Putting my money where my mouth is…
I gotta admit, I’m one lucky son-of-a-bitch.
I’ve been given the enviable job of heading to Cape Town in South Africa for the duration of the World Cup as part of the SBS broadcast team. My main job will be as the producer of sports news reader Craig Foster each morning, ensuring he gets all the scripts and background information needed to go to air.
But once that is done (by 11.30am Cape Town time) – I’m putting my money where my mouth is as a multi-platform, mobile journalist, filing for online, radio & TV.
Coming with me is a veritable feast of gadgets and prosumer equipment, and there’s little doubt I’m going to be extremely busy for the 6 weeks in South Africa, with requests already piling up.
Here’s what’s coming with me:
- MacBook Pro 13″ with Photoshop CS4 & FinalCut Pro
- Canon 70-200mm f2.8 zoom lens (camera buffs drool now…)
- Canon 18-135mm f3.5 zoom lens
- Velbon CX480 fluid-head tripod
- Flash Microphone
- iPhone 16GB laden with content producing apps.
With it I hope to spend my days shooting video for TV, filing interviews and doing live crosses for radio, photo galleries for The World Game & World News Australia online and a couple of other bits and pieces I can’t really discuss yet 
With today’s incredible and cheap equipment and with a bit of technical nous, I’m hoping to prove the point that truly mobile journalism is possible and can still be of the high quality, despite he claims of many traditional media journalists (including many workmates) that new media is killing off quality journalism.
I’ve laboured the point a million times before, but I’ll labour it again. Quality journalism isn’t only the domain of 2,000 word feature articles or 25 minute mini-documentaries, especially in the new media world. With media outlets facing such dogged competition from all platforms, the true skill of a quality journalist is telling stories in an engaging way for their audiences.
This requires journalism to evolve, to grow, and to adapt to the new breed of media audience that demands more from their media outlets.
Just have a look at the list of online news winners from this year’s Pulitzer Prize. Or the fact that, for the first time, an online-only publication won one of the prestigious awards.
Isn’t it time we all started moving past online as a ‘value-add’ for newspapers & TV? Here in Australia we may be bombarded with tabloid reporting in our biggest online publications, but as the saying goes, you are what you eat. It’s out there, you just need to look for it…
Here’s hoping I can contribute in a positive way to finally ending this debate over online as a legitimate journalistic endeavour.
Media140: I am the bastard child of old & new media…
This was my presentations for the ‘Do journos do it better’ session at the Media140 conference in Sydney. It was a fascinating day. Next time around I’d love to see a few of the ‘new media’ evangelists mixed into the same panels as the ‘old media’ protectionists.
EDIT: Just added the video – sorry it’s ropey as a workmate screen-captured it direct from the live stream:
Media 140 – do journos do it better? from Valerio Veo on Vimeo.
Talking to many of the attendees last night it was obvious there are SO many other issues people want to discuss – the paid content debate, the internet filter, the future of mainstream media in a rapidly changing media environment. I hope we can do it again and really set the cat amongst the pigeons! Anyways… my blurb below:
Do journos do it better? “Of course they do – as long as they know the rules before breaking them”
I am the bastard child of Old and New media.
As such I hope to provide some unique insight into this debate as I – like a child of a broken home – care deeply for both my divorced parents, despite their temporary differences.
I’m a child of the 80s who grew up with the daily newspaper, the six o’clock news over tea, The Goodies on the ABC, A Current Affair with Mike Willesee (when it was actually current affairs), movies on VHS and a love of the mixtape.
But ever since my Dad borrowed an early Macintosh for a week in about 1985 and spent the whole time playing Moon Lander – something always fascinated me about technology.
So for those who know me – it’s no surprise that after 5 years in radio and TV news at the ABC & SBS – I launched into new media the first chance I had.
I’m deeply passionate about the opportunities provided by the real time web and the instant impact it’s had on journalism – especially after witnessing so many historic moments this year. (Plane in the Hudson, Iranian uprising, Michael Jackson’s death etc etc).
But after being beaten into shape by so many sub-editors over the years I’m glad my fan-boy tendencies are tempered by a healthy dose of cynicism and just a touch of distrust.
So yes – I reckon journos do it better – but only if they respect the rules of Old Media, before breaking them in an increasingly New Media world – because the role of the journalist is changing … fast.
The new role of the journalist
I’m still surprised me that so many “mainstream media” types scoff at Twitter, dismiss the blogosphere and ridicule Facebook – when in reality, being a one-platform pony is an express ride to oblivion.
Look I know the language sounds ridiculous… Tweeting? The Twitterati? Tweet & Meets? Followers? It sounds like a religious cult.
BUT – it’s no longer enough to present a weekly radio show, write a newspaper column or bash out a single TV news package a day.
You must self-publish. You must go to your audiences instead of expecting them to keep coming to you. Because the media game has changed… permanently.
However – there is a massive upside to this new responsibility – by taking control of your destiny, you can find yourself suddenly at the centre of your own media network.
Take Leo Laporte – a radio jock and TV presenter who freely admits he’s had more programs cancelled on him that hot dinners…
“Leo the tech guy” eventually went out on his own – starting a This Week in Tech podcast – or Twit – which has grown into a network of 16 tech-related podcasts. Last month Leo told the Online News Association conference in San Francisco that Twit is pulling in annual revenue $1.5 million – a number that’s doubling every year.
Old Media – meet your new competitors.
As the audience fragments into a thousand niches – mainstream media will need to fight hard to maintain its place as the dominant voice of credibility. Savvy journalists who are on top of this trend can leapfrog many budding bloggers and establish instant credibility by association – depending on the association…
But the line between old media cred and the new breed of publishers is blurring. The passionate blogger does as much verifying and fact-checking as a good journalist – and is more transparent in the way they go about it. The audience is often the toughest sub-editor out there.
With blogs increasingly curating the best content across the web media organisations need to embrace the real time web.
So forget embargoed content– if you don’t meet the demand for instant gratification – your audience will find someone who does. Your audiences – young and old – expect more from a classy old dame such as yourself.
Follow these new media rules and apply your old media nouse… and you can’t go wrong.
In the meantime this kid from a broken home will continue to split his weekends between his Old Media and New Media parents… until they can get their acts together…
The social media revolution (with funky beats)
I had a very inspiring chat with an old friend last night on Skype who’s working on an amazing cutting-edge social media marketing project that could really change the way companies/brands/the media interacts with their audiences.
It’s definitely reinvigorated my appreciation of how important this space is and how quickly it’s become an intimate (and huge) part of our day. I guess it’s not that surprising considering that us humans are such social creatures. And we all love a recommendation – which is why Facebook reckons it can take on Google in the lucrative search market.
So what better to underline the point than a dramatic video (complete with Fatboy Slim soundtrack) to smack everyone about the head as to why Social media is the “biggest shift since the industrial revolution”…
Thanks Piero – always an inspiring chat my old friend.
Five reasons why the paid content model will fail
Will newspapers survive the paid content experiment?
Let the great paid content experiment begin.
After months of hints, guarded comments and innuendo from publishers around the globe, it was the big kid in the playground, Rupert Murdoch, who has ended the speculation in one foul swoop with plans to charge for all the online content of his newspapers and television news channels.
In a rare move by the savvy media mogul, Mr Murdoch clearly outlined his plans to begin charging for online news following the success of the Wall Street Journal, which keeps much of its content behind a pay-wall, and was acquired by News Corp in 2007. Obviously it’s hoped that dozens of other global publishers will see the move as an open invitation to follow the huge stable of Murdoch mastheads into what they hope is a river of cash (come on in, the water is green!), or at least enough to stave off the wolves at the door.
Here in Australia, Fairfax have opened the door to charge for content via a two-tiered system, claiming “we can’t afford to keep the big newsroom staffs we have”.
Can it work? Sure – it can work – and in my next entry I’ll show you five ways how.
But will it? Here are my five reasons why I think it won’t…
-
News is a commodity
The reality about many online newsrooms is there is almost no discernible difference between much of the wire-driven copy from one masthead to another – just plug a breaking news story into Google news and click on a few results. Short, text-based breaking news simply doesn’t have enough value to exist behind a paywall, especially as there are competitors in every market who are willing or even keen to give it away for free. Sure newspapers are the repository of some of the world’s best journalists who are able to craft articles or comment pieces of incredible insight and clarity, but in this fast moving world of 24/7 news, are they able to keep up with the demand in time. And what about the rapidly growing notion of news a service instead of a destination? How will you charge to get your news onto the platforms where your audiences are gathering (Facebook, Twitter, mobile phones) when news starts to find them.
-
Net natives don’t have masthead loyalty
The idea that new media audiences will continue to flock to a masthead simply because it’s an old-guard newspaper or broadcaster is, put simply, delusional. Not only is the credibility of these organisations drying up at a rate of knots, but Net Natives are going to respond to new news organisations that reflect their needs via the thousands of niche sites who represent them. It’s time to respect the audience and deliver news on their terms, not ours.
-
Journalism is not a profit-making exercise
It’s pretty simple really. Newspapers made their money from classifieds and advertising, not from charging at the news-stand. Unfortunately thanks to the internet that business model is broken. But without the cost of printing and distribution, it’s going to be a tough sell to charge on the basis of the content. Slapping a membership or a micropayment system on an existing infrastructure will result in disaster. It’s time the business model was pushed aside for a whole new type of thinking.
-
Online shouldn’t prop up bloated newsrooms
As a journalist, this will get me into trouble, but it’s time we all acknowledged the elephant in the room. Newsrooms are cumbersome and over-staffed with journalists filling up dozens of sections that barely get lip-service in a daily newspaper. It’s time to make decisions based on what audiences want, not what advertisers want. Do that and suddenly a whole crop of new business models and niche markets will unfold before your eyes.
-
Blogs are a credible alternative source of comment
Another furphy of old-school thinking by old-media journalists – that bloggers simply can’t do the job of trained journalists when it comes to commentary and analysis. The notion of bloggers as over-opinionated, ignorant raving lunatics is as out-dated as the newspaper model itself. Today’s blogs are a collection of professionals or passionate observers whose expertise often circumvents the knowledge of their so called professional peers. To denigrate The Daily Beast, Talking Points Memo, The Huffington Post, Mashable (for all things social media) and individuals like Jeff Jarvis, is akin to ignoring a dozen new competitors opening up within a block of your retail store. And unlike newspapers, they want to give away their product for free.
Don’t get me wrong – despite the gloomy points listed above, I do think the great paid content debate can be resolved by a compromised, workable solution. But it requires far more thought than simply throwing a bunch of content perceived to have value by old newspaper hacks behind a paywall.
What’s needed is a far more considered and somewhat sophisticated approach that treats consumers of new media with a lot more respect than is traditionally given by the old-media guard of newspapers and TV broadcasters.
In the next day or two I’ll give you five ways the paywall can work – but it will require media organisations to tear down the notion of what’s valuable and rebuild it from scratch.
What the F**k is social media?
Haven’t had time to post this week what with late nights on Insight and frankly, a couple of well needed lazy days lapping up the incredible sunshine across Sydney.
But I came across the great, simple powerpoint presentation which sums up why everyone is all abuzz about social media. Yeah I agree it sounds a lot like marketing speak – but hopefully this will break it down for all the nay-sayers out there (if there are any left??)
Enjoy… more to come in the next day or two..
What paid content might look like
Since Rupert Murdoch recently threw his support behind the paid content model a few months back suddenly a few news organisations seem prepared to give the previously failed model another chance.
I came across this interesting article via Harvard’s Nieman Journalism Lab – which gives a tantalising look at what the big media groups hope could save the staggering newspaper business overseas.
According to the survey allegedly filled out by this tipster – and duly shoveled online in its entirety – The New York Times is floating a couple of classic VIP membership models to access premium content – NYT Silver & NYT Gold. I’ll give you a bullet point sneak-peek – but you can see these models in detail here.
NYT Silver – $50 a year
- Backstory & Firstlook: Video of reporters discussing their stories, while Firstlook promises the chance to read content before it hits the news-stand or even the website
- Timeswire: Just that – a breaking news wire of everything that hits the website as its published – a NY Times ’stream of conciousness’ if you will.
- Timesmachine: Cute title this. The entire NY Times archive available online from front page to back – right back to 1851.
- Goodie bag: Lovingly referred to as ’swag’ in the US – think a free NY Times mug, baseball cap, style guide etc.
- Discounts from the NY Times store
- Crossword puzzle membership & first chance to get tickets to NY Times talks & other events.
NYT Gold – $150 a year
Take all of the goodies from the silver membership plus….
- TimesEvents – exclusive access to NY Times events and access to NY Times leading journalists (think having dinner with a film critic during the Tribeca film festival)
- TimesInsider – A tour of the NY Times including the newsroom.
Times spokeswoman Diane McNulty told Gawker the plans are far from final:
“It’s very early in the process. We are still in the data collection phase.”
Regardless – it’s a fascinating plan – mainly because the key content of the site – the news – appears to remain free to all comers, which would maintain the huge user base and millions of Page Views the site serves up every day.
Will it save the newspaper business? I doubt it.
Sure, these packages would attract a hard-core base of passionate NY Times supporters, but I’d suspect that they still buy the paper at least once or twice a week. Importantly it does nothing to attract the younger demographic of people, cutely coined ‘net natives’ who are developing enormous media consumption habits without ever opening a newspaper.
Are there any Australian newspapers that you’d be so attached to that you’d even want to tour their newsroom or be invited to their events early? I can’t think of any.
Newspaper businesses should be chasing the niche audience segments of their audiences … think a ‘Fairfax Foodie’ membership offering a first look at the Good Food Guide in Sydney/Melbourne and tickets to the awards dinner, a first look at The Sydney Food & Wine Festival and the chance to take part in ‘meet the chef’ sessions. Off the back of the success of Masterchef it’s not too hard to imagine is it?
I appreciate the issues faced by the newspaper business – News Limited CEO John Hartigan made a salient point when he said a few weeks ago that “for every reader we lose from the paper we need to pick up 10 online”. But it seems to me this is a wider issue with the advertising model that should be worked through by the market (do you like the way I fixed that huge issue with a wave of my hand?!).
Seriously though – as digital content inexorably becomes the predominant medium for news & entertainment, we’re likely to see better ad models measured by engagement, not just the numbers of pages served up.
But until then – we’re just as likely to see a few more of these ‘VIP’ news models rolled out – will be fascinating to see if any get a foothold in the market.
What do you think – could any of these models work?
The Guradian’s crowdsourcing experiment
Yesterday at the University of Melbourne’s Future of Journalism conference I used the Guardian’s experiment to use their audience to investigate MPs expenses as an example of crowdsourcing at work.
Thanks to the release of 450,000 pages of receipts in pdf format the overwhelming task of uploding all these documents online was made simple – the whole thing took a week from a software developer, a few days work from others in the department, and a mere 50 pounds to rent temporary servers.
Within the first 80 hours the Guardian audience has investigated 170,000 documents with a staggering participation rate of 56 %. That has slowed but even now 23,000 readers have trawled through 199,000 pages of documents – with the Guardian continually updating the story with new material.
Importantly it’s worth reading this article from the Niemen Journalism Lab on why it worked – as it’s not just a matter of whacking up the documents and letting the audience run riot.
The developer behind the project – Simon Willison – offered four big tips on making it work:
- Your workers are unpaid, so make it fun.
- Public attention is fickle, so launch immediately.
- Speed is mandatory, so use a framework.
- Participation will come in one big burst, so have servers ready.
He goes into details on all these so make sure you check out the story behind the story – but it’s a stunning example of using simple media technology for citizen journalism and the rich rewards you can reap as a result.
ANZCA09 Conference – comments
SBS has been working with QUT on a citizen journalism project for the last couple of years and as such I’ve been invited to join a panel at the ANZCA09 conference.
I’ll be joining a panel to discuss: SBS in the 21st Century: Public Service Media and new ways of thinking about Citizenship
I was asked to speak for 10 minutes to kick-start proceedings so I’ve pasted my comments below in case anyone wants to refer to them later on:
ANZCA09 – July 8th 2009
SBS in the 21st Century: Public Service Media and new ways of thinking about citizenship”.
Good afternoon,
My name is Valerio Veo and I’m the Executive Producer of News & Current Affairs online at SBS.
I’m responsible for the online and digital presence of World News Australia, Dateline, Insight & Living Black – each of which presents a unique online proposition – and all of which are undergoing a transformation to serve what is a rapidly changing media environment and an increasingly demanding and engaged audience.
As such I thought it best to address the question posed in this session by giving you our take on this changing media landscape and explain a little on what we’re doing to better engage with our audiences online.
From our perspective the media is changing fundamentally – not only in the way it is consumed but also the way it interacts with its audiences.
The media as we know it has been traditionally defined by a ‘one to many’ model of communication – delivered via the mass media vehicles of newspapers, radio and television.
But with the advent of Pay-TV and the internet we’re seeing that mass media market fragment into thousands of niches.
With an enormous amount of information available on almost every interest imaginable there’s no fanboy, Anorak or obsessive-compulsive who can’t get their fix or form communities in this new internet age.
Due to zero government funding for online SBS has moved late into the digital space – but the changing media landscape is one that we hope to benefit from significantly.
For decades we’ve flown the flag for minority ethnic groups & football fans…
We’re now reaching out to new audiences via our online food and film properties – both of which are growing rapidly – not to mention the legion of bleary-eyed cycling fans that are glued to our Tour de France coverage day & night.
In my area of expertise – journalism – we’re also seeing a fundamental shift in the way news is gathered – one that sits uncomfortably with so many in the industry used to the traditional ‘one to many’ communication model.
Initially coined ‘user-generated’ content, then ‘citizen journalism’ or ‘crowd sourcing’ – I think the term that best describes it is ‘collaborative journalism’ – call it what you will but the underlying trends and behaviours are the same.
Suddenly the audiences we have served are becoming the best place to source information and feed the never-ending news cycle.
The skill of the journalist is changing from a single-voice of trusted information into a curator of trusted information. The skills are the same – journalists are needed to verify, challenge and update information – then create a clear narrative from this ‘many-to-many’ conversation taking place on the internet.
Smart news organisations are embracing this change – others fear it. For many rusted-on hacks the tried and tested methods of sourcing information has changed virtually overnight.
There are many recent examples of this collaborative journalism – recent events in Iran being the most dramatic.
With news organisations either thrown out of the country or banned from covering anti-government protests – the young, tech-savvy population used technology like YouTube and Twitter to get their messages out despite best efforts of the government to prevent just that.
News organisations who embraced the change spent their days vetting, verifying and curating…
For me The Huffington Post provided excellent coverage of the Iran protests and gave some method to the madness made up of millions of tweets, thousands of YouTube videos and very little ‘verified information’.
The protests & cyclone in Burma, the terror attacks in Mumbai, that famous plane crash in the Hudson river in New York – the examples keep growing by the week.
Our online news team regularly trawls for content on breaking news stories in social spaces including Twitter & YouTube.
It doesn’t apply to all stories and verification is often an issue - but overall the benefits outweigh the negatives by a huge margin.
The power of this content and the fact we can even see it at all in many cases, is undoubtedly a positive development for the media.
We’re also trying to embrace this collaborative style through our Current Affairs properties – using social networks and platforms to communicate directly with our audiences where they gather instead of expecting them to always come to us.
This perfectly suits a forum program such as Insight, where we use Twitter during live shows to communicate with our audience and inject their feedback into our debates … while our live online chats have been hugely popular with our audience and even the guests themselves.
The new Dateline site allows its audience to not just debate the issues but contribute to the coverage by suggesting links to other websites on the issues of the day.
For the audience it’s about acknowledging their needs and their online behaviour and ensuring we’re relevant. For us it’s a nil-cost, high-yield way of getting our content onto new platforms and ensuring relevancy to this new market of a thousand niches.
Our funding challenges, while significant, have helped us focus on what is most important to our audiences and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that we will continue to be a valuable voice on the Australian media landscape.
