How Reuters Social Pulse refines raw social media into a daily intelligence tool nie.mn/AqOZbK
SHARE
Nieman Journalism Lab
Nieman Journalism Lab
Pushing to the future of journalism — A project of the Nieman Foundation at Harvard

What counts more than design in attracting an online news audience?

As I laid out on Wednesday, there seems to be no discernible correlation between the overall quality of a web site and how much time readers spend there.

In the heydays of printed newspapers, we had some similar anomalies: newspapers with terrible designs (as judged by the designer elite) would have market penetrations equally strong as those following the latest design trends and gimmicks.

So what keeps eyeballs on sites, once they’ve landed there? Here are some recent views of interest:

Phil at 1918.com has a nice post building on Dave Brubeck’s breakout “Take Five”, raking over the coals the lackluster site of the News & Observer (once an internet pioneer), and agreeing with my conclusion that it’s not really about design:

My contention is that our failure has nothing to do with metrics, local visitors or site redesigns. I think it’s because we don’t care about our audience. We don’t know our audience. We make zero effort to connect with them, because newspapers are ingrained with the belief that the very people we write for, offer us nothing in return. We are a 20th century, one-way communication platform. We’re famous, they’re not. We’re important, they’re not. We own the ink, the presses, the paper and the delivery trucks and they don’t.

In other words, the world revolves around us, the editors and publishers.  As it ever did, in print newsrooms. Let’s lose that model. Phil’s solution is: build communities around our content. What a thought!  “What about a community built around making the website better? If you created a place for real discussion to flourish, there’s no better place to get ideas and keep your finger on the pulse of the very people who can help your site grow and be accepted by a wider audience. How about starting today?”

Similarly, Dan Mason in the UK looked around for the welcome mat at various news Web sites, without finding much of a welcome. Having done a little PR work on the side myself, I’ve often had the same experience — it can be damned hard to find the editor’s name, address and phone number on newspaper sites. “Contact us” ought to be a universally standard format, but it’s not. Some editors just don’t want to be contacted except through maddeningly frustrating online forms complete with Kaptchas to verify whether you are a human being. And that’s if you can find contact info at all. One site I happen to follow, the Lewiston (Maine)  Sun-Journal, switched publishing platforms a few days ago and seems to have neglected entirely, for now, to include a way to send the editor a news tip or feedback.

At the Paper of Record, the need to connect is better understood, so the Times recently appointed a full-time social media manager, Jennifer Preston. Her job goes well beyond making sure you can figure out who the editors are and how to contact them: “It’s someone who concentrates full-time on expanding the use of social media networks and publishing platforms to improve New York Times journalism and deliver it to readers.”

But how long before they get one of those in Lewiston?  Not only in the provinces, but at various leading metros, editorial policies regarding social media use by editorial staff are far from enlightened. At the Times, the policy is simply “use common sense,” together with the reminder that when Tweeting or on Facebook, news staffers still represent the Times. The Associated Press has the same sensible approach. But elsewhere, control mentalities are in evidence. At the Wall Street Journal, “sharing your personal opinions” is discouraged, as it may “open us to criticism that we have biases.” And at the Bergen Record, aside from four editors authorized to Tweet, “Twittering by anyone else on company time is discouraged.”

Contrast all of this with National Public Radio, which just plain gets it. To be honest, I don’t look at their Web site much. But I know what’s there, because they tell me all the time on the radio that I can go to their site to hear an interview in its entirety, to listen to an uncut piece of music mentioned in a review or story,  to see a painting, or to find links to more information. Gida Hammami of EditorsWeblog explains “Why newspapers should follow suit:

Since NPR has grasped the fact that social media is changing the media spectrum, it has embraced social media with open arms. NPR has reaped the benefits of social media tools such as Twitter and Facebook, as well as blogs and podcasts to allow consumers to define what is newsworthy. The NPR Twitter account has close to a million followers, while its Facebook page has just under half a million fans.

What could be considered the most important player in pushing up NPR’s ratings and swelling listenership is much owed to the fact that NPR is dedicated to making content readily accessible. Listeners and readers can access NPR on ‘their own terms,’ tuning in via radio, podcast, through mobile applications, you name it, rather than just online on NPR’s website.

Audience participation is critical to the success of social media. NPR has a ‘mix your own podcast tool,’ which allows listeners to create customized programming schedules based on NPR’s archives. In addition, NPR released a content API so that developers can ‘remix and reuse’ content created within the NPR organization; NPRbackstory attempts to decipher the news behind trending topics by searching through NPR’s archives. NPRbackstory automatically generates tweets with linked articles from NPR’s archives relating to a specific topic a user may search for.

In order for newspapers assure their place in the future of media, newspapers should follow suit by making their content easily accessible to readers wherever they might want to find it. According to Catone, installing pay walls only drives readers (or in NPR’s case, readers and listeners) to seek out lower quality journalism free of charge. Delivering news, especially local and hyperlocal news, to readers means having the option to use any platform they desire to find coverage on a wide variety of stories.

It’s not about how sexy-looking your site is. It’s not about having the absolute latest display technology. It’s about how you engage readers with conversations and with ways of interacting with news staffers and with each other. It’s about projecting personality — showing that behind the stories, the columns, the blogs, there are real people living in your town, sharing your concerns and your joys.

                                   
What to read next
topheadlines
Justin Ellis    February 2, 2012
The experimental mobile app from The Wall Street Journal skims homepages for the top news from a universe of sources.
  • http://richardlfloyd.blogspot.com/ Richard L. Floyd

    Martin,

    Another terrific post. I also seldom go on NPR’s site, but I know it is there and can go if I want to or need to. So engaging people and building community is the key. I learned that as a pastor..

    -Rick

  • http://prestonstahley.com Preston

    If you’re not connecting with your audience, no amount of good design can save you.

    However, if you’re saying design has no effect on numbers, I would have to disagree:

    http://www.webdesignerwall.com/general/users-place-more-weight-on-design/

  • http://newsafternewspapers.blogspot.com/ Martin Langeveld

    No Preston, I don’t claim that design has no effect. But it’s not as strong an effect as designers claim. The poll you link to says only 25% of users would be driven away from a site by “poor visual presentation” (whatever they may understand by that term). The other 75% would not be, it seems. And the poll did not include measurements of social engagement or the more intangible values of community connectedness and personality.

  • http://www.1918.com Phil Buckley

    I agree that it must be a combination of better, more streamlined design and a cultural change within the newspaper industry.

    I think in 10 years we’ll be looking back at this era the way we now look back at the first few years of cell phones and realize that change was coming no matter what the old established players did.

    If you were starting a news organization today, where would put your initial efforts?

  • Perry Gaskill

    Interesting post, Martin. Personally, I wouldn’t discount too much the element of design for the user experience; there seems to be a predominance of design-by-committee news websites around which could be much better.

    On the other hand, I agree that mainstream news websites need to engage readers and establish a two-way dialogue. Individual situations obviously vary, but what I’m seeing lately is not the lack of means to comment on stories or contact reporters. Rather it’s that the story content is not compelling enough to prompt a response. Why this is true raises yet another set of complex issues: some are stylistic, some are technical.

    As a matter of moving the subject of reader engagement forward, I think journalists should be looking at the two following basic questions:

    The first is how do you determine in any given market when the existing news platform has become so out of touch with its readership that it is no longer worth continuing? On one hand, you might have an organization with decades of collective wisdom about a given community it would be a shame to jettison. On the other, that same organization may have grown so elitist that it will never recover the base of reader loyalty it might once have had.

    The second is what are the most functional topics and most appropriate scale for reader dialogue? Broad-based reader dialogue is nothing new and goes back at least as far as FidoNet. To this day, no one has really gotten a handle on what makes a “good” reader group. Groups targeted at topics too tiny to matter go moribund because no one engages. Others reach and maintain a critical mass which provide lively, informed, and congenial discussion from a variety of viewpoints. Still others reach and go beyond critical mass until they become so large that the reader group becomes more concerned with maintaining consensus than it does with listening to informed but dissenting voices.

  • http://newsafternewspapers.blogspot.com/ Martin Langeveld

    Phil, your question “If you were starting a news organization today, where would put your initial efforts?” will probably inspire another post — thanks!

    Readers: Phil Buckley is the Phil mentioned in the post, of 1918.com

  • Pingback: jardenberg kommenterar – 2009-06-27 — jardenberg unedited

  • Pingback: Could strategic bankruptcies be needed to transform U.S. newspaper enterprises? » Nieman Journalism Lab

  • Tim Barkow

    Probably the easiest first step is for news orgs and journalists to recognize that participation in comment threads (just as you’re doing here) is a mandatory (and natural) part of writing the story.

    Once you’re there and interacting, you can start to build that community and relationship with your readership.

    And once you’ve built the relationship, it will become relatively easy to discern what new beats and data-driven projects your readers want from you.

    Just one step to start changing your business model. :)

  • Pingback: Comma ‘n Sentence » Blog Archive » Museum-Quality Magazines for the Masses?

  • http://qiu-on-this.blogspot.com/ Hq

    Hi Martin and Readers,

    (I just discovered Neiman Lab.) This is an old post but the content and comments were very compelling. I thought everyone might be interested in this short TEDTalk on how design can save news’papers’.

    http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jacek_utko_asks_can_design_save_the_newspaper.html

  • Pingback: If you were starting a news organization, where would you put your initial efforts? » Nieman Journalism Lab

  • Pingback: News website FAIL « Mediascaper

  • Pingback: Link Roundup: The importance of blogs and blog-like interactions for journalism sites | Boldly Play