Readership nuggets

A lack of posts recently, due to out-of-town work at PTA. Here are some capsules of fresh material:

Reinvent journalism
Terrific advice from Howard Owens.

What to axe?
A compilation from a Google Forms survey created by Jeff Jarvis at Buzzmachine. See what 400+ journalists believe should be axed at newspapers. Sports, once again, appears to be undervalued.

The anger within
A new blog that collects anonymous posts of what makes journalists so angry these days. A “vent” site to be sure…I’m not sure it’s a healthy one. Some of the posts explode with an anger so vicious that it is frightening. This kind of negativity cannot be good…certainly can’t help newspapers prosper. I am not a sunshiny optimist for most things, but the kind of pessimism on display here will do nothing but assure the industry of certain death. You can’t innovate with this kind of attitude. Look at angry Journalist #470.
http://angryjournalist.com/?page_id=4&cp=47#comments
S/he gets brutally slammed in some subsequent posts, but s/he has the right attitude.

The posts also reveal an age-old problem with the newspaper industry—grinding young journalists into pulp. Say what you want about attitudes and generational differences, the fact is the same arguments have been made for generations—crappy hours doing crappy work for crappy pay. This has to change. The talent drain will not end otherwise. Keep beating the snot out of talented, motivated kids for a few years and journalism will shrivel and die.

Bad feature ledes
A lively discussion on the American Copy Editors Society board on a feature lede that, in the opinion of most, does not work. I hate it, too. What doesn’t get said, though, is how much damage poor writing can do to a paper’s credibility. Editors must protect this. Yes, writers need to have some freedom to experiment and branch out and try things. But they have to know their audience and have to know the power of their words. This writer—and the editor—missed this completely. Reporters and copy editors must read this.

New models for news

Another great post from Jeff Jarvis of Buzzmachine. He outlines some thoughts on new business models for news. He suggests starting with the problem and seeking the solution. Sounds logical, yes, but he points out there is too much waiting around for a neat, tidy solution—an “iPod moment.”

He expounds on some solutions: collaboration, networked content, networked advertising, innovation. But his best idea comes from “efficiency.” His thoughts mesh with mine (and many other who have proposed these ideas before). Get rid of newspapers’ fat. Leverage the individual strengths of the Web and print.

My thought—strip down newspapers to the content with the most impact. Focus on enterprise. On news people need to know:

• What their governments are doing that affects them. Does every single movement from a governmental body affect the general population? If so, then show people how it does. Explain.
  
• What their governments are not doing that affects them. Point out where citizens are being failed. Uncover the reasons why. It likely isn’t malfeasance or anything malicious. Local problems probably stem from state problems, which could point to even bigger problems nationally.
  
• How to get involved. Show how people can become engaged citizens. Encourage them to find a voice. Start by listing meetings and time but expand by explaining exactly how they can raise issues at meetings, how they can speak out or advocate for a cause, who they can contact.
  
• How to build community. Celebrate all your community has to offer. This is the fun part of your newspaper. Calendars, event listings, photos, announcements, of any and all kinds. Smiling people. Put the intricate fabric of your community on display.
  
• Sports times ten. You can’t run enough. I am amazed the importance of local sports is still not seen. Sports drives passion, even at the local level.

You don't have to cover everything in print anymore. Establish priorities. Let reader contributions take off some of the burden.

The "Next" Newspaper Next

I've linked the importance of Newspaper Next and Northwestern University's Readership Institute for a long time. While Readership Institute contributions have been mainly blog posts for a while (still valuable, though), Newspaper Next appears to be moving forward. It will announce its "version 2.0" on Feb. 19 in a webcast.

Newspaper Next states that the full version of the report will be available as a PDF after the webcast. Visit the N2 blog to download it.

Disaggregating newspapers
An old post recently discovered from Dave Morgan, an online revenue guru who knows something about the newspaper business. He suggests that newspapers, as they are, are weakening vertical companies. They might be more sustainable (even more profitable) as horizontal ones. His thinking is:

• Let local news units leverage content into more than just print and online (newsletters, specialty weeklies, global news companies).
  
• Grow alternative delivery businesses.
  
• Expand sales operations to other media.
  
• Allow digital team to offer more services to outside businesses.

Interesting thoughts.

Readership Institute: Get Smart About Your Readers

As always, steallar advice from the Readership Institute. Its groundbreaking study is nearly 8 years old now, but the advice still rings true. Unforunately, newspapers still aren't dedicating themselves to its principles. Anyway, this nuggest comes from Grupo Reforma's Alejandro Junco de la Vega (courtesy of Michael Smith, executive director of the media Managemetn Center, one of the industry's great thinkers and a fellow Ball State alum:
Readership Institute: Get Smart About Your Readers: "They don't tell citizens what to think, they tell them what they ought to think about"

"What is wrong with newspapers?"

Journalist Jon Talton blogs his opinion of what is wrong with newspapers. He is right on with his analysis. Start by reading his third point: Newspapers adopted a defensive strategy. Newspapers have played defense against non-print competitors ever since they came into existence. However, they always emerged with some degree of victory. Current trends indicate trouble, though. “Total audience” is a fine metric and definitely more appropriate for newspapers, but it can’t erase the fact that fewer people are reading and fewer advertisers are buying print. Newspapers have reacted with more defensive posturing.

I reiterate the importance of innovation—truly revolutionary thinking. Not just minor tweaks such as redesigns and special sections. Newspapers need to identify and fulfill critical information needs for people. And these are probably not going to be fulfilled with paper products. Innovation combined with high-quality content production will pull newspapers out of this mess. A good place to start is Newspaper Next.