Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

November 30 2010

18:30

Droid Does Mizzou: Speed-dating style app contest builds a new framework for journalism experience

It may not be possible to force innovation in journalism, but you may be able to guide it, starting with a little speed dating.

Lightning round-style matching is the secret to creating teams that can successfully build apps for news, at least at the Reynolds Journalism Institute at the University of Missouri. (For our purposes let’s replace nervous single-ites making awkward small talk with anxious j-students, programmers, and business majors.)

This is the fourth year the Institute has held a competition to encourage journalism students to try their hand at becoming developers. In previous years students have focused on creating applications for the iPhone and Adobe AIR. In this year’s competition students will create apps on the Android platform with help from Google, Adobe, Sprint, and the Hearst Corporation.

“What we try to do is take an emerging piece of technology and challenge our students to come up with a solution for journalism or the advertising that supports it,” Keith Politte, manager of the technology testing center at the Institute, told me.

Over the course of the next few months students will give an initial pitch to judges, followed by months of working on the apps for a final presentation in the spring. Winners will earn a trip to Silicon Valley to present their project to Google. “Android will be fun,” Politte said. “It not only allows us to go to phones, but also some of the new tablets and Google TV.”

In its role Hearst acts as a client and partner, offering specs on what types of apps or content areas it’s interested in, as well as providing project managers to help guide students. The company will also consider student apps for use in its own products. The winning projects from last year’s competition, a recommendation engine and an enhanced photo gallery program, have both been turned into internal projects at Hearst Interactive, Politte told me.

J-schools like Mizzou are taking furtive steps towards blending traditional media education with a sharper focus on teaching technical skills (or perhaps ushering in the rise of the journo-programmer), and the competition at RJI is an example of fostering innovation from journalism students in a less-than-academic (or at least outside-the-classroom) way. And if the last three competitions have been any indicator, it’s a bridge to outsiders (engineers, business students, programmers) who could bring fresh thinking into journalism’s future.

“We bring in different students, introduce them to the concept, and say go,” Politte told me. “After an hour of frenzied experiences you have a team.” Again, speed dating. They bring together undergrads from the School of Journalism with computer science majors, engineering students, and business majors. Absent the young developer toiling away in a dorm, it’s likely most people don’t have experience building web applications or may not have convenient connections to computer science geeks or budding journalists. As a practical necessity teams need members from the J-school and an “other,” meaning students from other schools, Politte said.

One benefit is that journalism students are exposed to thinking like (and communicating with) a programmer, a skill that likely will be handy once they leave college. But Politte said the opposite is true as well, as programmers, engineers, and business students gain an insight into journalism. “The world doesn’t live in silos,” Politte said. “We need to be able to cross disciplines — and our students, when they graduate, if they’re working as a journalist, will interface with IT folks.”

Of course there’s also the reality that working as a journalists going forward doesn’t necessarily mean working in a newsroom or at a newspaper. Politte thinks that future is more than apparent to students, which is why more are interested in broadening their skills outside of media.

“They see the legacy business model being fractured and are wanting to be more entrepreneurial and solve problems in a journalism context,” he said.

What may give students a greater incentive this year is the fact that they’ll own what they create outright. Politte said in previous competitions that there was uncertainty whether the university retained the license to products created by students. Now participants will have the intellectual property rights to what they develop. “The old way is the university owns everything and is motivated by capturing anything created and being able to monetize it,” Politte said. “It’s good in theory, but the university doesn’t have enough individuals to help commercialize and accelerate the licenses we have.”

Practical, tangible experience is now the mindset for many journalism schools, as we’ve seen with Columbia University’s Tow Center for Digital Journalism, the University of North Carolina’s Reese Felts Digital News Project, and the University of Southern California’s Annenberg Innovation Lab.

Journalism schools find themselves launching students into an industry in flux and trying to adapt to ideas and technology that may not be fully formed yet. What the student competition suggests is that creating non-academic frameworks for students to innovate (and potentially find solutions to the industry’s problems of today) may be just as important as any curriculum or classroom experience.

Politte sums it up best: “We wanted to step out of our students’ way and let them be successful.”

November 23 2010

15:00

A handbook for community-funded journalism: Turning Spot.Us experience into lessons for others

In creating a new system to fund reporting directly by donations from a geographic or online community, Spot.Us broke some of the traditional rules of journalism — namely that reporting is funded through a combination of advertising dollars and subscriptions.

That was two years ago, and now a network of individual journalists and small news organizations are attempting to use Spot.Us as a model to find new ways to fund their work and strengthen their connections to the community. And what they need are a new set of rules.

As part of his fellowship at the Reynolds Journalism Institute, Spot.Us founder David Cohn is developing a handbook for community-funded reporting that will cover everything from how reporters can pitch stories to establishing partnerships in the community to learning whether crowdfunding is right for your project. I spoke with Cohn and Jonathan Peters, who are working together on the project. In their eyes, it’s as much an assessment of how Spot.Us methods work as it is a handbook.

“I don’t want it to evangelize Spot.Us,” Cohn told me. “I want it to evangelize the type of community-funded reporting of Spot.Us.”

Spot.Us has worked with more than 70 organizations, from MinnPost and Oakland Local to The New York Times. “In my experience so far, it’s been the journalism community that has been adopting the Spot.us model, not the journalism industry,” Cohn said.

Which is why the book will serve not only as a how-to, but also something of a Hitchhiker’s Guide to the (Community-Funded Journalism) Galaxy, pointing out what has (and hasn’t) worked for Spot.Us, introducing the new players in community journalism, new methods of generating funding and a helpful glossary of terms (the difference between micro donations, crowdfunding and crowdsourcing for instance).

What they did not want to do, Peters says, is try and create a paint-by-numbers book that applies the same method to every community. “The community-funded model relies wholly on a very local focus, not only in the reporting that sites provide, but also in the structure of the site,” Peters said, adding that what works for one site may not work for another.

Only a few months into the project (they expect to be done by the spring), Cohn and Peters have found that one of the biggest questions the handbook can answer is how to explain the way community-funded reporting — and Spot.Us — works. For their research the two are surveying reporters who have worked with Spot.Us to fund and report stories. “The most interesting thing to the two of us was the majority of reporters who talked to us could not give an elevator speech to someone who does not know what Spot.Us does,” Peters said.

Making a pitch to an editor and convincing groups of people to help pay for a story are different things — largely because reporters tend to think journalism should be supported simply because it’s journalism, Cohn said. This is where a little entrepreneurship and the art of the sale come in, teaching journalists to articulate their goal and show their work meets an identifiable need. Just as important as the pitch is knowing how much of a story to tease out when trying to get funding. Cohn said reporters need to show what an investigation could reveal instead of giving up all the information their story will hold. Why would anyone pay to fund your story if you tell them the whole thing during the pitch?

Becoming something of a salesman and being more transparent in reporting are part of a broader question the handbook will deal with: Is community-funded journalism right for you? Those considerations, along with the amount of time it takes to raise money for reporting and having regular interaction with the audience, are key to whether a reporter will be successful working in Spot.Us model, Peters said.

Just as important is being able to navigate the playing field. Peters said its important for journalists to be aware of the varying options for getting funding for the work, whether it’s Kachingle and Kickstarter or GoJournalism (for Canadians).

Cohn and Peters say they don’t expect the handbook to be the definitive resource on community-funded reporting, but they expect it can help people who are curious. (As far as the actual book part of the handbook, they expect to publish it online.) Cohn said a large part of what he does now is talk to others about how Spot.Us works and how it can be applied elsewhere. Now all of that will be in handy book form.

“The audience is — as far as we can tell — writing for reporters who want to work with people like Spot.us or GoJournalism, and don’t know what it’s like,” Peters said. “We can knock down barriers and misconceptions.”

September 27 2010

17:30

Block by Block: Once you’ve launched, what’s Phase 2 of a community news startup?

Jay Rosen called it “entrepreneur atomization overcome.” And, for an event that put nearly 100 formerly disconnected community news publishers together in one place, it’s an apt description. When those publishers got together in Chicago on Friday to share their experiences in publishing — to talk, in particular, about on-the-ground matters like audience engagement, advertising strategies, and, of course, revenue generation — there was a prevailing sentiment: Why didn’t we do this earlier?

The Block by Block Community News Summit, principally organized by the Reynolds Journalism Institute’s Michele McLellan (a former Nieman Fellow), was thankfully well-recorded, through means both ephemeral (its Twitter hashtag), slightly less so (its CoverItLive’d live blog), and much less so (its official blog). I don’t want to reinvent the wheel here, and if you’re at all interested in community news — and if you’re interested in the future of news in general, you probably should be — I highly recommend checking those out. In the meantime, though, here are some of the core ideas that emerged during the conference’s jam-packed day of panels, breakouts, and room-wide discussions.

Know — and grow — your role in the community

Community news sites, just like their larger and more established counterparts, need to be able to provide an answer when someone — a would-be reader, a potential advertiser or funder — asks, “So why do you exist?” As West Seattle Blog’s Tracy Record put it during the conference’s panel on engagement: “You have to think how different your publication is…what need is it filling?” Starting out, answering that question could involve filling a particular niche in terms of content, or simply stepping in to contribute community coverage that a local paper is no longer willing or able to provide. (As virtual attendee Whitney Parks noted in the conference’s Twitter stream, “ask your community what they want to know about and what issue they want covered.”) But the purpose has to be clear, and easily articulated. It’s the foundation of a site’s brand, which, in turn, is the foundation for its success or failure.

Embrace a new relationship with readers

During the conference’s closing session, Jay Rosen invoked that classic de Tocqueville line: “Newspapers make associations, and associations make newspapers.” In another context, and in another conference, that reference might have been laughably romantic hyperbole; at Block by Block, though, it fit right in. There was a sense — to engage in just a smidge of laughably romantic hyperbole myself — of symbolism in the room. In some ways, Rosen pointed out, the publishers in the room are going back to the early days of American journalism, in which the connection between publications and the communities they covered was implicit, and therefore intimate — and vice versa.

And that relationship, the conference’s modern-day publishers said again and again, should translate to sites’ interactions with advertisers and other members of their local business communities. As the Patterson Foundation, one of the conference’s sponsors, noted in a tweet, “Small sites have an opportunity to create a closer relationship with users b/c a brand is not standing in the way.” Mike Orren, from Dallas’s Pegasus News, agreed — if in a roundabout way. In the ability they have to rally people around particular events, he noted, “we’re a lot more like radio than like newspapers.” Local sites have the ability to summon people, to engage them — to join them together into communities. And they should leverage that power. As David Boraks of Davidson News put it: “We are not writing about the community anymore; we are writing for the community.”

Embrace a new relationship with advertisers

Local advertising is a $100 million business, GrowthSpur’s Mark Potts noted, and he said Google and AOL have more than 50 percent of that market. Their services are easy to use, but taking the time to develop relationships with local businesses — which is to say, fellow local businesses — is worth the investment, many publishers agreed. The key is humanizing the transaction. As Windy Citizen’s Brad Flora, a 2010 Knight News Challenge winner for a real-time advertising project, put it: “We don’t sell eyeballs — we sell introductions.” What that suggests is a shift, if a slight one, in the ancient wall dividing editorial and advertising. The Loop, a hyperlocal site in NYC, does sponsored stories — clearly identified as such. Santa Barbara’s EdHat prominently invites readers to advertise on the site, and, via a single button on the homepage, makes it easy for them to do that. And many publishers agree that word-of-mouth is key to success with advertisers. As Baristanet’s Liz George put it, “Your readers are probably your best salespeople.”

Branding matters more than traffic

Advertising is based on relationships. Brand matters more than abstractions like CPM and traffic, publishers agree. While national ad sales rely on CPM, “local advertisers cannot spell CPM,” said GrowthSpur’s Potts. And while metrics like traffic stats “provide a baseline for understanding,” Pegasus News’ Orren noted — proof that you’re generally legit as a news organization — they’re functionally meaningless for advertisers. “There’s actually an inefficiency in the market,” Potts noted. Because they don’t understand CPM — mention it, and “they’ll go running from the room.” West Seattle Blog’s Tracy Record agreed. “Advertisers don’t care about metrics,” she said, “but they do care about your mission.” Convince them of your mission — and your reputation — and, she said, “they’ll buy ads to support you.”

Collaboration will lead to participation

Collaboration isn’t just a way to get more and better content for a site; it’s also a way to inspire engagement among readers. As OJR put it, tweeting a comment from Dave Cohn, “One key to engaging=collaboration w/audience and others says @digidave. Actually attracts others to participate.” And that’s true for the local sites themselves. Several participants expressed the desire to continue the conversations at other conferences, and online. They’ve made it through Phase 1, the creation stage.

But as VTDigger’s Anne Galloway put it during the conference’s wrap-up session, “We need a Phase 2 guidebook.” The publishers want a systematized way to share information and best practices. During the conference, there was a wealth of wisdom in the room; participants agreed in their desire to aggregate that wisdom. “It would be good to have tipsheets,” Galloway said. It would also be good, they agreed, to continue the conversation via further conferences. The Block by Block participants are already planning a meetup at next month’s Online News Association conference, during which they’ll consider more ways to consider the conversation; here’s hoping even more good things will come from that.

July 30 2010

17:57

Learning From Failure in Community-Building at Missouri

news21 small.jpg

Education content on MediaShift is sponsored by Carnegie-Knight News21, an alliance of 12 journalism schools in which top students tell complex stories in inventive ways. See tips for spurring innovation and digital learning at Learn.News21.com.

I recently had an opportunity that is rarely handed to a journalism school professor: The chance to be a member of the inaugural class of the Reynolds Journalism Institute Fellows in the 2008-09 school year.

I already have a unique job. As an associate professor at the Missouri School of Journalism, I am also a new media director at the university-owned NBC-affiliate, KOMU-TV. I teach new media and I manage its production in a professional newsroom that is staffed with students. (We have a professional promotions, production and sales department just like any other television news station.)

Screen shot 2010-07-29 at 8.50.40 AM.png

I had a big idea back in 2007. I wanted to find a way to bring multiple newsrooms together to make it easier for news consumers to learn about their candidates leading up to election day. I wanted to partner with the other newsrooms owned by the University of Missouri: KBIA-FM (the local NPR station) and the Columbia Missourian (the daily morning paper in town). I wanted to plan for the big election in November 2008 and had already tried a similar project during the mid-term 2006 November election season.

Smart Decision '08

In 2006, we put a lot of content into one place but it was all hand-coded. I won't go into the nit-picky details. What I will tell you is it was time consuming and almost impossible to keep up to date as three newsrooms populated the site. I wanted automation and simple collaboration so the site could make it easier for news consumers to learn about information without worrying about where it came from. Information first, newsroom second. In the end, news consumers would end up using all of the newsrooms' information instead of just one or none.

I launched the Smart Decision '08 site and went into my RJI fellowship with a plan to complete my goal. I had already started building a new website that would collect RSS feeds of each newsroom's politically branded content. I had a small group of web managers tag each story that arrived into our site and categorize it under the race and candidate names mentioned in the news piece. It was a relatively simple process.

Unfortunately, our site was not simple. It was not clean and it was hand built by students with my oversight. It did not have a welcoming user experience. It did not encourage participation. I had a vision, but I lacked the technical ability to create a user-friendly site. I figured the content would rule and people would come to it. Not a great assumption.

Back in 2008, I still had old-school thoughts in my head. I thought media could lead the masses by informing voters who were hungry for details about candidates. I thought a project's content was more important than user experience. I thought I knew what I was talking about.

We did find a way to gather up some participation on the night of the big November 2008 election. We invited the general public to a viewing party where they could watch multiple national broadcasts, eat free food and participate in a live town forum during a four-hour live webcast we produced in the Reynolds Journalism Institute building.

We brought four newsrooms together in a separate environment where we produced web-only content while each newsroom produced its own content for air or print. We had a Twitter watch desk, a blog watch desk and insights from all kinds of people in the area. You can see a very quick video that captures some of the experience of that night:

Assumptions About the Audience

But in the end, my project was a failure.

Still, without that failure, I would not have learned so much.

You see, I came into this project with the idea that I was progressive. I was thinking about the future of journalism. I was going to change it all. But it all started out with a very old view of journalism: I made assumptions about my audience.

  • I assumed people wanted the information I was collecting.
  • I assumed the online audience wanted to take the time to dig into the information I was collecting for them.
  • I assumed the audience wanted to participate in a new space I created for them.
  • I assumed the newsrooms that were partners in the project would promote the site without any prompting.

My assumptions killed my project. I had invested so much time into the project that I had to finish it. I arrived into the fellowship with a work in progress and I wasn't going to stop -- even though I could see we were not getting the public participation. I created the content and hoped participation would follow.

The truth is that things work the other way around.

But I would not have learned that without my fellowship.

I worked with an amazing team of people. Jane Stevens and Matt Thompson led me into a new perspective in community building and content collection. I watched as we talked about community building. My biggest "a-ha moment" was when we discussed how community builders need a personal relationship with its first 1,000 members on a website. I realized that my Smart Decision project was doomed to fail from the start because I did not start with my community first. I expected the community to come to me. I needed to go to them.

I also learned a major project needs two managers: One to keep up with the content and one to make sure it gets promoted. That promotion needed to happen in each individual newsroom and in the public.

Being More Agile

During my fellowship, I also learned to be more agile. These days, when I start a project, I'm ready to move on to the next idea a lot faster. I launch multiple ideas at the same time and see what floats. I also cherish the relationships I form with members of the community. Instead of creating many different sites, I'm bringing the information to where they are. I'm focused on delivering information to Twitter and Facebook. I have news employees working on blogs, but most people go to those posts through Facebook. They do not go directly to the sites or from our main news web page.

Screen shot 2010-07-29 at 8.52.40 AM.png

I'm constantly learning as a news manager. But I will always cherish the time I had as a fellow because I was allowed to fail. The Smart Decision project was not something I could have managed while I was also in charge of a newsroom. It was an experiment that taught me how not to launch a new website.

I learned Drupal sites can be awesome if you know what you are doing. (I did not know what I was doing until it was too late). I also learned that my job in my newsroom does not make it easy to launch major multiple-newsroom projects. I am not sure if I will do it again in 2012. I would like to, but I'll need to consult my community first.

Jennifer Reeves worked in television news for the majority of her career. In the last six years, she has moved from traditional journalist to non-traditional thinker about journalism and education. Jen is currently the New Media Director at KOMU-TV and komu.com. At the same time, she is an associate professor at the Missouri School of Journalism and was a part of the inaugural class of Reynolds Journalism Institute fellows (2008-09).

news21 small.jpg

Education content on MediaShift is sponsored by Carnegie-Knight News21, an alliance of 12 journalism schools in which top students tell complex stories in inventive ways. See tips for spurring innovation and digital learning at Learn.News21.com.

This is a summary. Visit our site for the full post ».

March 17 2010

17:27

Deal brokering: Perhaps America’s next top (news business) model?

[Our friend Michael Skoler wrote this post for Mizzou's Reynolds Journalism Institute, where he's currently a fellow. It's on deal brokering — sites like Groupon or Woot that connect sellers to buyers by offering time-limited deals. He thinks it could be a big part of news organizations' financial future, and we thought you'd be interested in seeing it. —Josh]

How does this sound? A million-dollar revenue stream that requires only a salesperson or two, some web support and off-the-shelf e-commerce and newsletter tools? It caught my eye. And I’m suggesting you steal the idea for your local news operation fast before national competitors own the market.

The idea is deal brokering. You use your knowledge of the local scene, your brand and your contacts to negotiate group deals with local businesses from bars to restaurants to dry cleaners. The businesses offer big one-time discounts to attract new customers, your audience gets access to great deals, and you broker the deal on your site and get a substantial cut of the money. It’s already happening around the country.

Online startups like Groupon and Living Social offer one local deal a day, which is conveniently pushed to you through e-mail or cell phone.

Each deal is usually 50 percent off or more, good for just one day, and specific to your city. I’ve seen deals on organic food, massages, hair styling, dry cleaning, acupuncture, dental checkups, online book printing, gym memberships, belly dancing classes, and much more. Yet the most common deals, and probably the best sellers, are restaurant, bar and entertainment gift certificates. I have yet to see a deal repeated.

The beauty of the model is its simplicity. It is easy and fun to see one deal a day, presented with humor or sparkle. I dislike lists of deals provided by groups like Travelzoo.com or Restaurant.com that require combing through offers to see if any are relevant. And the new deal services make it easy to buy the day’s deal and share it with friends. They also provide incentives to get people to share the deals through their social networks.

Here’s how a single deal with a local restaurant works from the customer’s perspective. After registering for a daily email or text message, one day I see a $65 gift certificate for a restaurant I’ve been hearing about — price is $30. I click it, buy it with Paypal or a credit card and receive a certificate with a unique deal code. I go to the restaurant, show my gift certificate on paper or cell phone, and have a great meal (since food always tastes better at a 50%-plus discount.) I can only use the certificate once, so I order a little more than its value and pay tax, tip and the amount over $65.

Now, here’s the value from the restaurant owner’s perspective. I pay nothing upfront for marketing to thousands of people in my area. I receive half the money collected by the deal-brokering organization. Typically, I can count on maybe 25-30 percent of the people who buy the certificates to never show up. The money I receive should cover my actual costs for food and drink for the 70-75 percent who redeem the certificates. Any spending over $65 gives me income at my regular prices. My restaurant is busy, word-of-mouth buzz rises, my serving staff get tips on the full bill and some of those new customers come back again at full prices.

Now, here’s how it looks from your news organization’s perspective as the deal broker. I have a valuable new service to offer that can bring people to my site and get them registered for a daily e-mail list. I have a valuable new service to offer businesses in my area — risk-free marketing. On top of that, I get half of the money that comes in on each deal (a percent that can be negotiated up or down.) As we’ll see in a minute, that money can be huge. Plus, I build loyalty and traffic for my site, as folks spread word on the deals through their social networks. And my costs are reasonable – one salesperson or two to manage the program and some IT support for the email newsletter app and ecommerce page on my site. My fulfillment involves sending a receipt with a unique deal code to each buying customer (a feature of e-commerce tools) and sending a list of names and deal codes to the restaurant so the owner can check off codes as they are used. (Don’t want those codes used twice!)

And what’s the income? A restaurant in Minneapolis, Minnesota offered the deal described above through Groupon and 860 people bought it. The deal earned a total of $25,800. The restaurant got $12,900, Groupon got $12,900 and the deal buyers potentially saved over $30,000. According to Mark Desky, vice president of marketing for Groupon, deals have ranged in cost from $3 for quick food restaurants to $450 to rent an exotic car for a day. He says one deal for tickets to the Chicago Auto Show attracted 15,000 buyers.

The businesses that I spoke with loved this deal experience. They received actual money, rather than being asked to provide free gift certificates in exchange for ad spots or radio mentions of their businesses. They immediately see the results of the promotion. And they say some customers are coming back again.

If your news organization can average a deal like the restaurant example above every weekday excluding holidays, you can earn over $2.5 million annually ($12,900 x 200 days). For a small organization in a small market, maybe you average 86 sales a day (one tenth of the volume) or $258,000 annually before expenses. And, of course, you get the added benefit of building your online community and extending your relationships with local businesses.

I’ve described one system. But you can be a deal broker in many ways. Ask your audience what they want to buy and then go out and cut a volume deal with a computer seller, a broadband provider, an airline, a theater, grocery stores, events… anything. You get closer to your audience and learn what they want, which is helpful in selling other advertising. Or ask local businesses if they bought too many goods and want help clearing the inventory fast. For local startup news organizations, even occasional sales like this might add desperately needed cash and a new revenue stream.

There are many online or mobile coupon services, from Yowza to Coupon Sherpa. But deal-brokering is different. It is about community and buzz and that means strong local news organizations potentially have an advantage over national startups. They know their audience and their market, have relationships with local businesses, know which businesses are high-quality and buzz-inducing, and can promote the deals and the brokering service on their media platforms, whether in print, radio or online.

In fact, Living Social partners with The Washington Post, placing its deals on the paper’s online “Going Out Guide.” Living Social CEO Tim O’Shaughnessy says his company is interested in local news media partnerships. And he argues that companies like his have an advantage in deal brokering, since Living Social produces some of the most popular Facebook applications and knows how to serve online communities. O’Shaughnessy says deal brokering involves customer service — something he feels is thin for local news outlets. (Folks interested in exploring partnership should contact Jake Maas.)

Groupon says it has a patent pending on its model. But patents must be for products or processes that are unique and it’s hard to see how Groupon can claim to have invented group buying or online sales of discounted products and services. While executives at both Groupon and Living Social agree the model seems straightforward to copy, they point out there is an advantage to being the first to build a deal community in a town. Businesses and buyers like to participate when they see many people in the network. And both companies offer incentives to people to sign up others in their social networks.

Groupon is already in 40 cities; Living Social is in 9. Both are moving fast to enter others. You could offer one advantage to businesses by paying them faster — Groupon pays in three chunks over 60 days. Living Social says it pays within 10 days.

Instead of watching startups take over yet more of the advertising that now goes to news organizations, let’s move fast to seize this opportunity. I would love to hear your thoughts on what it would take to implement this for your news site and what other forms of deal brokering might excite your audience.

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl