger audiences form their media habits and older audiences look for serious local news sources to replace the papers they once relied upon -- something that's happening right now -- sites like these will gain in influence and popularity among our target audience and could eventually pose a threat to the member station franchise.

Local public radio stations are ideally positioned to form alliances with sites like these. The member stations have reach; they have an audience already pre-disposed to quality journalism; and if they want to use it to this end, the ability to drive traffic to these (or co-branded?) endeavors. They also have established relationships with funders, which these sites presumably are just starting to put together. The startup-ups, meanwhile, have the capacity to innovate in ways most stations do not.

In other words, member stations could potentially bring audience and money to the table to help keep these efforts alive; and in the process further develop their reputation and capacity as a source of serious local news. (And NPR, through its API, could provide wider visibility and lift for these efforts).

If half a dozen of the more progressive member stations around the country aligned with the best of these sites on a trial basis, they might create a model that other start-ups and stations could emulate.

In addition to the sites mentioned in Richard Pérez-Peña 's piece, also check out the newly launched Spot.US, which solicits story pitches from individual journalists in the Bay area and asks readers to donate money to support story ideas they think are worthy of further effort. It launched Monday.

NPR's digital distribution strategy

N.B.   Many readers know that I'm the Interim CEO at National Public Radio, but this personal blog (now closing out its fifth year) has only a couple of times been used to talk about related things going on at NPR or at my previous workplace.  However, since what we're trying to build is so closely related to what I've learned over those five years and earlier, all of which I've shared here, I thought it made sense to share this "private" email to NPR station managers here.

If you're at a public television station or in a non-profit, education or government organization, please read on because this initiative could very well be for you also.  So now, I'll quote from this morning's email with only very minor changes.  --Dennis

_______________________________

Dear station colleagues,

 

Happy Monday!  With apologies for the length of this, I’m hoping to stitch together several developments at NPR in the context of what they mean for the future of your station.  It will pay special attention to connecting a number of developments into a coherent digital strategy.  I am excited about these because I think they can be important building blocks in lifting all of public radio.

 

The 90 stations that founded NPR did so because they wanted to serve the public in a way that could only be achieved through collaboration.  This collaboration has encouraged impartial distribution of both branded programming (NPR, PRI, APM) and independent productions - in the intervening 38 years through PRSS and, more recently, PRX. Distributed hours have grown tremendously over the past four decades.  As we seek to strengthen our relationships in content creation and fundraising, we must make a strong commitment to reinventing distribution for a new age, or we will fail to reach the audiences we seek to serve.

 

Radio will remain strong long after I’m a full-time grandpa, but the rapid adoption of new digital platforms means we must effectively utilize these platforms or ultimately witness the erosion of our audience and economic model.  More importantly, the new digital platforms give greatly expanded opportunities to deliver broader public service, to be more significant in our communities and nation.

 

Toward this end, there are now several initiatives on our plate at NPR.  I'll write primarily about a cluster of digital distribution projects from which we will draw to create something we're calling the "Community-Building Initiative," but I also want to mention a news-related one that will benefit from the same initiative.

 

• A “News Network of the Future” (NNoF) is envisioned to provide structure and scale for collaboration in the support      and production of news for all platforms, building on ideas which have already brought promising results to a few stations (e.g., N³, the Northwest News Network);
• Three related projects in the category of what I’ll call “distributed distribution” —expanding our ability to reach our listeners better, and expanding and engaging our audience:
  • The open Application Provider Interface (API),
  • The acquisition of Public Interactive (PI), and       
  • The Community-Building Initiative (CBI), which I’ll discuss below.

 

There have been several digital distribution efforts in public media in recent years.  Leaving out many, I’d like to tip a hat to a few that have made extraordinary contributions.  Independent producer Stephen Hill showed us that the web can be an important means to serve the audience, and that they will financially support such efforts.  Entrepreneur/philanthropist Mike Homer developed Open Media Network, a functioning content delivery network for public media, with the help of Stephen, KQED’s Tim Olson, myself and several others, and gifted it to public broadcasting.  PI (above) under the direction of Debra May Hughes has been public media’s innovative application service provider for years.  Jake Shapiro’s team built Public Radio Exchange (PRX) under the sponsorship of the Station Resource Group, creating a way to cultivate, discover and distribute new talent, voices and ideas and to innovate with models that connect listeners to a broader world.  Mark Fuerst’s Integrated Media Association has led beyond-the-transmitter thinking for years. NPR’s Dana Davis Rehm has championed both the News Network of the Future and the Digital Distribution Consortium (DDC) of 2006 in which Jake, Tim and others played critical roles.  Lastly, the WGBH Forum Network and Twin Cities Public Television’s Minnesota Channel are important inspirations to the CBI.

 

Bottom line – there has been a ton of work by dozens of people over nearly a decade during which, independently, Web strategies and content distribution over the Internet have matured.  We have learned a lot in this time, we have successful exemplars, and it’s past time to put those to work in ways that strengthen public radio. 

 

This and what follows provides some context for the announcements you’ve heard about the open API and the PI acquisition and why it’s important for the future of your station.

 

The open Application Programming Interface (API) is an awful name for a very powerful functionality that permits accessing NPR and, soon, station and other content and placing it with modest but important restrictions on non-NPR web sites.  These might be your station’s web site, or it might be a non-profit organization with which your station has a relationship, or it might be a blog that your sister maintains.  If you look down the left column of [this] blog, you can see an example that took me ten minutes to install.  Why do this?  Because open, distributed access to public radio content will result in much greater usage than if we require everyone to come to our portals.  It’s expanding the reach of public radio beyond the radio or our own websites.  This is being fairly recognized as one the most progressive and powerful web initiatives in American media.  Open APIs are common on the web but are very rare among major media companies.

 

Public Interactive (PI) has been around for a long time and has a great reputation for providing Web services to the public broadcasting community.  We’re pleased to have reached an accord with Public Radio International to bring it into the NPR family.  Its mission is entirely consistent with our goal of increasing NPR’s commitment to station services, as was our acquisition of National Public Media(NPM) last fall.  PI has a great suite of products and its core competencies are consistent with our open API and other “distributed distribution” efforts to grow the quality and relevance of station websites.

 

Combining these, we are developing the Community-Building Initiative to expose public media content to broader audiences, strengthen public stations as a key community anchor, help national and local community service organizations be more effective, and, through all that, enhance and diversify the public media economy. Like NNoF, the CBI is a “child” of NPR’s New Realities effort.  An example follows and this weekend I doodled a simplified drawing [see link] for those among you who are visually oriented.

 

To seed this effort, we are working to establish several model national partnerships with non-profit organizations which have affiliates in your communities.  There is a complex array of ways new partnerships of this kind could work, so to help in understanding one of them, here’s a fictional example:

 

Let’s say that you’re a public radio manager who wants to gain exposure for what your station does and build community public service alliances, adding local value.  You have recently been approached by a local conservation organization that has a best-practices initiative relating to salmon recovery for which it would like build awareness.  It is also interested in building a community dialog using modern social media tools.  Traditionally, you might have put them in touch with your news director, who has done stories on salmon recovery in the past and perhaps might be interested in another one.  She handles the story in the journalistically critical arm’s length way and it is heard by 10-15% of your weekly cume on the air and then it (maybe) goes into a podcast or is archived on your web site.

 

But the CBI expands possibilities.  Let’s say that the organization also has some video content that it commissioned, perhaps from your local PTV station.  With proper guidelines, branding and labeling, it can be part of a larger collection that you can distribute.  So this video piece, the ten radio stories you’ve already produced archived on this subject, some NPR stories on the subject (Google gives 574 hits for “salmon” on npr.org), a couple of related stories from PRX, and links to related blogs in your community are curated by your web producer into a widget (a piece of portable code that can fetch content from other web sites) carrying your branding, the template for which has been provided to you by Public Interactive.  That template also includes social media features to build communities of interest, plus opt-in sponsorship messages arranged by NPM.  The widget then goes on the partner’s web site, on those of many of your other partners, on your own pages, on relevant blogs, etc.  Others will use the API tools to extract some of these pieces and republish them still more places.  Web searches build still more users, not just for the distributed content but for your main web site.  In the context of how search works (see PageRank), these multiple linking relationships make it more likely for your content to emerge higher in search results.  This strategy builds a much larger audience by bringing content to people rather than requiring them to come to your website.

 

Perhaps the station undertakes similar partnerships with 25 or 50 or 100 other community organizations. Some of these are local affiliates of national service organizations with which NPR will have initiated relationships that stations can opt into.  Others are those you develop yourself.  You can see that the placement opportunities for content grow tremendously.  So do new partnerships that increase your station’s impact in the community, not to mention new funding opportunities from new sources.

 

Public broadcasters have learned over nearly 40 years that distribution success depends on brand impartiality.  Recent digital distribution work has taught that we’re better off starting with a service   model and related economics, instead of with technology, and that we need a to place our content many places on the web, not just on our own web sites.  To be sure, there are important issues, especially with the need to maintain a wall between partner-generated content and station journalism efforts, but there are numerous successful examples to follow.  The CBI plan is to incorporate all of these assumptions in a way that just might transform the value equation for public broadcasting stations in their communities.   

 

These are exciting and challenging times for all of us in public radio.  I continue to be encouraged by what I see and hear from stations around the country, and what is happening here at NPR.  These latest developments should give us some important new tools to address our common future in a way that can transform both the impact and economics of public media.  Please share your thoughts about these issues with me by posting a comment below. 

 

Dennis Haarsager, Interim CEO, NPR

The delusions of net neutrality

Andrew Odlyzko of the University of Minnesota makes a withering analysis of the arguments of network service providers concerning why (real-time streaming capabilities) they oppose net neutrality.  Odlyzko's analyses frequently challenge flabby assumptions with hard data and this one is particularly valuable.

Two of Om Malik's blogs today provide an overview of this important paper.  In Streams Won't Pay for Themselves, Chris Albrecht writes:

... Video can be delivered more efficiently and less expensively using downloads over streaming, says Oldzyko, and these downloads can be more accommodating to the viewing habits of online audiences and just as secure as streams. ¶  Oldzyko thinks the belief that we need real-time streaming is a holdover from broadcast and phone networks. ...

Link:  NewTeeVee.

Then, in Hulu Bad For the Net, Video Still Not Clogging It, Stacey Higginbotham writes:

... the largest part of the paper is devoted to data that supports his conclusions that content, such as Internet radio and video, is worth less than connectivity such as voice or Twitter. People don’t pay for content, they pay for connectivity, says Odlyzko. ...

Link: Gigaom.

Here's the abstract of and link to Odlyzko's paper:

Abstract. Service providers argue that if net neutrality is not enforced, they will have sufficient incentives to build special high-quality channels that will take the Internet to the next level of its evolution. But what if they do get their wish, net neutrality is consigned to the dustbin, and they do build their new services, but nobody uses them? If the networks that are built are the ones that are publicly discussed, that is a likely prospect.

What service providers publicly promise to do, if they are given complete control of their networks, is to build special facilities for streaming movies. But there are two fatal defects to that promise. One is that movies are unlikely to oer all that much revenue. The other is that delivering movies in real-time streaming mode is the wrong solution, expensive and unnecessary.

If service providers are to derive significant revenues and profits by exploiting  freedom from net neutrality limitations, they will need to engage in much more intrusive control of traffic than just provision of special channels for streaming movies.

Link:  University of Minnesota [pdf].  --Dennis