Innovation: Part One

The very first winner that I looked up was the EveryBlock open-source software created by Adrian Holovaty. At first glance, this idea already seems outdated, but you have stand back and realize he came up with this in 2007. His idea was an open-source software that provided hyperlocal information to citizens all the way down to their very own city block. Now, there are many iPod applications that can provide a similar service, but usually only for a certain niche, like only movie or restaurant reviews. EveryBlock provides a newsfeed including crime, restaurant inspections and media coverage. It’s great that his idea was able to evolve into an iPod application and stay current with the way that people want to receive their information. This is just like Jeff Jarvis was saying about the new way companies should work: bring yourself to your audience, don’t wait for them to come to you. Combining this idea with the growing trend of media going hyperlocal makes this a great innovation.

I think my favorite overall was the Transparent Journalism project. Transparency is a big topic in online journalism right now. In fact many people are looking to transparency to solve the problem of objectivity in the news. This program would allow people to search articles not only by topic, but also how the author came about the information and what biases they might have. This is a good example of providing a niche service that people cannot find anywhere else. Also, how cool is it that Sir Tim Berners-Lee was one of the developers? I want my project to address current issues in journalism, just like this project does with transparency.

A 2008 winner,the Sochi Olympics Project, seems like an idea that could not only help a community, but also actively prove how its’ communication platform has encouraged improvements. It’s not just about how many users click on it per day. This project wants to figure out a way to improve life in Sochi by allowing the community to “better prepare for the Olympics, to inform the media about the city’s issues and to use discussions about the games as a way to improve life in Sochi.” This comes down to a social issue and I think that makes it very different from many of the other projects whose goal is mostly just to inform or ease the process of informing in a time when newspapers are no longer doing the trick.

However, the John Ewing’s Virtual Street Corners does not impress me as much as many of the other winners. In order to facilitate dialogue between two areas separated by race and class, Ewing wants to install life-size TV screens on street corners of two blocks in both areas. These screens would “provide portals into each other’s worlds.” I think it’s great to want to bring communities together, but overall this idea seems gimmicky. I could see people ignoring the screens or wondering why they should care what the other people are saying. Also, he doesn’t mention a way to tell if his innovation works. I don’t want to come up with an idea that’s just “cool.” I want to come up with something that serves a purpose and has measurable goals.

Ushahidi, created by Ory Okolloh, has great intentions as well. This program would use crowdsourcing to inform the public during crises. To me, it seems a little unnecessary because its purpose can easily be served by Twitter. Okolloh says this idea has been tested in Kenya, but I don’t feel like that proves much in the context of modern American technology. She says that the media can’t be everywhere at once, but I think we’ve pretty much figured that concept out in the U.S., especially since social networks like Twitter and Facebook make it easier for citizen journalists to report on crises. It’s important to me that my idea is innovative and necessary. If people can find this information in another place, why should they come to me?

After reviewing all these winners I have realized the sheer variety of ideas that Knight considers. Some focus more on art, while others are more serious and have ambitions of saving the world. Right now I am thinking about a project that can simplify the understanding of news for the general population. My software would allow users to choose a topic and then the program would aggregate news from as many objective sources as possible and then would seamlessly put together a summary of the latest news from that topic. There would also be an option for gathering all the opinions on the subject into a separate summary. This would help internet users to sift through the overwhelming amount of information out there and keep them informed on important issues in the news.

Future models for news…part 2

Now that we’ve discussed how we got here, our current strategies, and our future challenges, it’s time to evaluate the models of news we will probably rely on soon.

There are two parts to the concept of “models” of news: the business side and the reporting side. When it comes to business, we’re talking about how journalism can make money on the Internet. It seems like a pretty difficult thing to do, since nearly all publications offered up their content for free from the beginning.

“Pay walls” and “micropayments” are a couple of examples of future business models that might seem similar at first. According to Michael Massing’s “A New Horizon for the News,” pay walls involve charging for all access to news content of a website. The most popular version of this is a “hybrid” pay wall in which some content is available for free, but if a customer wants to delve deeper, they must purchase a subscription. Micropayments, on the other hand, would involve charging for content on an as needed basis. Basically, a customer wouldn’t need to buy a full subscription, they would only pay for the articles they want.

Various publications have avoided charging for content by relying heavily on advertisers. For example, the New York Times can count on companies to pay a lot of money to appeal to their intellectual audience. The same goes for Politico, whose print and online publications are funded entirely on advertising.

The final business model that news could possibly rely on is that of endowments and donations from consumers.

As far as reporting goes, we can’t remain static and follow the old rules for print. If a publication wants to thrive online, they must produce content that cannot be found elsewhere, as Journalism.org’s State of the News Media addresses. This is called “niche” reporting, and it can be difficult to differentiate between this and “hyperlocalization.” Hyperlocalization refers to reporting on extremely local news and leaving the international, national, and even statewide news to the bigger publications that already have the resources to follow such events. This could mean a blog that covers only stories related to the Westlake area of Austin and does not cover any UT-related news. Niche reporting focuses more on one subject, rather than an specific geographic area.

On a related note to hyperlocalization and niche reporting, Massing gives a good example of how local radio can revive the flow of local news content in the event that the large metro daily newspaper has to shut down. “If the news-gathering abilities of these public radio stations were truly fortified, they could help fill in the gaps in local news being left by the downsizing of daily papers.” he says.

Which business models are most likely to work? As we’ve seen from the success stories of Wall Street Journal, Texas Monthly and the Financial Times websites, and, according to  Paul Bradshaw, because of the extreme power of the link (see video below), pay walls will probably work better than micropayments.  Also, advertising has always funded publications, but advertisers are just now fully getting into the habit of purchasing online space.

Re: pay walls and links via buzzmachine

But out of all the business models so far, I think endowments and substantial advertising are the direction we are headed. Right now, wealthy people are backing start-up companies, (think Texas Tribune) to begin small publications that serve a specific purpose and are to rely on donations from their audience in order to remain in business.

One feature that any future successful reporting technique will share, according to journalism.org, is “original reporting meant to fill what they see as an expanding void in what mainstream media now offer.” I think reporting that keeps this in mind will be able to compete for an audience.

New trends emerge everyday in models for journalism. Developers are encouraged to create platforms that enable communities to share what they know and need to know, with journalists contributing value – reporting, editing, aggregation, curation – to their ecosystem, says Google’s Marissa Meyer (buzzmachine). Jeff Jarvis refers to this as a hyperpersonal news stream.

Paul Bradshaw came up with some remarkable models in three categories for reporting news online: actual reporting, understanding communities as sources, and what to do with your content after it’s published.

A table that describes Paul Bradshaw's ides for future newsrooms

Using your community as a source, by Paul Bradshaw.

And then what? by Paul Bradshaw

Overall, I think Bradshaw has the idea right about how to change the procedures of reporting to keep up with the digital age. The charts he created truly capture the essence of these models and put their ideas in clear English. However, even though publications seem to want to move toward a non-profit stance, I think the business model of relying on endowments and donations could have serious flaws. I think audiences could have a hard time changing their perception from NYT being a cash cow to suddenly being a government project. It’s easy to start up a company if someone throws money at you, things get more difficult when they decide it’s time for you to be on your own.