Mediaconcepts and digitalization of media: March 2014

Saturday, March 29, 2014

The newsonomics of NYT Now

Nieman Lab reporting:

...The product is straightforward. It’s mobile-only and, at launch, iPhone-only. On Android, the Times says, “We’re looking at it.” There’s no tablet or web access. As mobile usage surges past 50 percent in some parts of the day and week for the Times and other news companies, NYT Now aims to exploit the compulsive, near-OCD check-in behavior of 2014 life.
The app will be a standard, standalone iPhone app, not part of Apple’s Newsstand, where the Times’ core iOS app lives. Download the app and you get 10 free articles a month — the same way metered access works on the other Times’ digital products. The price is $2 a week or $8 for four weeks.
...
The journalism is NYT Now’s foundation. Importantly, that journalism is both self-referential (which is what we’d expect of the proud, sometimes haughty, news standard of the Times) and breaking new ground — encompassing a wider world beyond the Times. So readers of NYT Now will get 30 to 50 Times stories in a given day, with stories appearing and being replaced throughout the 24-hour cycle. That’s roughly 10 to 15 percent of its total number of articles and blog posts it writes daily.
It’s an editor’s product, put together around the clock by an editorial staff of 15 to 20 (in addition to another dozen or so on the business side). Levy is modeling it on the success of New York Today, the blogging-from-the-five-boroughs NYTimes.com section that he developed last spring and which has grown in reader (and publisher) appreciation over time. He and a growing staff have built NYT Now over nine months, starting with the idea of a “need-to-know” mobile product. Think of the content in three parts, each borrowed from New York Today:

http://www.niemanlab.org/2014/03/the-newsonomics-of-nyt-now/?utm_source=API%27s+Need+to+Know+newsletter&utm_campaign=1233023689-Need_to_Know_March_28_20143_28_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e3bf78af04-1233023689-31701933

Twitter Takes to TV Tie-Ins

eMarketer reporting:

Twitter showed in 2013 that its ad business is growing fast. Even as user growth slowed dramatically, ad revenues and ad engagement metrics ticked up.
Advertisers cite three reasons why they’re increasing spending on Twitter: The social network’s tie-ins with TV, its real-time nature and its willingness to partner closely on creative executions. Other developments that will drive growth this year include improved analytics, more ad offerings for international markets and additional ad products in the direct-response and ecommerce areas, according to a new eMarketer report, “Advertising on Twitter: Unique Opportunities Outweigh Slowing User Growth.”

Twitter spent much of 2013 solidifying its connections with TV. It launched a new ratings business with Nielsen to measure TV-related conversations on Twitter; created new video ad opportunities with Amplify; and bolstered its association with high-profile TV events such as the Super Bowl, Grammys and Oscars.
Twitter’s linkups with television are beneficial to both the TV industry and the social network. TV executives know that many people multitask on mobile devices while watching TV. On-air mentions of Twitter drive conversation about what’s on TV and help keep viewers focused on the television.

http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Twitter-Takes-TV-Tie-Ins/1010717/2

Saturday, March 22, 2014

The future of news: know thy audience

theguardian reporting:
When we launched The Information last December, many thought we were crazy. How could a $399-a-year technology news publication compete in a world all but overrun with free alternatives? How could an eight-person startup that aimed to educate the world's professionals about the technology industry compete with venerable brands like the Wall Street Journal on the one hand and dozens of ambitious tech websites on the other?
Four months after our launch, I'm more confident than ever that our business is going to be a lasting one. My confidence is rooted in a simple idea that all news businesses need to relearn as they redefine themselves for the digital age: know thy audience.
This idea seems obvious, almost cliché, especially in the technology sector. I'll confess to rolling my eyes countless times as I've listened to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and hoards of other entrepreneurs harp on about the importance of putting the customer first...
Today, most news organisations are adjusting to the fact that the internet has toppled the distribution models that once supported them in style. Seduced by the billions that Google and others have made off free, ad-supported services, they've convinced themselves that online advertising is the future and thus they should focus on building the widest possible audience. Subscription offerings, in many cases, were an afterthought.
The Information is founded on the opposite principle. We believe the best way to build a brand is to be indispensable to some people, rather than try to appeal to everyone. The business model aligned with that mission is a subscription business where our only incentive is to write articles our customers want so badly they are willing to pay for them.
One benefit of the model is it helps build our revenue quickly. But a far more important outcome is that it puts the focus exclusively on high-quality, original journalism. In the world of ad-supported media, traffic volume is everything. Too often that means sacrificing quality for quantity and prioritising stories that generate clicks. In the subscription world, quantity doesn't move the needle. Quality does...
http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2014/mar/19/future-news-digital-media-audience?CMP=new_1194

Predicting the future on the Web’s 25th anniversary

Pew reporting:

Experts say the Internet will become ‘like electricity’ over the next decade–less visible, yet more deeply embedded in people’s lives, with many good and potentially bad results...

Mostly-hopeful 2025 scenarios identified by the experts

Information sharing over the Internet will be so effortlessly interwoven into daily life that it will become invisible, flowing like electricity, often through machine intermediaries.
The spread of the Internet will enhance global connectivity, fostering more positive relationships among societies.
The Internet of Things, artificial intelligence and big data will make people more aware of their world and their own behavior.
Augmented reality and wearable devices will be implemented to monitor and give quick feedback on daily life, especially in regard to personal health.
Political awareness and action will be facilitated and more peaceful change, and more public uprisings like the Arab Spring will emerge..
.http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/03/11/predicting-the-future-on-the-webs-25th-anniversary/

In defense of ‘vanity’ metrics: why page views are still important

Poynter reporting:
...
While it is critical that our industry evolves and adapts, and new ideas around better metrics are a key part of that journey, wishful thinking on new fangled metrics don’t necessarily mean we can simply abandon what works — and I dare say, works OK.
I am also keen on metrics that help drive conversions — and these will vary by newsroom and business model — of “guests” (your one-and-done type visitors) to “readers” (often registered but not paying) to “subscribers” (paying readers) to “members” (those who avail themselves of other non-content led benefits of subscribing.)
These metrics remain a work-in-progress in various News Corp newsrooms globally but, eventually, will be the primary focus of how we need to manage our newsrooms and news publishing companies when it comes to audience data. I am wary of “time spent” metrics simply because of the complexity of measuring that and the resulting assumptions and inaccuracies that usually creep in....
http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/top-stories/244136/in-defense-of-vanity-metrics-why-page-views-are-still-important/

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Digital Set to Surpass TV in Time Spent with Media in the UK

eMarketer reporting:

This year, for the first time ever, the amount of time UK consumers spend with digital media (desktops, laptops, tablets and mobile phones) will surpass the amount of time spent viewing television, according to eMarketer’s estimates of media consumption among UK adults. The growth of mobile is key to this shift, as it continues to drive both digital and overall growth of time spent with all media. In contrast, time spent on desktops and laptops is plateauing.
The average UK adult will spend more than 8.5 hours each day consuming media in 2014. Of that total, 3 hours and 41 minutes will be spent online, on nonvoice mobile activities or with other digital media, eMarketer estimates, compared with 3 hours and 15 minutes watching television.
The total reflects simultaneous media consumption—for example, if someone uses a mobile device for 1 hour while watching television, it counts as 1 hour for each activity. The estimates do not attempt to define “primary” focus during simultaneous usage.
http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Digital-Set-Surpass-TV-Time-Spent-with-Media-UK/1010686/2

Better Measurement, Metrics Needed for Engagement

eMaketer reporting:

Consumers have come to expect brands to interact with them—not simply talk at them. However, November 2013 polling by Google Think Insights and Advertising Age found that marketers were struggling to actually manage online engagement.
According to the study, 86.2% of US agency and marketing executives said that engagement was a priority for their company, yet around half that number—45.8%—reported actually managing this. About four in 10 believed engagement was a priority but did not manage it, and just 13.8% didn’t believe engagement was important at all.
Poor measurement systems were a big reason for lack of online engagement. Fewer than 42% said their company was able to quantify engagement. Whether they were actively managing engagement, thought it was important but weren’t handling it, or did not believe it was a priority, the majority of respondents agreed that better metrics and measurement would help drive online engagement efforts.

http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Better-Measurement-Metrics-Needed-Engagement/1010684/2

Nearly nine in 10 say online engagement is a priority, but just 45.8% are actively managing this

A New Millward Brown Study Shows Mobile Use Now Outpacing TV

Ad Age reporting:
Daily time spent on mobile devices is now outpacing TV in the U.S. for the first time, according a newly-released 2014 AdReaction study from Millward Brown.
Americans now spend 151 minutes per day on smartphones, next to 147 in front of TVs. But the numbers are even greater elsewhere. In China, consumers spend a whopping 170 minutes a day buried in smartphones, nearly double their TV watching time.
Users in Indonesia, the Philippines, Brazil and Vietnam also spend more total screen minutes on average than the U.S., predominately on mobile.
The firm surveyed more than 12,000 mobile users, between the ages of 16 and 44, in 30 different countries, polling consumption of ads over TVs, laptops, smartphones and tablets.
Primary screen
According to the findings, the smartphone has emerged as the primary screen worldwide, but the firm also found users are watching multiple screens simultaneously, a global trend that is most-pronounced in China.
The agency classifies simultaneous screen time into two key buckets: "stacking," when the consumed content is unrelated (mindlessly surfacing Facebook during a favorite show); and "meshing," when the content synchs up (searching for an actress in the show).
Across the globe, particularly in Asia, consumers prove much more willing to "mesh" than they do in the US. Only 30% of American screen time is spent soaking in related content. The rates in China, Japan, Indonesia and South Korea are all higher. Sixty percent of Thai users spend their screen time "meshing."
Ads not catching up
Outside the US, consumers are also much more amenable to ads on their devices. Asian smartphone owners responded far more favorably to ads than counterparts in the US; and they were more attentive to ads splashing across their phones...
...Advertisers in the U.S., Ms. McGoldrick added, haven't just fallen short in spending---they've proven unable to produce consistent, relevant video content for phones, particularly content that exploits multiscreen use. "As a result," she said of video advertising in the U.S., "it feels more like an interruption."
http://adage.com/article/digital/millward-brown-study-shows-mobile-outpacing-tv/292183/

The Personal News Cycle: How Americans choose to get their news

API reporting:
Contrary to the conventional wisdom about media consumption dividing along generational or political lines, a new survey finds that the nature of the news itself — the topic and speed of the story — largely determines where people go to learn about events and the path they take to get there.
The findings also suggest that some long-held beliefs about people relying on just a few primary sources for news are now obsolete.

“There are five devices or technologies that majorities of Americans use to get news in a given week. The average American adult uses four different devices or technologies for news.
”

In contrast to the idea that one generation tends to rely on print, another on television and still another the web, the majority of Americans across generations now combine a mix of sources and technologies to get their news each week, according to the survey by the Media Insight Project, an initiative of the American Press Institute and the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
Where people go for news, moreover, depends significantly on the topic of the story — whether it is sports or science, politics or weather, health or arts — and on the nature of the story — whether it is a fast-moving event, a slower-moving trend, or an issue that the person follows passionately.
The data also challenge another popular idea about the digital age, the notion that with limitless choices people follow only a few subjects in which they are interested and only from sources with which they agree — the idea of the so-called “filter bubble.”
There are relatively few differences by generation, party, or socioeconomic status in the level of interest with which people report following different topics...
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/publications/reports/survey-research/personal-news-cycle/?utm_source=API%27s+Need+to+Know+newsletter&utm_campaign=c758cc304c-Need_to_Know_March_18_20143_17_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e3bf78af04-c758cc304c-31701933

Thursday, March 13, 2014

Who cares if it’s true? Modern-day newsrooms reconsider their values

CJR reporting:
...

President Bar

For nearly two decades, a culture war has divided journalists. The gap seemed mostly generational, but it always boiled down to a battle over the very purpose of what we do. All the dismissive sniping and straight-out antagonism between old-school defenders of the print craft and the young digital brains propelling start-ups came down to a debate over values: The old guard argued that they were driven by the quest for truth, and by their sense of what citizens need to know to be informed participants in democracy. Reporting was all about locking down the facts and presenting them to readers, who would know best how to take advantage of the light we shined. Digital journalists countered that their way was more honest and democratic—and quicker. If that meant presenting stories before they’d been thoroughly vetted, that was okay, because the internet would correct itself. Truth would emerge through open trial and error.
With the collapse of old business models, the debate over values turned into a death match. Print chauvinists still muster mock horror when a few news sites run with wholly unconfirmed reports that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s uncle, apparently fallen from favor, was stripped, caged and eaten by 120 ravenous dogs. And more than a few digital evangelists find a proud identity in the distance they keep from stodgy, superfluous, layered editing structures that persist at many newspapers and magazines.
But consider a new possibility: What if conciliation is at hand?...
http://www.cjr.org/cover_story/who_cares_if_its_true.php?page=all

BuzzFeed is no scrappy little start-up anymore. It’s a big, profitable, influential news organization. The viral videos it publishes—generally without vetting—occasionally turn out to be hoaxes, the kind of mistake that delights old print curmudgeons eager to assert their ethical superiority. But as BuzzFeed continues to grow—four new employees checked in at the front desk in the 10 minutes I spent waiting there one morning—they’re not just adding brilliant headline writers and producers who get the gestalt of cat lovers. BuzzFeed has decided it’s no longer good enough to fix errors after publication, at least not on its most popular posts. They’ve decided it makes good journalism and business sense to assure readers that their posts are true, so BuzzFeed is embracing the ultimate symbol of the overstuffed print newsrooms of the pre-digital past. BuzzFeed is hiring copy editors. For nearly two decades, a culture war has divided journalists. The gap seemed mostly generational, but it always boiled down to a battle over the very purpose of what we do. All the dismissive sniping and straight-out antagonism between old-school defenders of the print craft and the young digital brains propelling start-ups came down to a debate over values: The old guard argued that they were driven by the quest for truth, and by their sense of what citizens need to know to be informed participants in democracy. Reporting was all about locking down the facts and presenting them to readers, who would know best how to take advantage of the light we shined. Digital journalists countered that their way was more honest and democratic—and quicker. If that meant presenting stories before they’d been thoroughly vetted, that was okay, because the internet would correct itself. Truth would emerge through open trial and error. With the collapse of old business models, the debate over values turned into a death match. Print chauvinists still muster mock horror when a few news sites run with wholly unconfirmed reports that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s uncle, apparently fallen from favor, was stripped, caged and eaten by 120 ravenous dogs. And more than a few digital evangelists find a proud identity in the distance they keep from stodgy, superfluous, layered editing structures that persist at many newspapers and magazines. But consider a new possibility: What if conciliation is at hand? - See more at: http://www.cjr.org/cover_story/who_cares_if_its_true.php?page=all#sthash.IbcuNo4O.dpuf

Journalism startups aren't a revolution if they're filled with all these white men

the guardian reporting:
When the predictive superstar Nate Silver announced last summer that he would defect from the New York Times, it began a wave of new, new money-backed “personal brand” journalism startups that launch in earnest with FiveThirtyEight on ESPN next week. This was supposed to be a good thing. “A very luxurious situation” indeed.
When word leaked a few months later that the billionaire eBay founder Pierre Omidyar would be joining forces with Glenn Greenwald, he had to clarify that the then-unnamed First Look Media would amount to something bigger than one man, a “long-term effort to build a new and exciting platform for journalism” and contribute to “the greater good”....
...
It is not just the four new (and still exciting) breakout projects of the year: Vice, Quartz, Buzzfeed, Politico, Grantland - these, too, are led by white men, and filled with more of them.
It is as if Arianna Huffington never happened. Or as if diversity of leadership and ownership did not really matter, as long as the data-driven, responsively designed new news becomes a radical and successful enough departure from the drab anecdote laden guff put out by those other men.
...Maybe it is the fault of legacy media for failing to make enough women “marquee journalists” in the first place. Being a “personal brand” superstar journalist is a harder path for women to negotiate, not just through the closure of institutional opportunity, but also through the bruising nature of internet discourse, which can represent an entirely different and much less civilised clubhouse than the equitable one Nate Silver is building at ESPN with so much fanaticism that he hires by chart.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/12/journalism-startups-diversity-ezra-klein-nate-silver

Friday, March 7, 2014

It Turns Out People Don't Really Surf The Web On Their Smartphones

BusinessInsider reporting:
It Turns Out People Don't Really Surf The Web On Their Smartphones

Since Apple kicked off the modern smartphone app era in 2008 with the App Store, there's been a debate over what will win in mobile: apps or mobile sites?

Well, smartphone and tablet users have spoken. And it's not even close. Mobile users spend far more time using apps than they do browsing mobile sites on their devices.

This chart from Statista breaks down the monthly usage of apps versus mobile sites.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/apps-versus-mobile-web-2014-3#ixzz2vHoKy1IP

The Dutch revolution in journalism: all newspapers behind one paydike

Blendle is a small journalism startup from The Netherlands. Recently, we (two 27-year old founders) got all major newspapers and magazines in the country to start a revolutionary experiment. The Netherlands will be the first country in the world where all articles of all newspapers and all important magazines will be available in one web app, with one pay wall, where users will only have to pay for the articles they read. We think that unbundling of journalism is the Holy Grail in getting young people to pay for journalism again.

Within Blendle, users can see what articles their friends or interesting curators (celebrities, journalists, politicians, radio DJ’s) have shared from the paid sections of today’s newspapers and magazines, and which articles are trending on the platform. The app also enables anyone to share articles from Holland’s best journalists on Facebook and Twitter. No more signing up with different paywalls for every newspaper. Users pay with a single click, and only for the articles they read. New users get €2.50 for free, and can then top up their Blendle wallet.

Until now, it was not possible for Dutch consumers to search for premium content from newspapers and magazines. Blendle is the first paid search engine for newspapers and magazines in the country. If a user wants to follow everything about specific subjects — say, the situation in Crimea, or bitcoins, or their favorite author — they can set email alerts for those words.

Users always pay a price per article (set by the publisher), but are also able to refund their money if they don’t deem the article worthy after reading it (a fair use policy applies). It’s a pretty cool function that greatly increases the amount of money spent on journalism in the beta.https://medium.com/changing-journalism/a2031594e430