Journalism, citizen media and profit
Our publisher, Robin Saul, is quoted in a BusinessWeek media column by Jon Fine saying, "We have not been able to determine a revenue-generating stream from that traffic," referring, presumably, to our efforts at citizen journalism: blogs, forums, interactivity and the like.
It's more complicated than that, of course. Our efforts are first aimed at building a different, better relationship with the community, expanding our journalism and interacting with people in a way we're unable to with the printed product. I know that to business people that reads blah, blah, blah. So there is also this. It's early in the profit-making game. We -- I use this universally -- are building a business and business model as we go. Like all businesses, we have glitches in the system. We have software programs that don't work and vendors who overpromise. We hatch ideas that are good on paper but don't resonate with customers.
But have no doubt the Mark Pottses and the Backfences are the Magellan's of citizen media, and to mix my metaphors, we're still in the Jurassic period of citizen media online. It takes many failures to reach success. The newspaper is fortunate that we, like many other corporations, have other revenue streams. We can support exploration, experimentation and patience as we expand our business. We -- or someone else or several someone elses -- will find a good revenue stream.
Anyone suggesting -- and neither Robin nor Fine are -- that there ain't gold in them thar hills is in the wrong business. There is, as Ed says, money to be made. I hope we figure it out, and the sooner the better because we have things we want to do. But in the meanwhile, the journalists in the newsroom will enjoy, explore and expand how we get information to and from you.
Comments (6)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I think you hit the nail on the head, it's just the beginning, or atleast that's what alot of people are banking on. Online advertising projections in the next 10 years are staggering, but it will take a new breed of journalists, media outlets, and skilled individuals to take advantage of this revenue. I hate to admit it, but the most obvious players probably won't be the ones who survive the evolution.
Posted on March 16, 2007 9:46 PM
Just a different view from the one who is helping us build this business - I think we are definitely benefitting from the pageviews on the blogs - we're able to deliver ads to those pages. So the audience they bring - not to mention the interactivity and loyalty they create for our site - does generate revenue for us directly. And the more we can connect with our users in this way and others, the more successful we will be, and the more innovative we can become in digital media.
Posted on March 17, 2007 5:39 PM
You go, girl
Posted on March 18, 2007 8:55 AM
I have complete confidence in the N&R that they will never figure it out.
I canceled my print subscription a month ago. I read eight newspapers a day online, don't need the ads and my hands stay clean.
Posted on March 22, 2007 1:58 PM
Thank you for an informative post. My experience is that it takes time to break into an established community - as is the case with HyperLocal publishing. You have to establish a bond with your users; have existing credibility; or other incentives. MIT's fishWrap in the 90s was the ONLY place to get all the wired news AP, Reuters, BPI, ABC Radio News, and Knight-Ridder Tribune had to offer. Then we layered our locally user created content with it. It enriched the experience. I doubt that fishWrap would have survived with only user created content as there were well established student and university publications on-campus. So it is more a question of who will get the right mix of desirable community features and content to keep the users. I am optimistic that it will happen - it might even be a newspaper!
Posted on March 22, 2007 4:14 PM
And now the layoffs come. I like how the paper today (8 June 2007)goes on blah, blah, blah without the guts to say our mega-profits just are not enough. What it the profit margin for the N&R? 10% 15% 20%?
I know many newspapers are in the high teens and 20% profit margin. And then the hypocrisy of stating how cutting jobs will make the paper better.
I can hear it now by somebody pulling in mega bucks, "Lets spread the same work around less people, and the paper will be better." Very doubtful except better profits on the backs of the workers.
For shame you greedy people cutting these jobs.
Posted on June 8, 2007 9:15 PM