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

December 14 2011

17:43

Journalism Education Roundup, Dec. 14, 2011

Education content on MediaShift is brought to you by: 


USCad68x68.gif Innovation. Reputation. Opportunity. Get all the advantages journalism and PR pros need to help put their future in focus. Learn more about USC Annenberg's Master's programs.
The best stories across the web on journalism education


1. Some quick lessons for student journalists: Penn State scandal (Newspaper and Online News)

2. Don't study in the j-school after midnight...or else (J-School Buzz)

3. YouTube offers all schools education-only link, beefs up K-12 content (MindShift)

4. Friendly advice for teachers: Beware of Facebook (NPR)

5. Tips for teachers on modeling online courses after social games (EDU News)

Get the weekly Journalism Education Roundup email from MediaShift



Education content on MediaShift is brought to you by: 

USCad68x68.gif Innovation. Reputation. Opportunity. Get all the advantages journalism and PR pros need to help put their future in focus. Learn more about USC Annenberg's Master's programs.

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

December 16 2010

18:14

Going beyond the story: journalism, storytelling and computer games

The final session of news:rewired  - which was focused on the place of game play in journalism – was the one that, more than any other, got “beyond the story”.

In an earlier session, Alex Wood, Molly Flatt and others had talked about storytelling being a key skill for journalists. But for interactive producer Philip Trippenbach, storytelling is only one tool in a journalist’s arsenal. He said that non-narrative forms can often be a more effective way of disseminating news in some cases.

For example, climate change. Climate change is not a story, Trippenbach said. Neither is the financial crisis or coalition politics. These “systems” suit non-narrative forms. But, he added, when reporting the effects of these systems on people and communities, storytelling might be more appropriate than non-narrative means.

In a nutshell – stories must be microcosms, localised and personalised, but the best way to understand how wider systems work is by playing with them, Trippenbach said.

A practical example of this in the session was Scoop! a role playing game about newsgathering in which teams of newshounds chased fictional politicians during a mock general election. Alex Fleetwood, of social gaming maker Hide&Seek, said that Scoop helps people understand “the games” of media and politics by allowing them to take on role of the journalist or politician.

“As a journalist, the importance of stories and narrative has always been drummed into me. It was interesting to see a different approach to explaining data and systems,” he said.

See a liveblog of the entire session from Wannabe Hacks at this link.

You can find video footage from the day on this site and on BBC College of Journalism YouTube channel. Check back to this post for footage of this session.

October 14 2010

16:00

Badges? We might need some stinkin’ badges! Badgeville tries to bring a little gameplay to the news

Is good content alone enough to build reader loyalty? Or could adding a little gameplay — and some circular icons — turn casual readers into engaged ones?

Early next week, The Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News’ philly.com will launch a virtual rewards program to build reader engagement. Registered users will earn points each time they visit the site, read an article, or post a comment. These points will translate into a series of virtual trophies, which will appear alongside the articles the users read and be displayed next to their usernames whenever they comment on a story.

Philly.com’s partner in this project is a tech startup called Badgeville, which won the audience choice award at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference earlier this month. The company’s name puns on FarmVille, the Facebook game which convinced as many as 85 million users to trade virtual vegetables from virtual farms. Badgeville uses similar social gaming techniques, like awarding points, trophies, and badges, to help web sites retain users. This is not a new idea: The Huffington Post already rolled out their own system of badges this April. But Badgeville is expecting newspaper and media sites to become some of their most enthusiastic clients.

As users grab their news from the swiftly moving streams of Twitter or Facebook, homepages can seem increasingly irrelevant, and traffic spikes from successful stories soon melt away. Two years ago, the focus of philly.com execs was on pageviews, said Yoni Greenbaum, philly.com’s vice president of product development. Now, as at many newspapers, what matters at philly.com isn’t just clicks, but engagement. How long are visitors spending at the site? How often do they return?

I spoke to Badgeville’s CEO and founder Kris Duggan about the company’s overall strategy for news sites, as well as to Greenbaum and Christopher Branin about why and how Philly.com is adding points and trophies.

Building on the lessons of social gaming

Duggan told me that he doesn’t think news sites should move beyond just adding Facebook widgets to their pages as their social media strategy. “You’re just promoting Facebook, which is kind of your competition,” he said. Instead, he thinks news web sites need to leverage the same kinds of tactics that make Facebook so additive. The goal is for users to spend time as part of the news site’s own community, rather than just viewing the organization’s content occasionally through the lens of another site. (The New York Times, of course, has already implemented their own on-site version of this, Times People, which has yet to really take off.)

In order to encourage users to hang around, Badgeville can create built-in frameworks to incentivize any kind of behavior with any kind of reward, Duggan said. Rewards might be completely virtual, like shiny pixel trophies, or more real, like coupons or access to premium content. The key, Duggan said, is “communicating with the user at the right moment in time to drive behavior.”

What news sites need to do, Duggan said, is build on incentives that have worked elsewhere on the web — anything from the badges that powered Foursquare, as TechCrunch suggested, to the little profile completion bar on LinkedIn that tells users that they’ve only filled in 60 percent of their profiles.

“I really do believe that people want to see their face on web sites,” Duggan said. News sites right now use their sites to highlight their content. Duggan suggests they might need to become more like Facebook, and highlight their loyal users, as well. Why not add a widget with the faces of the users who have emailed the most stories, he told me, as well as a typical “most emailed list” of stories getting a lot of attention?

While Badgeville bills itself as a loyalty and rewards system, at the core, Duggan said: “We think of us as an analytics product…I don’t think they [news sites] really understand who their audience is. I don’t think they have the analytics to say, ‘here are our high-loyalty users, and our medium-loyalty users.’ They don’t know who’s sharing, they don’t know who’s commenting, they don’t know who the high-quality commenters are. They might have little tools for each of these things, but none of these things are unified…We think the next generation of analytics is actually influencing outcomes and changing behavior, and we think we’re in the forefront of that.”

Fitting gameplay into a newspaper context

For philly.com, partnering with Badgeville is a substantial investment. While Greenbaum said the monetary terms of their partnership were private, he did say that among philly.com’s third-party partnerships, it was “in the top three” in terms of cost.

Philly.com’s Badgeville roll-out, tentatively slated for Tuesday, will start off with a very simple incentive system. Users will get one point for visiting the site, one point for reading an article, and one point for commenting. The trophies they are awarded will be generic ones from Badgeville’s trophy library, but the “badges,” awarded for certain milestones — like posting a given number of comments — have been custom designed for philly.com. Branin said Badgeville’s service includes some barriers to keep people from gaming the points system — users can only get a point for visiting the site once every half hour, for instance, and for commenting once per article.

Branin said that they hope the points system will convey status on the site’s more enthusiastic, dedicated readers and commentors, and that the system might have an impact on the commenting culture, as HuffPo’s badge system set out more deliberately to do. As they get initial feedback on how the system is working, they’ll continue to add incentives and rewards.

I asked both Greenbaum and Branin and Duggan about how they thought reporters would react to the new system. After all, Badgeville operates on the assumption that giving out digital gold coins will attract loyal readers in a way writing good stories won’t. To a certain segment of journalists, the ones who pounce on tech entrepreneurs for referring to articles generically as “content,” Badgeville is likely to look like another step towards the total trivialization of news.

“I don’t think we’ve done a really in-depth analysis in talking with our reporters on how they’re going to feel,” Branin said, adding later that he didn’t think readers would be clicking on stories just to earn points.

Greenbaum said he thought Badgeville was friendlier to reporters than other social media tools. “It’s not that an article will have a value attached to it. It won’t be: ‘1,000 people liked this article and 10,000 people didn’t'…It’s really a tool on the publisher level and not the reporter level,” Greenbaum said.

Greenbaum and Branin also noted that the information gained from the points-and-trophies strategy could be used to direct traffic to stories that might otherwise languish unread. Philly.com might create a special badge for people who read, say, land use and development articles, or other worthy reporting that doesn’t tend to draw a lot of eyeballs.

For his part, Duggan noted that implementing a Badgeville reward system won’t fix sites with bad content or no community. A news organization needs a certain amount of community already in place for the points and trophies to have an impact. Philly.com is using Badgeville to build on what they already have; last month, that was roughly 6 million unique visitors, 76 million page views, and nearly 70,000 comments. They will be watching how the system affects the outcome of the complex algorithm they use to measure engagement. (Right now, that equation spits out a score of 73/100 for sports content engagement on philly.com, and only about 30/100 engagement for news.)

On the other hand, Duggan said, “Right or wrong, it’s just how it is. Facebook and Twitter have transactionalized your relationship with content.” In a world where content is shared freely, and articles sleep into the stream and disappear, news sites need something to “suck people back” to their home pages, Duggan said. “If you don’t have a magnet to keep people there, you’re dead.”

August 27 2010

14:30

This Week in Review: ‘Mosques’ and SEO, Google’s search and social troubles, and a stateless WikiLeaks

[Every Friday, Mark Coddington sums up the week’s top stories about the future of news and the debates that grew up around them. —Josh]

Maintaining accuracy in an SEO-driven world: Apparently the future-of-news world isn’t immune to the inevitable dog days of August, because this week was one of the slowest in this corner of the web in the past year. There were still some interesting discussions simmering, so let’s take a look, starting with the political controversy du jour: The proposed construction of a Muslim community center in downtown Manhattan near the site of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center. I’m not going to delve into the politics of the issue, or even the complaints that this story is symptomatic of a shallow news media more concerned about drummed-up controversy than substantive issues. Instead, I want to focus on the decisions that news organizations have been making about what to call the project.

It has predominantly been called the “ground zero mosque,” though beginning about two weeks ago, some attention began being trained on news organizations — led most vocally by The New York Times and The Associated Press, which changed its internal label for the story — that wouldn’t use that phrase out of a concern for accuracy. The Village Voice used some Google searches to find that while there’s been an uptick in news sources’ use of the project’s proper names (Park51 and the Cordoba Center), “ground zero mosque” is still far and away the most common designation.

What’s most interesting about this discussion are the ideas about why a factually inaccurate term has taken such a deep root in coverage of the issue, despite efforts to refute it: The Village Voice pointed a finger at cable news, which has devoted the most time to the story, while the Online Journalism Review’s Brian McDermott pinpointed our news consumption patterns driven by “warp-speed skimming” and smart-phone headlines that make easy labels more natural for readers and editors.” Watery qualifiers like ‘near’ or ’so-called’ don’t stick in our brains as much, nor do they help a website climb the SEO ladder.”

Poynter ethicist Kelly McBride zeroed in on that idea of search-engine optimization, noting that the AP is being punished for their stand against the term “ground zero mosque” by not appearing very highly on the all-important news searches for that phrase. In order to stay relevant to search engines, news organizations have to continue using an inaccurate term once it’s taken hold, she concluded. In response, McBride suggested pre-emptively using factchecking resources to nip misconceptions in the bud. “Now that Google makes it impossible to move beyond our distortions — even when we know better — we should be prepared,” she said.

Google’s search and social takes shots: Google takes more than few potshots every week on any number of subjects, but this week, several of them were related to some intriguing future-of-news issues we’ve been talking about regularly here at the Lab, so I thought I’d highlight them a bit. Ex-Salon editor Scott Rosenberg took Google News to task for its placement of an Associated Content article at the top of search results on last week’s Dr. Laura Schlessinger controversy. Associated Content is the giant “content farm” bought earlier this year by Yahoo, and its Dr. Laura article appears to be a particularly mediocre constructed article cynically designed solely to top Google’s ranking for “Dr. Laura n-word.”

Rosenberg takes the incident as a sign that reliability of Google News’ search results has begun to be eclipsed by content producers’ guile: “When Google tells me that this drivel is the most relevant result, I can’t help thinking, the game’s up.” The Lab’s Jim Barnett also questioned Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s recent articulation of the company’s idea of automating online serendipity, wondering how a “serendipity algorithm” might shape or limit our worldviews as Google prefers.

Google’s social-media efforts also took a few more hits, with Slate’s Farhad Manjoo conducting a postmortem on Google Wave, homing in on its ill-defined purpose and unnecessary complexity. Google should have positioned Wave as an advanced tool for sophisticated users, Manjoo argued, but the company instead clumsily billed it as the possible widespread successor to email and instant messenging. Meanwhile, Adam Rifkin of GigaOM criticized the company’s acquisition of the social app company Slide (and its social-media attempts in general), advising Google to buy companies whose products fit well into its current offerings, rather than chasing after the social-gaming industry — which he said “feels like it’s about to collapse on itself.”

WikiLeaks, stateless news and transparency: The saga of the open-source leaking website WikiLeaks took a very brief, bizarre turn this weekend, when reports emerged early Saturday that founder Julian Assange was wanted by Swedish authorities for rape, then later that day prosecutors announced he was no longer a suspect. The New York Times provided some great background on Assange’s cat-and-mouse games with various world governments, including the United States, which is reportedly considering charging him under the Espionage Act for WikiLeaks’ release last month of 92,000 pages of documents regarding the war in Afghanistan.

No one really had any idea what to make of this episode, and few were bold enough to make any strong speculations publicly. Two bloggers explored the (possible) inner workings of the situation, with Nicholas Mead using it to argue that catching Assange isn’t exactly going to stop WikiLeaks — as NYU professor Jay Rosen noted last month, WikiLeaks is the first truly stateless news organization, something only permitted by the structure of the web.

That slippery, stateless nature extends to WikiLeaks’ funding, which The Wall Street Journal focused on this week in a fine feature. Unlike the wide majority of news organizations, there is virtually no transparency to WikiLeaks’ funding, though the Journal did piece together a few bits of information: The site has raised $1 million this year, much of its financial network is tied to Germany’s Wau Holland Foundation, and two unnamed American nonprofits serve as fronts for the site.

Hyperlocal news and notes: A few hyperlocal news-related ideas and developments worth passing along: Sarah Hartley, who works on The Guardian’s hyperlocal news efforts, wrote a thoughtful post attempting to define “hyperlocal” in 10 characteristics. Hyperlocal, she argues, is no longer defined by a tight geographical area, but by an attitude. She follows with a list of defining aspects, such as obsessiveness, fact/opinion blending, linking and community participation. It’s a great list, though it seems Hartley may be describing the overarching blogging ethos more so than hyperlocal news per se. (Steve Yelvington, for one, says the term is meaningless.)

Brad Flora at PBS MediaShift provided a helpful list of blogs for hyperlocal newsies to follow. (Disclosure: The Lab is one of them.) And two online media giants made concrete steps in long-expected moves toward hyperlocal news: Microsoft’s Bing launched its first hyperlocal product with a restaurant guide in Portland, and Yahoo began recruiting writers for a local news site in the San Francisco area.

Reading roundup: Despite the slow news week, there’s no shortage of thoughtful pieces on stray subjects that are worth your time. Here’s a quick rundown:

— Spot.Us founder David Cohn wrote an illuminating post comparing journalists’ (particularly young ones’) current search for a way forward in journalism to the ancient Israelites’ 40 years of wandering in the desert. TBD’s Steve Buttry, a self-described “old guy,” responded that it may not take a generation to find the next iteration of journalism but said his generation has been responsible for holding innovation back: “We might make it out of the desert, but I think our generation has blown our chance to lead the way.”

— A couple of interesting looks at developing stories online: Terry Heaton posited that one reason for declining trust in news organizations is their focus on their own editorial voice to the detriment of the public’s understanding (something audiences see in stark relief when comparing coverage of developing news), and Poynter’s Steve Myers used the Steven Slater story to examine how news spreads online.

— At The Atlantic, Tim Carmody wrote a fantastic overview of the pre-web history of reading.

— In an argument that mirrors the discussions about the values of the new news ecosystem, former ESPN.com writer Dan Shanoff gave a case for optimism about the current diffused, democratized state of sports media.

— Another glass-half-full post: Mike Mandel broke down journalism job statistics and was encouraged by what he found.

— Finally, for all the students headed back to class right now, the Online Journalism Review’s Robert Niles has some of the best journalism-related advice you’ll read all year.

March 19 2010

15:00

This Week in Review: Loads of SXSW ideas, Pew’s state of the news, and a dire picture of local TV news

[Every Friday, Mark Coddington sums up the week’s top stories about the future of news and the debates that grew up around them. —Josh]

A raft of ideas at SXSW: The center of the journalism-and-tech world this week has been Austin, Texas, site of the annual conference South by Southwest. The part we’re most concerned about — SXSW Interactive — ran from last Friday to Tuesday. The New York Times’ David Carr gives us a good feel for the atmosphere, and Poynter’s Steve Myers asked 15 journalists what they took away from SXSW, and it makes for a good roundup. A handful of sessions there grabbed the attention of a lot of the journalism thinkers on the web, and I’ll try to take you on a semi-quick tour:

— We saw some conversation last week leading up to Matt Thompson’s panel on “The Future of Context,” and that discussion continued throughout this week. We had some great description of the session, between Steve Myers’ live blog and Elise Hu’s more narrative summary. As Hu explains, Thompson and his fellow panelists, NYU prof Jay Rosen and Apture founder Tristan Harris, looked at why much of our news lacks context, why our way of producing news doesn’t make sense (we’re still working with old values in a new ecosystem), and how we go about adding context to a largely episodic news system.

Michele McLellan of the Knight Digital Media Center echoes the panelists’ concerns, and Lehigh prof Jeremy Littau pushes the concept further, connecting it with social gaming. Littau doesn’t buy the idea that Americans don’t have time for news, since they obviously have plenty of time for games that center on collecting things, like Facebook’s Farmville. He’d like to see news organizations try to provide that missing context in a game environment, with the gamer’s choices informed by “blasts of information, ideally pulled from well reported news stories, that the user can actually apply to the situation in a way that increases both recall and understanding.”

— NYU’s web culture guru, Clay Shirky, gave a lecture on the value that can be squeezed out of public sharing. Matt Thompson has a wonderful live blog of the hourlong session, and Liz Gannes of GigaOM has a solid summary, complete with a few of the made-for-Twitter soundbites Shirky has a knack for, like “Abundance breaks more things than scarcity does,” and “Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution.”

Once again, Jeremy Littau pulls Shirky’s ideas together and hones in on their implications for journalism in a thoughtful post, concluding that while the future of journalism is bright, its traditional players are clueless. “I just don’t see a future for them when they’re trying to protect information as a scarce commodity,” he writes. “The scarcity, in truth, is in media companies trying to create civic goods via user sharing.”

danah boyd, who studies social media and youth culture for Microsoft Research, gave a well-received talk on privacy and publicity online. It doesn’t have much to do directly with journalism, but it’s a brilliant, insightful glimpse into how web culture works. Here’s a rough crib of the talk from boyd, and a summary from TechCrunch. There’s a bunch of cool nuggets in there, like boyd’s description of the “inversion of defaults” in privacy and publicity online. Historically, conversations were private by default and public by effort, but conversations online have become public by default and private by effort.

— One of the big journalism-related stories from SXSW has been AOL and Seed’s efforts to employ a not-so-small army of freelancers to cover each of the 2,000 or so bands at the festival. The Daily Beast has the best summary of the project and its goals, and TechCrunch talks about it with former New York Times writer Saul Hansell, who’s directing the effort. Silicon Alley Insider noted midweek that they wouldn’t reach the goal of 2,000 interviews.

One of the big questions about AOL and Seed’s effort is whether they’re simply creating another kind of “content mill” that many corners of the web have been decrying over the past few months. Music writer Leor Galil criticized it as crass, complaining of the poor quality of some of the interviews: “AOL is shelling out cash and providing great space for potentially terrible content.” David Cohn of Spot.Us compared AOL to the most notorious content farm, Demand Media, concluding that journalists shouldn’t be worried about them exploiting writers, but should be worried about their threat to the journalism industry as a whole.

— One other session worth noting: “Cult of the Amateur” author and digital dystopian Andrew Keen gave a sobering talk called “Is Innovation Fair?” As Fast Company’s Francine Hardaway aptly summarized, he pointed to the downsides of our technological advances and argued that if SXSW is a gathering of the winners in the cultural shift, we have to remember that there are losers, too.

Pew’s paywall findings: The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism released its annual “State of the News Media” study, and it’s a smorgasbord of statistics about every major area of journalism, from print to TV to the web. A summary of summaries: The study’s six major emerging trends (expanded on by Poynter’s Bill Mitchell), some of its key statistical findings, and the Columbia Journalism Review’s seven eye-popping statistics from the study.

The biggest headline for most people was the study’s finding that only seven percent of the Americans who get their news online say they’d spring for a favorite news source’s content if it went behind a paywall. (The AP writeup has a few more statistics and some analysis about online loyalty and advertising.) Jeff Jarvis, a longtime paywall opponent, wondered why newspapers are spending so much time on the paywall issue instead of their “dreadful” engagement and loyalty online. Former WSJer Jason Fry breaks down the study to conclude that the basic unit of online journalism is not the site but the article — thus undermining the primary mindset behind the paywall.

Poynter’s Rick Edmonds, who writes the study’s section on newspapers each year, said he’s done with dead-and-dying as an industry theme. Instead, he said, the problem with most newspapers is that they are becoming insubstantial, shells of their former selves. “They lack the heft to be thrown up the front porch or to satisfy those readers still willing to pay for a good print newspaper.” Editor & Publisher pulled some of the more depressing statistics from Edmonds’ chapter. Yet Lee Rainie, who co-authored the study’s section on online economics, said he was still optimistic about journalism’s future.

A bleak look at local TV news: Another fascinating journalism study was released late last week by USC researchers that found disappointing, though not necessarily surprising, trends in Los Angeles local TV news: Crime, sports, weather and teasers dominate, with very little time for business and government. USC’s press release has some highlights, and co-author Martin Kaplan offers a quick, pointed video overview of the report, concluding with a barb about wants and needs: “I want ice cream. I need a well-balanced meal. Apparently the people of Los Angeles want 22 seconds about their local government. Maybe if they got more than that, they’d want more than that.”

FCC Commissioner Michael Copps was “flat-out alarmed” by the study and vowed some vague form of action. Jay Rosen was ruthless in his criticism on Twitter, and Los Angeles Times critic James Rainey used the study as the basis for a particularly well-written evisceration of local TV news. Rainey had the most promising suggestion, proposing that a cash-strapped TV station find a newspaper, nonprofit or j-school interested in partnering with it to build an audience around more substantive, in-depth TV news.

The iPad, magazines and advertising: As we expected, lots and lots of people have been ordering iPads since they went on sale — 50,000 in the first two hours and 152,000 in three days, according to estimates. We’re also continuing to get word of news organizations’ and publishers’ plans for apps; this week we heard that the AP will have an app when the iPad rolls out next month, and saw a nifty interactive feature for the digital Viv Mag. (The Guardian has a roundup of other video iPad demos that have come out so far.)

SXSW also had at least three sessions focusing on media companies and the iPad: 1) One on the iPad and the magazine industry focused largely on advertising — here’s a DigitalBeat summary and deeper thoughts by Reuters’ Felix Salmon on why advertising on the iPad could be more immersive and valuable than in print; 2) Another focusing on the iPad and Wired magazine, with Salmon opining on why the iPad is a step backwards in the open-web world; 3) And a third on iPad consumption habits and their effects on various industries.

Reading roundup: One ongoing discussion, two pieces of news and one smart analysis:

The conversation sparked by Netscape co-founder Marc Andreesen’s advice for newspapers to forget the printed paper and go all-in with online news continued this week, with Frederic Filloux noting that “there are alternatives to envisioning the transformation of the print media as only a choice between euthanizing the paper product or putting it on life support.” Steve Yelvington looked at setting up separate print and online divisions (been there, done that, he says), Tim Kastelle spun Andreesen and Google’s Hal Varian off into more thoughtful suggestions for newspapers, and Dorian Benkoil took the opportunity to marvel at how much things have changed for the better.

The first piece of news was Twitter’s launch at SXSW of @anywhere, a simple program that allows other sites to implement some of Twitter’s features. TechCrunch gave a quick overview of what it could do, CNET’s Caroline McCarthy looked at its targeting of Facebook Connect, and GigaOM’s Mathew Ingram was unimpressed.

Second, ABC News execs revealed that they’re planning on putting up an online paywall by this summer. The Guardian and paidContent have detailed interviews with ABC News digital chief Paul Slavin.

And finally, newspaper vet Alan Mutter examines the often-heard assertion that small newspapers are weathering the industry’s storm better than their larger counterparts. He nails all the major issues at play for small papers, both the pluses (lack of competition and broadband access, loyal readership) and the minuses (rapidly aging population, some local economies lacking diversity). He ultimately advises small papers to ensure their future success by innovating in order to become indispensable to their communities: “To the degree publishers emphasize short-term profits over long-term engagement, they will damage their franchises — and open the way to low-cost online competitors.”

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