A Semester in the life of a family man student

Time to pay up

I took a look over the http://www.editorsweblog.org and found an excellent article by Emma Heald regarding how the Financial Times can sustain paid online content.  The main point that CEO John Ridding tries to make is that people will pay for valuable content.  The model needs to be right, but in the end people want high quality journalism.

These comments reflect my overall feelings since starting the multimedia course.  Niche markets with quality journalism done well and using new technology will survive.

It is a similar model I suppose to I-Tunes.  People can illegally download music and movies with the know-how, but it can take time and the end product is not always top quality.  This is why I-Tunes is still operating, because for a small fee you know as a consumer you will get the quality product quickly and efficiently.

As with news, you can get news for free from many many sources.  But to get top quality product, you need yo wither pay a small fee as in newspapers, or view sites which may have online advertising to cover costs.

This is more important in relation to niche journalism as sites like BBC still operate free content and plan to continue without ads.

The below interview is Josh Tyrangiel, managing editor of Time magazine who explains that Time intend to introduce paid content for the valuable niche market.  They understand their place in news journalism and know their limitations in man power, resources etc.

An excellent interview, short and to the point just like Josh envisions Time to be.

Accessed 15/9/09 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_E1UTy9h4o

Its the final week of blog entries, and I am going to be sad to see it go.  I’ve had a blast and learnt a lot, and more importantly been thoroughly engaged the entire semester which is rare.

Have a good one.

While perusing the Journalism.co.uk blogs I came across an interesting entry by the “Fleet Street Blues”.

The entry discusses how much he/she dislikes the idea of Tewspaper, which is an American “Social Media” site that pulls media from other sources and links it on their site.  It then uses ‘crowd sourcing’ to rank the news stories, and according to the blog it is doing a poor job.

But is this what we can expect from social journalism borne from the convenience of technology.

This type of site is different that ‘User Generated Content’, but has a strong impact on what the population would term news.  As the Fleet Street Blues comments, a web site that acts as a news distributor without actually employing any journalists is hard to not consider as a viable venture.  But it is just re-using other peoples work.

The possible upsides are the convenience to consumers,  If people are rating the news articles, it may be easier and quicker for following readers to get the news they are interested in (as long as they share the same interests and views as other readers).

The website and others like it may also increase readership.  Someone logging into local social media sites will come across stories they may not have looked at previously because they come from a site they are not interested in.

Journalist Paul Carr as an amateur interview via Vascellari Media Channel but does raise some interesting points.  See the video below.

Accessed 15/9/09 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DVGvVqYfJM

He does comment there is less original news stories because social media has people everywhere twittering breaking stories before journos get a chance.  This results in journalists working harder for their stories, which is linked to my previous blog about only the elite journalists surviving.

Social media and interaction between writer and reader may be the cause to that effect.

Where do we go from here? 

Where will all the pro-jos go?

The transcript from a forum regarding Mass Journalism stuck a chord with me this week.  You can find the forum here: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/saturdayextra/stories/2009/2539281.htm

Campbell Reid from News Limited make a point that there may be less professional journalists, but they will be the best journalists.

During my thinking about how the new wave of journalism will effect the professionals I have often wondered on the outcome, and think Mr Reid has an excellent point.

I think there will always be a place for quality journalism, or ‘public trust’ as Eric Beecher of Crikey.com terms it.  Governments, corporations and alike need to be held responsible for their actions and I think the general population would support that.  There may be a place for super fast on demand journalism for breaking news features, but when it comes down to actually analysing and deciphering stories to highlight the truths and the wrongs of the world, turn to the professionals.

Any man and his dog can take a photo of something controversial or exciting if he gets stuck in the middle of it.  And freelance mo-jos can send in several stories a day via wireless internet, and people will log in to read the stories.

But when it comes to war for example, a picture may tell 1000 words, but you need expert analysis and inside contacts that the professional journos have access to in order to really get the truth from an event or story.

Accessed – 14/9/09 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgK580bQNtA

The above interview is top notch and highlights the possible future of print journalism.  The most poignant point Eric Alterman makes is that its not all ‘doom and gloom’, but that there will a better news ‘conversation’ but much worse news information. Basically saying the way we are going with blogs etc is that people will b more involved and objectivity will decrease, but the people will have far less knowledge.

Mo-Jo without the horny english spy…

Mobile journalism (Mo-Jo) appears on the surface to be the future of journalism, at least for user generate content and alternative journalism.  As Stephen Quinn discusses in the Week 9 reading, broadcast journalists previously had to truck around in a large and expensive van kitted up with large and expensive equipment that took 2 people to set up and operate.

Stephen makes a point of highlighting that the spread of mobile technology allowing citizens to take photos and video means the potential for amateur mo-jos is in the billions in the near future.

Accessed 8/9/09 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WZOW_jHpuU

Above is a brief interview with Stephen Quinn from 2008 regarding mobile phones.  A notable message he gives is that the mobile phone for journalism is like the Swiss army knife.  Its very useful when you have nothing else, but will not replace the best forms of news gathering.

I agree with Stephen, but even in the last year since this interview, the I-Phone has hit the markets and brings even more powerful tools to report within the field.

Accessed 8/9/09 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIce0Z2gZ7M&feature=fvw

Steve Garfield is a good example of a mobile journalist who has met relative success and his video above gives a quick rundown on how he operates with some examples.

Accessed – 8/9/09 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpWS-6pMzwo

This video above is part of the ‘YouTube reporters centre’ instructional videos.  These types of tools are all over the web, and highlights how it is not in the hands of traditional media outlets to get the population using mobile phones to record breaking news events.  Anybody with the right technology can break a story, as Stephen Garfield did, and I think this probably scares traditional media sources.

But I again go back to Stephen Quinn’s comments that it will not replace good professional news reporting.  Yes, its great for the breaking footage when nothing else is available, but broadcast news will continue to fulfil the in depth analysis of news that a large population still craves.  Footage, no matter the quality can tell 1000 words, but without analysis it will never tell the whole story.

Adding to the discussions surrounding User generated content as legitimate journalism, STOMP (Straits Times Online, Multimedia and Print), is a user generate site owned by Singapore Press Holdings which has paved the way for wholly User generated news sites.

This form of news media is becoming used more widely throughout the world, but Singapore it seems, according to Stephen Quinn, has led the way in creating a new way of reporting news.

This poses the question, will User generated content always be treated as alternative journalism, and it this a good thing?

STOMP Website

I would prefer the separate news streams. I think user generated content definitely has its place in journalism and will constantly be first to report certain breaking news.

But I would not like to see professionals replaced with all their experience and ability to get down to the important nitty gritty while keeping an easy read.

Viewing the STOMP website, including the article in link above, it is clear the content supplied daily is not exactly breaking news. Articles cover socially unacceptable behaviours on quick look, which obviously has its audience but to me this is not always news worthy materials. I do however feel that the media companies are smart, as they can find their next big headline or profile story among these smaller stories.

The below link is an interesting site launched by CNN called I-Report, which is another User generate content and in my opinion more user friendly that STOMP. The interesting note is that the articles are not edited, but those deemed suitable are used on CNN.

IReport – CNN User generated content

This report below is a I-Report article used on CNN. It is interesting to see the content moving from the citizen to national news.

Wikipedia has good rundown of I-Report, but as always with Wikipedia take with a pinch of salt, after all it is User generated!

Reading more about the new tools used by journalists, expanding on new technology I began to look at the more financial benefits.

We have touched upon the benefits during previous posts, but the new tools are not only giving far more scope for journalists and media to get the story first via use of Twitter, mobile phones etc, but the technology is also providing cost saving to all facets of journalism, not just distribution of the story.

The video below is by a journalist who highlights how he personally uses technology to do his job, he is editor of SiliconValleyWatcher.com which reports on the ‘business of technology and media’, which is exactly what we are talking about!

He comments in how he used to need many tools, but technology is now integrating these tools meaning fewer are needed to do his job, and therefore would be saving him money.

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ihaeH-H0Gk

As Amy Gahran states in her article on Skype, it costs her much less money to use Skype for her journalism interviews than a mobile or land-line.  That got me thinking about how other technology saves the individual journalist money.

Sound recording and listening devices – Instead of using rechargeable batteries or standard batteries, many now come with a USB plug in facility meaning it uses the power from you computer to charge up, and nothing to throw away

Same goes for digital cameras, camcorders and mobile – no need to purchase expensive rechargeable batteries, cords, tapes etc.

With built in hardrives, USB battery chargers and bluetooth technology, journalists save money and time on all the ways they used to have to produce images and video by direct uploads, regardless of what actually makes it to publish.  Plus integration means less tools, more space, time and money is saved.

Remoting into work – With remote IT technology, a journalist now has access to all the normal IT tools they would have in their office from anywhere in the world.

Communication technology has exploded in the last decade.  There are new tools and gadgets every week from online software such as pod casts and RSS to mobile content like Twitter.  These mobile technologies are providing far quicker techniques for news gathering.

Journalists, whether professional or amateur, or just helpless bystanders can publish short news entries from on site.  There is no longer any need for computer and Internet access which in the right circumstances can save time and money.

RSS – This video below gives a real fast into to RSS.

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0klgLsSxGsU

Really Simple Syndication…if you know what your doing!

JD Lasica of Online Journalism Review wrote an interesting article in 2003 regarding RSS and the future. Its interesting to see how much it has come true. One of the great points is viewing RSS as another ‘free model’.

Some media groups would stray from RSS due to no revenue opportunity but in a niche website called Christian Science Monitor it was used to increase interest and ‘mindshare’ in order to get people familiar with the product.

http://www.ojr.org/ojr/lasica/1043362624.php

IN an ironic twist, during research I found the below site:
http://fivefilters.org/pdf-newspaper/

This site allows you to input an RSS feed and it converts it to a newsletter that can be printed out. I was trying to rack my brains on the use of this but I suppose there are people out there who still prefer the written word on paper than on a computer screen, otherwise newspapers would be obsolete.

This technique would be really useful for quick distribution of important news to staff in a company that does not have regular access to the Internet. Yes they do exist. But for anyone with regular access, these days you can even share RSS feeds.  But that’s another blog entry

All Hail Oh Yeon-Ho….

Ohmynews is a testament to the power of the people.  Basically an experiment designed to combat the politics and power of government owned or censored media, this Citizen journalist media distributor (cant say just online as they have print copy in Korea also) has changed the face of media internationally.

Unfortunately, we have an interesting point to make regarding ‘free’ business models.  Ohmynews has admitted that without consumer support, their time may be running out.  With the global financial crisis knocking all budgets around, advertising has dropped significantly enough for the CEO to be looking for ways to fund the business elsewhere, namely paying consumers.

Ohmynews article – Sourced 15/8/09

Another angle to the Citizen Journalism revolution is what Nascar have done in the USA.  Citizen Journalism may quickly be becoming not an alternative to traditional journalism but actually converging legitimately.  Due to drop in print media coverage because of layoffs and tight budgets, Nascar have given 28 ‘blog’ sites credentials to officially report on Nascar, even providing them access to “media’ only areas.

The video below is a media release launching the new citizen journalism system Nascar are using, stating they are not going to censor anything that is not already copyrighted, keeping the media coverage balanced.  They admit they need these sites to create more interest in Nascar during a fledgling period and that traditional media is no longer a secure option.

Sourced 15/8/09: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/1886033

Note how the interviewees explain they understand that media is becoming on demand and consumers refuse to wait for their coverage.  Nascar need to keep up with technology and provide information in the way consumers like to get it.

Chris Anderson’s article “Free” has a very modern spin on the economy of multimedia and I found the article thoroughly engaging.

The model relies on several variances of providing a free service and making money via other streams  e.g. free web site selling advertising rights.  The background of ‘free’ economy was enlightening and you realise the old saying “nothing is free’ is very real as long as you look hard enough at what you are getting.

I found myself agreeing with his points wholeheartedly regarding how new technology is driving the costs of media and information distribution down lower and lower.

I think the technology in turn is also providing the ability to manipulate how consumers consume that media and information, which also pushes costs down due to unwillingness to purchase the ‘goods’.

The ethics and legal consequences of movie downloads have been debated worldwide, but the fact still remains it is still widely available and this has caused companies involved in online media distribution to keep costs to consumers at a minimum.

The below video covers a presentation regarding “ad supported music downloads” as an example of a ‘free’ business model for consumers.

Source: Captured 08/08/09 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Yz_wJJn-SY

The following links are responses to Anderson’s article and provide strong debate to the ‘free’ model.  They are well worth a read for a balanced view of the free business models.

http://abovethecrowd.com/2009/07/15/bill-gurley-on-the-free-business-model/

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2009/07/06/090706crbo_books_gladwell?currentPage=all

The most interesting points in my opinion being:

• The products can be free (or close to it) for consumers due to minimum costs for distribution on the surface, but delve deeper and costs for running the business grow as demand increases and more resources are needed to manage all areas of the business.  Examples included the outrageous costs to youtube to purchase rights to program licences, and bandwidth costing them $3.6m.
• ‘Free’ is a risky venture; there will also be someone else creating something better than yours.  Examples included Facebook over Myspace, where its  similar product tweaked and presented better.

A breaking story is but one click away

This post quite smoothly follows on from previous posts.

The emergence of user generated content is providing an entirely new way of providing news and information to consumers.

News rooms today are factoring user generated content more regularly into their news reports, and content is driving the ‘breaking news’ segments.  Take the below video, mobile phone footage of Sam the Koala during Black Saturday.

Source: Captured 08/08/09 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XSPx7S4jr4

Conventional journalism would not have been able to capture such footage behind the fire lines, and yet Sam (recently passed away) was a beacon of hope during rough times.  Similar footage came out of the London Bombings, protests in Tehran (as commented on last week) and this footage drove news headlines for weeks.

Source: Captured: 08/08/09 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuhBdHc8Nqs

The technology we now have access to means were are all amateur journalists, or at least have the same tools at our disposal.  Media companies instead of fighting the changes in journalism have embraced it to an extent.  They have set up news desks which deal in user generated content.  I feel in my gut this may be a way of controlling as much of the amateur stuff as they can, as well as making sure they don’t get left behind in the new era of the blog and mo-blog.  The question to you is: how long will Freelance journalism as a paid profession last for, with the ability for every man and his dog to take their multimedia toys out and start digging?

Link – http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_3780000/newsid_3784700/3784703.stm.
Fergal Keane is a BBC Special Correspondence