Too little, too late from ombudsmen

The Organization of News Ombudsmen (ONO) has appointed a new executive director, Jeffrey Dvorkin. According to this piece in the Observer newspaper, the ONO are looking at ways to work within the blogosphere and consider allowing online media critics into the fold.
They seem to be closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. What will their conclusions be and how will they help?
The news industry should be left to remould itself based on survival of the fittest. The debate has moved on from 'if' and 'when' to 'now'.

Too little, too late from ombudsmen

When the tough get good, the going gets tough

How do you make a good publication and business even better? Surprisingly, this can be more difficult than starting from scratch.
I met up with some old contacts last week and it struck me that I was having the same conversation with them that I have heard countless times before.
It goes something like this:

Owner/publisher: "The publication is profitable, well-received and fulfilling our business plan. But it's hard work, and we don't know where to start in terms of making the business more process-led, creative and growing the audience."

Very often, the most successful publishing operations have a great product, but with all the work that goes into making it financially viable the focus on marketing, business development and basic processes is completely lost.
Think poor website and little or no online presence (they publish printed communications to supplement a major international media source). However, still a very profitable operation.
In my experience, a little discipline is required here. I suggested they set aside ten minutes every few days to update a blog with sneak previews of forthcoming issues and topics. And make sure updates are emailed out to all readers, advertisers and partners who have opted in.
I also suggested they did the same with their social network presence. Why do so many organisations have dusty, out-of-date Facebook and LinkedIn pages? What's the point if you don't add some decent content on a regular basis?
Here's an example of how it should be done.
Since last week they have followed my advice and already received calls from advertisers and readers requesting new information and products. All for the sake of just 30 minutes work every week.
Obviously they are keen to ensure the team's focus remains on the 'core' work and this solution is by no means conclusive, but it shows what can be achieved with a little discipline and a second pair of eyes.

When the tough get good, the going gets tough

Mine, all mine...but I don't want it

Have you ordered a copy of Mine magazine yet?
This is a customer magazine, sponsored by Lexus and published by Time. The idea is clever in principle. You register here and give some basic information about your lifestyle and interests and choose five magazines from the Time portfolio that interest you. For non-US readers of this blog, Time's other titles include Sports Illustrated, Golf and Food&Wine.
Every month you will receive a 'customised' magazine delivered to your inbox with content aggregated from these titles and selected based on you and your interests.
Yes, there is some advertising from Lexus, but no more than you would see in any other publication. And yes, the content is very worthy as you would expect from a Time publication.
But does it work as a package? I don't think so; for two reasons.
The platform on which each issue is presented looks like the usual digi-mag software. This means lots of zooming in and out to read copy, naff flicking pages and a painful read if you are trying to access the information on a netbook.
The magazine has been designed as a printed magazine, not for web viewing. Just as importantly, the features do not offer the flow and synergy of a normal, original, magazine. Features from each of the chosen titles simply butt up against each other, making the whole package feel cheap.
When I read the original press release promoting this new publication, I thought it may represent a new avenue for custom content. Instead, like almost all digi-mag presentations I have seen, it represents re-purposed content at its most basic.
I have yet to see any response figures from Lexus and I will happily eat my words if it helps sell lots of vehicles. Then Mine will have fulfilled its purpose.

Mine, all mine...but I don't want it

Why journalists must save themselves

When the UK entered the credit crunch last year, and eventually moved into recession, the resulting job losses in journalism clashed with the already-raging debate about 'citizen journalism' and the proliferation of online 'news' and blogs.
Let's be clear - real journalism will always be needed. Bloggers comment on news, therefore someone needs to be on the sharp end, sourcing the stories and reporting them. In my view blogs add comment, opinion and nurture debate. No more, no less. That's as it should be in the Web 2.0 world.
But nevertheless, journalists do need to be sharper, faster and more commercially-minded than ever. They need to marketers, publishers and salesman all in one. This is particularly prevalent in local media, where the effects of recession are being felt most. If signs in the US are anything to go by, local media could be going 'hyper-local' with journalists reporting independently on small areas and responsible for their whole business, not just the editorial.
Thankfully, I am not the only one thinking this way. This blog from Rick Waghorn is typical of many cropping up in the ether right now.
I think this is particularly refreshing and not a moment too soon. I have long advocated and practised running editorial and sales teams alongside each other, both as a business model and in terms of the physical layout of the office.
Only this way can each party understand what the other requires and make the publication work as a business, which, after all, is what keeps everyone employed.
Journalists - follow the lead set by many of your contemporaries and take up the entrepreneurial challenge!

Why journalists must save themselves

Converting critics to advocates

I came across this fantastic case study yesterday.
These lessons from Singapore Airlines can be applied when handling a disgruntled reader, advertiser, client or customer.

Converting critics to advocates

The L word

OK, this may be an obvious one to many, but it is amazing how many organisations still believe that an expensive website created only be developers will suddenly push their presence to the top of the search engine results.
While reading The Wisdom of Crowds, by James Surowiecki, I came across this great definition of how Google actually works:

PageRank relies on the uniquely democratic nature of the web by using its vast link structure as an indicator of an individual page's value. In essence, Google interprets a link from page A to page B as a vote, by page A, for page B. But, Google looks at more than the sheer volume of votes, or links a page receives; it also analyzes the page that casts the vote. Votes cast by pages that are themselves "important" weigh more heavily and help to make other pages "important".

So, for your site to be a success you need to have plenty of reciprocal links and in order for people to link to you, plenty of valuable content. Simple, but worth a reminder.

The L word

Look after your suppliers as well

As a publisher of magazines, direct marketing material and websites on behalf of clients, I spend much of my time producing reports, keeping valued customers up-to-date on progress with their projects.
I also have to spend a similar amount of time managing suppliers: printers, web developers, freelance writers and designers, mail houses and so on.
Given the large amounts of money I pay to these suppliers, it would be all too easy to threaten to withdraw work as a method of managing their progress. Naturally I do not do this, because I believe in working with people and making choices based on informed decisions from the outset.
However, it would seem that one or two organisations I have come across in the past do not train their staff in the management of suppliers. This has often put relationships with these clients under strain: you want to stay professional and helpful at all times; they want to be placed top of the list and provided with a level of service that far outstrips the formal agreement.
Fortunately I have enough experience to smooth out these situations and ensure the client feels well taken care of, regardless.
However I can't help but think there must be an opportunity to train organisations (at all levels) in how to handle suppliers.
Here's a list of some of the points I would include:

1. Do- choose a supplier in whom you have confidence, then stay confident. Provided your supplier does a good job, your trust should continue to grow
2. Do not - look for problems that are not there
3. Do - ask if you are unsure or unhappy about something
4. Do - agree the parameters, specification and scope of your project. Then stick to these and keep your side of the bargain. If anything needs to change, be honest with your supplier straight away
5. Do - take time to thank them for a job well done, however small or regular the work may be. That way, if you do have to go back with a complaint another time, it will have all the more impact
6. Do - empathise. You know that you are not alone in supplying your customers, so why should you expect an exclusive service? Understand the constraints of a working day and make a judgement on what you would reasonably expect to achieve.
7. Do - keep the relationship as amicable and friendly as possible. If you ever have cause to be upset, the effects will be much greater

Look after your suppliers as well