How encouraging is this: a journalist who succesfully launched a subscribtion model for just his own reporting. You can do this too!
I reckon that if the five dominating media companies joined forces, 80% of original-content news would be owned by that collective.
The five common-front news houses would need to make just one move: no more streaming of free news. The result? No more free news for Google News. No more Facebook news feed. If you want the news, you’ll have to buy it.
According to marketing author Martin Lindstrom, this is how the news business can survive Facebook. He wrote this in response to Facebook’s offer to publishers to host their content on their superfast, steady and mobile-loving social network (which David Carr reported for The New York Times).
Lindstrom thinks that newspapers should join forces just like the Swiss watch industry did when they launched Swatch together in the eighties to compete with cheap Japanese watches.
(Dan Gillmor suggested a similar approach in 2009 – be sure to read the interesting discussion that followed.)
I think this would just lead to more aggregation sites. A bunch of bloggers would read the paid mega sites and then summarize the articles for a bigger audience.
I do expect a loyal group – small, but loyal – to happily pay a subscription fee to read world’s most in-depth and impressive longform articles (just as Dutch people are now paying for newspapers articles on Blendle).
Should publishers accept Facebook’s offer?
That leaves the question of Facebook’s offer to host articles of legacy media, because their own sites are loading painfully slow on mobile devices.
(I for one, haven’t recently experienced a crappy mobile experience on legacy media sites. I could read The New York Times column about this matter just fine on my mobile. Maybe it’s because I live in a 4G country.)
Joining such a content deal with Facebook sounds like a race to the bottom to me. It’s basically surrendering. Admitting that you’re nowhere without their superb platform.
How we use Facebook to attract more members
At De Correspondent, we try to profit from Facebook without becoming too dependent on them:
- Last month, 79 percent of our social traffic came from Facebook. 232k of those visitors were new users.
- As soon as someone likes our page (as 82k people did) we treat it like a trial subscription. We share our best articles with those likers and every time they’ve read one, we tell them we’re ad-free and hope they like the idea of making new stories like the one they’ve just read possible by paying 60 euros a year for a membership.
- Last month, 267 people became a member of De Correspondent via Facebook (€60 p/y). 0.12% of the new users who came through Facebook became a member.
The conversion rate is still pretty low, but 267 new members on a total membership of 28.000 is a monthly increase of almost 1 percent in our membership, which already sounds more hopeful.
We’ll keep trying to use Facebook likers as trial members and hope not to become too independent on the platform (as in: what if members just read us when we share a link on Facebook?) and instead use it for our own good.
So the guys from @IndieWebCamp want us to tweet from our sites. Does this one (through @IFTTT) count?
I like how transparent publishing platform Medium is about their challenges.
Founder and CEO Evan Williams recently decided to publish (edited) internal meeting notes. Today he shared how their product team spent almost six hours on discussing how their site can make more sense to users and visitors.
At De Correspondent, we’ve also shared our biggest mistakes and challenges (at our one year anniversary) but we had the time to think about those for twelve months. Medium is almost posting them real-time, which is not just entertaining for us to read, it also helps Medium, since readers will reflect on their writings and might come up with great solutions.
A free brainstorming session with thousands of publishing experts. Not a bad idea, Mr. Williams.
As long as I can remember, I always wanted to be a journalist. So when I moved to New York in 2007 to intern at the United Nations, I decided time had come to apply for a writing gig at a serious newspaper. I emailed my favorite journal, offering them my services and, to my great astonishment, received a reply within hours.
‘No thank you’, it said.
So I started blogging about how I wanted to become a journalist. Later I joined The Next Web as their founding editor in chief.
Fast forward to two years later.
The newspaper now emailed me, asking if I wanted to start a blog for them. I accepted their invitation, as Dutch newspapers were limiting their internet journalism efforts to copy/ pasting and I wanted the work of Holland’s finest journalists out there on the web.
On this newspaper blog, print journalists elaborated on the stories they had written for the newspapers and carried meaningful discussions with readers. In the first year of its existence, the blog was awarded ‘Best blog of The Netherlands’.
Then I stopped blogging.
Because I became the chief digital of the newspaper’s mother company and in 2013 I co-founded De Correspondent, a world record-breaking journalism platform; both gigs meant I had to quit writing and making the writings of other journalists possible.
But here I am, back at the blogging thing. The last couple of weeks, I find myself posting things on this site again. Please allow me to tell you why, with the hope it might inspire you to start blogging (again) as well.
There’s still no better medium for people to freely share their knowledge than blogging.
It encourages you to dive into your beat – analyzing and rethinking it post by post – while allowing other experts to comment on your finding along the way. You aren’t limited by the constraints some social network have invented for you.
Writing about your experiences and learnings forces you to rephrase the incoherent thoughts in your mind into clear stories other people should understand. This public thinking is incredibly valuable, it makes you understand your work (and where it’s heading) better.
Plus: people who write well, think well (so any exercise is welcome).
Not to mention that you can always go back to your archive to see how you felt about something years ago (which comes in handy, as we humans tend to forget negative experiences).
The only thing that sometimes bothers me about blogging is that it can seem superficial. 200 words about something here.., a link to an article there; when you just look at single posts the whole blogging endeavour doesn’t seem to add much value.
Especially when you’re a fan of this one liner: ‘you’re as good as your last post’.
But when it comes to blogging, that one liner is utter nonsense. At least, that’s what I’m trying to tell myself.
I tell myself the value of blogging cannot be found in a single post, it can only be found in the stream of posts. With blogging, it’s the sum of all parts that counts. It’s about the public archive you’re building.
That’s why I lately started to encourage myself to constantly lower the barrier of writing a blog article. ‘If it’s a paragraph, it’s a post‘, writes Gina Trapani, and I couldn’t agree more.
So here I am, back at blogging again. I’ll document the lessons I’m learning at De Correspondent – about how we’re trying to turn readers into contributing experts or how we raised $1.7M with a crowdfunding campaign (and what happened in year one). I’ll also point out interesting articles from other folks out there, who are also trying to reinvent publishing – such as the IndieWeb movement.
To sum it up: I’ll take notes while exploring the future of publishing.
(And I’ll do this thing in English. I might not be as good at it as I am in Dutch – I might even be terrible at it – but it allows me to communicate with thousands of peers all over the globe.)
‘The cracks are beginning to show in medialand’
‘The days of cheap tricks for clicks are coming to an end, the days of bullshit “growth hacking” are coming to an end. ‘
And then Ali continues:
‘Time to focus on what matters: building loyalties, both with users and advertisers (if that’s a constituency), focus on doing the things that build revenue base, stay away from hiring diva-stars for the sake of hiring them, and focus on quality as consumers are tiring off cheap tricks.’
Well, that’s exactly what we’re doing at De Correspondent (except for the advertisers part, since we’re ad-free).
‘Medialand has always been a game for the long haul’.
(The evidence in his post is pretty weak though. I haven’t seen any bubbles yet and Ali doesn’t specifically mention one either. But the idea that users will get fed up with click bait and pageview generating stuff, makes perfect sense. I’m reading the book Trust Me I’m Lying by Ryan Holiday, which exposes all the negative outcomes of cheap tricks. More on that later.)
I’m fascinated by the IndieWeb movement. These guys encourage people to own their online identity by creating a personal website and using it for your content and communications (better explanation on their wiki).
Expect further (and more elaborate) updates on the IndieWeb.
The show’s creator, for his part, has claimed he doesn’t have a cynical view of politics: Dead bodies and callous plots aside, Frank Underwood is an “optimist at heart,” Willimon insists. “He says, ‘Forward progress. Momentum. Do something instead of nothing.’”
Says House of Cards-creator Beau Willimon in an interview with Politico. I didn’t see that coming (I thought House of Cards served more as a cynical response to The West Wing – proving how politics has changed).
But as Politico says: the gridlock American politics is in, makes you wish for a getting-things-done-guy like Underwood.
Even when he’s surrounded by dead bodies?
Whenever you travel to Barcelona, think of the man who designed Terminal 1, architect Ricardo Bofill, and the beautiful ‘Cathedral‘ he has created out of a cement plant (a project that started in 1973).
When my friend Justus Bruns alerted me to this video, he said ‘Jep Gambardella lives and he’s a Spanish architect’. I like that angle.
I once had the honour of dinner with #BenBradlee's at his home. He told me: "Focus on the big stories. No-one will remember the small ones."
— Paul Lewis (@PaulLewis) October 22, 2014
Paul Lewis is The Guardian‘s Washington correspondent and got the advice from late Ben Bradlee (editor in chief of The Washington Post during the Watergate scandal) to ‘focus on the big stories. No-one will remember the small ones.’
Although it’s probably hard to recognize big stories from the very start, and small stories can grow out to become as big as Watergate, I do think this is wise advice.
In these days of focusing on instant recognition (I often check how many tweets my last published story generated), it serves you and journalism better to unplug now and then and take the time to work on something bigger. Something that might not be retweeted at first, but will have a larger impact on the long run.
On the must-read Monday Note blog, one of its authors describes how Facebook and Google now dominate media distribution and why – as a publisher – you shouldn’t solely rely on them (they’re uncontrollable and the users they’re sending you aren’t loyal). He ends with a good recommendation: improving the recommendations on your own site and thus getting more people to directly access your publication:
Taken to the extreme, some medias are doing quite well by relying solely on direct access. Netflix, for instance, entirely built its audience through its unique recommendation engine. Its size and scope are staggering. No less than 300 people are assigned to analyze, understand, and serve the preferences of the network’s 50 million subscribers.
This is one of the greatest priorities at De Correspondent, where we’re building a new front page, filter methods and collections for stories. We believe we can provide a unique insight in the subjects we cover by connecting our previously published (and quiet timeless) stories.
(with the small difference that our budget isn’t as impressive as Netflix’)
A friend alerted me to Ozy, a daily curation web site, backed by Laurene Powell Jobs. What I like about this site is that they – albeit a bit pompous – describe in an inspiring way how you should read their site.
First: they call their daily briefing ‘The Presidential Brief‘. It’s their ‘take on what the most powerful person in the world gets with their morning coffee’. This is exactly the sentiment most readers have in the back of their mind when reading a daily brief, the idea that they’re hitting the streets well-prepared. Just like the president.
Second: the distinction within the brief between ‘Important’ and ‘Intriguing’. At my former job as digital editor of NRC Handelsblad, we tried to do something on nrc.nl with the labels ‘The most important news’ and ‘The best of the web’, but I think Ozy came up with more powerful labels.
I do think their site is a bit overwhelming when it comes to the visuals. I’d prefer a more sparse look, to reaffirm the idea behind a presidential brief. But still, Ozy it’s a good example of how to prep your visitors for reading your site.