Print is still king: Only 3 percent of newspaper reading happens online » Nieman Journalism Lab April 29, 2009Posted by Jonathan Hewett in : delicious links , add a comment
Martin Langeveld does some estimates to get to this three percent figure and concludes:
"So whether you look at page views or time spent reading, only around 3 percent of newspaper reading happens online. I’ve made a few estimates along the way to reach that conclusion, but only a drastic and unwarranted change in my few guestimates would change that result signficantly.
Is it any wonder then, that online revenue is stuck at less than 10 percent of the print revenue? Given the online share of audience attention, 10 percent looks high, actually."delicious links , add a comment
Kate Day reflects on her experience — perhaps the most important point is: "Let the story choose the medium rather than worrying about playing with all the toys available to you."
So armed with my camera, three lenses, a laptop and an iPhone, I decided to see what it was like using social media to cover a live event. In fact, the process began a few days before the race. I knew my starting point would be great photos. So I asked my followers on Twitter where I should shoot from. They duly came back with ideas and one of them asked if I could send small pictures of each location out in my Twitter stream.
I began to see Twitter as a kind of glue that held the various pieces of coverage together, a way of giving a behind-the-scenes glimpse of what it was like to be there photographing the event.delicious links , add a comment
If you want an example of the success of Twitter as a mechanism for distributing authoritative information about the Swine Flu, look at the rapid growth in the subscriber numbers for the @CDCemergency account. The @CDCemergency twitter account users have been able to get notifications about conference calls and direct communications from the federal agency tasked with monitoring and reacting to the crisis. The fact that the followers for @CDCemergency went form ~2,600 on Wednesday to ~28,000 should tell you that people are making a rational decision to pay attention to trusted sources.
Contrary to Morozov and Slattery, I believe that Twitter is one of the most essential weapons that government has to get timely information to the general population in this crisis. As with all human discourse be it written, spoken, or "texted", the medium has its imperfections.delicious links , add a comment
Gina Chen on the need for change in journalism:
Much of what gets done in newsrooms is reflexive — done almost without thinking: We do it because we’ve always done it. We do it because that’s what newspapers do. We do it because we don’t want to have to come up with our own ideas. We do it because we don’t want to get blamed if a higher-up complains that we didn’t do it. [...]
I challenge all journalists and bloggers — and I include myself in this — to ask Jarvis’ question — Am I adding value? – before doing anything on the job. In my experience, the hurried newsroom culture doesn’t encourage deep thinking. In my 20 years in a variety of newsrooms, I’ve found decisions on what to cover or how to cover it are often rooted in journalistic routines, which is a fancy way of saying “that’s how we always do it.”
Seth's Blog: Warning: The internet is almost full April 29, 2009Posted by Jonathan Hewett in : delicious links , add a comment
Seth Godin's point about information overload seems well made:
Ten years ago, you had a shot of at least being aware of everything that mattered. Five years ago, you had to be really selective about what you took in, but at least it was possible to know what you didn't know. Today, it's impossible. Today, you can't even read every article on a thin slice of a thin topic.
You can't keep up with the status of your friends on the social networks. No way. You can't read every important blog… you can't even read all the blogs that tell you what the important blogs are saying.
Used to be, you could finish reading your email, hit "check email" and nothing new would show up. Now, of course, the new mail is probably a longer list than the mail you just finished processing.
The internet isn't full, but we are.delicious links , add a comment
It is not the mere number of journalists that matters; it’s the choices that editors and publishers make about how to use the journalists available to them. [...] Few newspapers have cut sections or types of coverage, choosing instead to cut throughout the newsroom and not to reassign journalists to the kinds of journalism that matters most to society.
It should also be noted that decisions where to cut employment in newsrooms have not been equally spread among employment categories either. According to ASNE statistics the number of newsroom supervisors has declined only seven tenths of one percent since 2000 [...] the numbers seem unusually lopsided to me. If there are fewer reporters and photographers to be supervised and edited, one would expect that fewer editors and supervisors would be required and warranted.
Maybe it’s about time that journalists stop whining about their troubles and initiate some internal discussions about how their own newsrooms are structured and operated.