I don’t think anyone doubts Varian’s view that only very specialized content will draw consumers in enough to where they’ll pay. The experimentation is taking place, albeit it seems only sparse. Most news organizations appear to have implemented some form of user-generated content by now, but sadly that’s just not enough.
Did they really think opening up comments on stories would make that much of a difference? Fact is, most comment streams look terribly stale when compared to the real-time conversations happening in niche communities and social networks like Twitter.
In my view, the best thing that newspapers can do now is experiment, experiment, experiment. There are huge cost savings associated with online news. Roughly 50% of the cost of producing a physical newspaper is in printing and distribution, with only about 15% of total costs being editorial. Newspapers could save a lot of money if the primary access to news was via the internet. Hal Varian, Chief Economist
On a brighter note, some news organizations have realized that information sometimes needs to be packaged in other ways in order to be valuable. The example I always use is Mint.com. The way they’ve used the aggregated data of their user base is not only creative but it drives interest. More interest is exactly what newspapers need.
As far as experimentation, I think that will come in the form of real-time curation and collaboration with citizen journalists and other hyper-local sources. The move to more open styles of reporting and media coverage will tap into an ecosystem of information sources that will provide other forms of advertising and e-commerce.
How can anyone really think using community and curation tools won’t be a boon to media companies and publishers? The ones that get it are already committed to establishing better ways of sharing and collaborating, baking that mindset into every part of the business.
Not so long ago every pundit preached “community” this and “community” that (me included). Sure that’s a part of it, but in less than a few years, things like Twitter, Google Buzz and a newsier Facebook have forced private and public institutions alike to look outside of their comfy websites and community hubs. Brands and online publishers realize the conversations happening in other online environments and niches can often overshadow much of the activity taking place on their own web properties.
The BBC’s recent statements underscore much of the shift taking place not only in media outfits but in corporations, where internal and external teams are scrambling for the right mix of engagement and listening.
"For BBC news editors, Twitter and RSS readers are to become essential tools, says Horrocks. Aggregating and curating content with attribution should become part of a BBC journalist’s assignment; and BBC’s journalists have to integrate and listen to feedback for a better understanding of how the audience is relating to the BBC brand."
Shifting Roles and Perceived Priorities
The other thing you’ll see as the aforementioned scrambling takes place is a shifting of skill sets and even roles. Most companies don’t need a social media director, they just need their own employees to rally around their own assets. Or another way to put it. What’s important to organizations is understanding how to scale what’s already right under their noses.
Knowledge, customers, alliances – all the things that make a business a business – are what all of us have to become better at promoting and publicizing. Most companies need a good communications playbook way more than they need any technology, media plan or whiz-bang strategist.
And somewhere between the analysis paralysis and the trip to the CFO’s office lies the epiphany that you and your company can do this stuff. You see, you’ve been talking to customers all along and you pay people to make sure they’re happy with your product or service. What you haven’t been so focused on is helping them understand it’s ok to connect with them in other environments, around the global water cooler, if you will.
As the social web and 2.0 mindset fades into the fabric of business, the things corporations will ultimately cling to will be collective wisdom, innovation and the desire to make a difference. That’s more than a skill set. That’s passion and that’s willingness to change.
Obviously, the publishing business – especially print – can’t support much of the old operational costs built in to production and distribution. It will take rigid monetization models (pay walls), innovative content and licensing alliances (e-Readers,etc) and better bridging of online and offline communities. That’s a tall order for most organizations because their business has been so dependent on ready-steady advertising for so many years. When Craigslist killed classifieds and the bottom fell out of the auto industry, well, you could predict the ramifications.
One potential business model that newspapers are exploring is charging a monthly fee to read a daily newspaper’s content online. This model, however, seems unlikely to work as three-quarters of online adults (77%) say they would not be willing to pay anything to read a newspaper’s content online. While some are willing to pay, one in five online adults (19%) would only pay between $1 and $10 a month for this online content and only 5% would pay more than $10 a month.
"Quality content is not free. In the future, good journalism will depend on the ability of a news organization to attract customers by providing news and information they are willing to pay for."
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=179080f0-ff11-4a04-b83a-71522e9cafcb)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=adbc097f-3351-40f3-8a3e-ce16753902ba)
