This is my dumping ground for quotes and other stuff relating to the wonderful world of digital & communications.
inviting the public to interact with the actual publication of the paper, the Winnipeg Free Press in Canada, has opened a café in the city centre where three of their employees work permanently, giving the public direct dialogue with newspaper staff… open daily it also hosts special events organised by the newspaper…
The Wall Street Journal quietly enabled a personalization feature today (or at least this is the first time I’ve noticed it). Articles are now automatically sorted based on what they think you’ll like to read.
When the New York Times published the headline “Study of Twitter Messages Tracks When We Are :-) ” online… it marked first time an emoticon had been used to convey information in a headline
What if readers were able to help newsdesks work out which stories were worth investing precious reporting resources in? What if all those experts who delight in telling us what’s wrong with our stories after they’ve been published could be enlisted into giving us more clues beforehand? What if the process of working out what to investigate actually becomes part of the news itself?
It might seem a minority pursuit, but the experience of covering breaking news already suggests otherwise. Like many websites, we are discovering some of our best-read stories are the live blogs that report events as they unfold, often with brutal honesty about what we don’t know or hope to find out.
With this in mind, the newsdesk at the Guardian is planning an experiment in opening its doors.
The December 24, 1900 Boston Globe included an article that imagined what Boston would look like in the year 2000. … With all the fantastically futuristic predictions made in the article, it’s somewhat interesting that the most quaint idea in the entire piece is the idea that Boston of the future will have both a morning and evening edition of the local newspaper. This newspaper of the future was, of course, to be delivered by fancy pneumatic tubes, but you’d be hard pressed to find a young person in the year 2000 who even knew such a thing as an evening edition of the newspaper ever existed
The Newspaper Association of America has long claimed there are 2.3 readers for every print edition circulated…
So, if it’s always been possible on any given day to pick up the local paper somewhere for free, why did people ever pay? Not because they had to, but because it was easier to get it placed on their doorstep every morning (convenience), because they felt if they were going to read it every day they ought to pay (duty), or because they wanted to support the institution and people that produced it (appreciation).
Those are the same three reasons someone might subscribe to the The New York Times’ digital content.
When the managers of Le Monde introduced computers to the paper’s print works in the early 1990s, they hoped for greater efficiency and lower costs. But this was not the priority of the Syndicat Général du Livre et de la Communication Ecrite, a trade union which controls the printing of French national newspapers. It demanded that for each new computer, Le Monde should pay for one print worker to type on the keyboard and another simultaneously to watch the screen.
Clearly something dramatic has happened to the news business. That something is, of course, the internet, which has disrupted this industry just as it has disrupted so many others. By undermining advertising revenue, making news reports a commodity and blurring the boundaries between previously distinct news organisations, the internet has upended newspapers’ traditional business model. But as well as demolishing old ways of doing things, it has also made new ones possible. As patterns of news consumption shift, much experimentation is under way. The internet may have hurt some newspapers financially, but it has stimulated innovation in journalism.
Norran, a large regional daily in the north of Sweden, has opened up its newsroom with a tool … where readers can discuss story ideas with journalists in real time.
The blog is monitored by a senior journalist throughout the day. The newslist and minutes from conferences are published online and readers suggest possible angles and ask questions.
the amount of money generated by online advertising is far from compensating for falls in print ad sales. Of UK national titles, only the Daily Mail’s parent releases its digital advertising revenues, which were £12m in the past financial year. Last week, the Guardian Media Group said its total digital revenues for last year were £47m.
In 2011, Douglas McCabe of Enders Analysis estimates, UK national newspapers will take about £1.3bn in display advertising and £220m in classified.
Mr McCabe believes the grand total for this year of all UK digital newspaper revenues, for display, classified and other businesses such as online dating sites, national papers will bring in less than £190m.
Somebody once told me that a newspaper is like a high-minded lecture series held in the back of a big shopping mall. The lectures never paid for themselves, so all the mall shops — the nail salons, clothes stores, and restaurants — included a small surcharge in their prices to pay the speakers. This worked beautifully for a while because the lectures attracted high-end clientele and the stores profited from their wallets. But then somebody invented the Internet and everybody realized shoppers could visit the stores online without paying extra to support the lectures. What happened? Shops fled from the mall, which forced the lecture series to find other sources of revenue or otherwise pay fewer speakers less money.
This is what has happened to newspapers.
click it any time nytimes.com blocks you on a page. It does nothing on any other website, but clicking it on a blocked NYTimes article will show the content as usual. It should work with any browser that has a bookmarks toolbar showing
(I’m not sure I’ll hit the 20 article limit regularly but this is a handy tool to have as a backup, and easier than trawling that twitter feed. $15 is a lot to pay if it’s just the odd 1 or 2 articles that I’d go over. $5 aka cup of coffee I’d have been happy to take a punt on and to support them but $15 feels a lot for something I only graze on. I’ll support them via readability instead)
The Wall Street Journal has added 200,000 paying subscribers via tablets such as the iPad and Kindle, according to Les Hinton, head of the newspaper’s publisher, Dow Jones.
He said some 150,000 people have signed up for WSJ’s mobile products in the past 12 months alone.
As Arment announced today on the Instapaper blog, you can now send you Instapaper logs to Readability.
What this means is that you can use the payment element of Readability without having to really use Readability at all (beyond the initial payment set up). So if you like the idea of Readability but still prefer to use Instapaper, that’s fine — this gives you the best of both worlds.
And there’s an option when you link your accounts to send everything you save on Instapaper to Readability or to only send items you archive to Readability. That’s also interesting. It gives you a way to selectively pay certain publishers/authors.
The articles also allow you to comment, with both the written and spoken word. The latter is an interesting if not odd feature. Perhaps the future of the letter to the editor involves angry voice recordings