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

June 11 2011

14:17

In Google's app store: "Read WSJ" stories behind the paywall subscription free

BetaBeat :: One of the more interesting dichotomies to develop in the software ecosystem over the past few years has been the open nature of Google’s app stores versus the closed and controlled marketplace maintained by Apple. A new app in the Chrome store, Read WSJ, lets users get access to stories protected by the paywall without paying for a subscription the Wall Street Journal. It’s the perfect example of the sort of viral application that a permissive marketplace fosters.

Continue to read Ben Popper, www.betabeat.com

May 28 2011

20:16

App search marketing - 89pc of Chomp users conduct functional searches, only 11pc for names

Chomp is a search engine for iPhone and Android apps and was launched January 2010. Its proprietary algorithm learns the functions and topics of apps. Chomp users can search based on what apps do, not just what they’re called. The service stores and analyzes data from each app search query to better understand how users interact. A great resource for any app maker who wants to optimize marketing effords.

Clipped from: chomp.com (share this clip)

Chomp's App Search Analytics is a collection of data that showcases what Chomp users are searching for and downloading in a given month

Visit the Chomp website Chomp

Search analytics - Chomp app charts chomp.com

November 17 2010

15:00

The Magic 8 Ball of News: The Future-Jobs-O-Matic

American Public Media has built a better Magic 8 Ball. Okay, not exactly, but it’s just as fun to shake things up on the Future-Jobs-O-Matic game and find out your destiny. And better than the 8 Ball, it’ll tell you what your salary will be.

Released by the team at public radio’s Marketplace, the Future-Jobs-O-Matic is a game-ified (or maybe app-ified) way of breaking out data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Specifically they’re breaking down the Occupational Outlook Handbook, the guide released every two years by the bureau outlining the jobs and industries that are expected to grow.

The guide is already available and searchable online (or in paperback, weighing in at more than 800 pages). But the team at Marketplace figured they could make the information more accessible — and maybe even fun — for their audience.

Taking a spin on the Future Jobs-O-Matic is as easy and familiar as picking a flight on a travel website. You start with a career field, ranging from agriculture and manufacturing to transportation and professional, and narrow it down to specific occupations and ultimately your Job of The Future.

Going several steps better than a high school guidance counselor, the Future Jobs-O-Matic provides a competitive outlook — will your field grow or shrink? — the change in job numbers over a decade, and the median income for 2010.

(The outlook for reporter? “News tip: Keep your eyes open.” For an author/writer/editor? “The internet could be your best chance.” For a network administrator? “Your future is bright. Really bright.”)

I emailed Adriene Hill, a multimedia reporter working on sustainability issues at Marketplace who worked on the project. She said displaying the labor data as an interactive feature gives the audience a better way of understanding information than a more straightforward story.

“We wanted users to engage with the information — to play with it,” she wrote.

The release of the game was timed to coincide with the fall election, as jobs were expected to be a big issue. But with Marketplace’s broader economic focus, the game fits into their continuing coverage on the recession. Hill told me it took around a month to develop and package the game, and similar to most data journalism, one of the larger tasks was figuring out what information was important to the public.

Hill said the game serves a basic function of helping people consider potential jobs, but also provide perspective on the economy. The editorial goals of the game, Hill said, were to examine future jobs, identify trends causing changes, and to “show that some of these changes in the labor market are unrelated to the claims and promises of politicians.”

American Public Media has a history with news games, having previously released Consumer Consequences, which shows the impact of society’s consumption habits on the environment, and Budget Hero, where players could try their hand at spending and cutting the federal budget. Hill said news games need to go beyond just good design and user experience — they need to fulfill the standard of news. “It also needs to meet some need the audience has. In our case, we wanted something simple that would be fast to produce and look at serious, long-term trends (trends that actually are depressing in some cases) and present them in a fun way,” she wrote.

August 12 2010

21:27

Marketplace brings a Twittery approach to the explainer

When you listen to Marketplace, American Public Media’s finance-focused show, you generally expect to hear expert, and even entertaining, takes on the day’s economic news. On Wednesday’s show, though, the typical quick-and-dirty met…quick-and-funny. Marketplace offered a segment pretty much summarizing the world financial situation…in pretty much three sentences. Listen to the whole thing — all two minutes of it — here; but the gist of it, per the transcript, is this:

Paddy Hirsch: People are worried about the local economy. They think gold is the safest investment, so that’s where they put their money.

I’m Paddy Hirsch for Marketplace.

Liza Tucker: Demand is way down for oil. That’s because some economies are shaky and countries aren’t using as much.

I’m Liza Tucker for Marketplace.

Ethan Lindsey: People are still scared about the economy. So no one wants to blow their savings on a house.

I’m Ethan Lindsey for Marketplace.

And the kicker, from host Kai Rysdall: “Y’know, it’s funny, our news spots are usually a whole lot longer than that. I’m not really sure what happened on those.”

Seriously, if you haven’t already, it’s worth a listen. It’s funny. Also, short. From the future-of-news approach, though: It was also a pithy (“pithy,” in fact, might be too expansive a term for it) explanation of the financial doldrums the nation — and the world — are currently experiencing. Sure, the topics covered are the stuff of dissertations/post-graduate programs/think-tank white papers; but they’re also, more to the point, the stuff of everyday life. People need to understand it. As Celeste Wesson, Marketplace’s senior producer, told me: “We are always trying, as a show, to think of more interesting ways to tell business stories. That comes with the territory of covering business, economics, money, etc.: we want to look at how it affects people’s lives, but we also want to make sure that we’re really clear — and really entertaining.”

A Twitterfied take on the ongoing financial crisis: Clear? Check. Entertaining? Check.

The idea came in Wednesday morning’s editorial meeting, Wesson told me. Marketplace staffers were talking about one of the big financial stories of the day — oil prices — and how best to explain it to listeners, when Liza Tucker, the show’s senior Washington editor and resident sustainability expert, finally said: “It’s easy. Demand is down, and that’s because economies are in trouble, and countries aren’t using as much oil.” And “she said it in the meeting,” Wesson says, “as if to say, ‘This is not a complicated story here.’” But “she did it like this perfect little tiny news spot.”

Everyone laughed — but there was something to the joke, Wesson realized. “There’s something we can play with there”: clarity by way of brevity.

“And then someone said, ‘Yeah, but we can’t do just one. So maybe we can do a mini news report with a number of them.’”

“Yeah — we probably need at least three.”

“Maybe we could do gold.”

“Oh, yeah, that would be good.”

Et cetera. “So we had this little, inchoate idea floating around the morning meeting,” Wesson says — which crystallized throughout the day, as producers refined it, into a segment. They tapped Tucker, who’d come up with the initial, off-the-cuff gem, to participate in the final product; then Paddy Hirsch, an expert in gold markets; then Ethan Lindsey, who came up with that “perfectly deadpan way” of talking about home sales.

“Really, it’s a group process,” Wesson notes. “All of us know that one of the things we need to do is make sure that we’re taking complicated things and making them clear” — and to explode the formula that’s all too familiar among lay consumers of financial journalism: incomprehension leading to boredom (laced, often, with frustration).

One way to do that: go simple. Really simple. In this case, “It just struck us as funny that sometimes these things are simpler than we think they are,” Wesson says. “And wouldn’t it be fun, in the middle of August, to break this up with something that’s fun to listen to, and catches listeners by surprise?”

June 10 2010

15:00

The Newsonomics of tablet ad readiness

[Each week, our friend Ken Doctor — author of Newsonomics and longtime watcher of the business side of digital news — writes about the economics of the news business for the Lab.]

Are you ready to receive? That’s the question news company should be asking themselves this month, as the second half of the year — with its unexpected flow in mobile ad dollars — beckons.

The numbers are mostly anecdotal at this point, though as some of us forecast, tablets promise a new, significant source of revenue for the companies that are ready to play the tablet game, and play it well.

Among the early evidence, reported by AP’s Andrew Vanacore, are:

  • $50 CPMs ($50 per each one thousand views) for USA Today’s iPad ad, as compared to maybe $10 for its web ads.
  • Irrational exuberance! Brian Quinn, WSJ’s VP/general manager for digital ad sales, says overall ad spend is increasing because of the iPad version, not just switching dollars from one platform to another. “Out of the gate, there was an exuberance about this,” he says.
  • Chase Sapphire, which is a New York Times iPad sponsor,  says its ads are getting a remarkable 15 percent clickthrough rate. That’s 150 times the rate of an average web ad.

Add to that the July 1 launch of Apple’s iAds, which will introduce ads within iPhone and iPod Touch (but not yet iPad) apps, and which will begin with $60 million in sales, with such companies as Disney, AT&T, and Best Buy participating. You can bet that when the program launches on the iPad, a vastly superior ad medium given the screen size, it will do well. Even just on the “phone” side of the business, the iAds launch should give Apple — and, importantly, apps — almost half of the mobile ad spend in the U.S.

Want a little flavor to understand advertiser enthusiasm? Check out this Steve Henn Marketplace report featuring a VP for The Gap. She’s near-ecstatic in describing her enthusiasm for the iPad/tablet as a way of selling stuff and gaining customer knowledge.

So, yes, maybe the iPad ad euphoria should come with a few grains of salt. But, still, the “multi-touch” immersive future, painted by Steve Jobs and talked up by the big digital ad agencies (themselves looking for new reasons to be in the supply chain) is upon us.

So, are publishers ready?

I had a conversation recently with someone who runs a digital division for a major newspaper group — smart guy, a pioneer in the field. I asked: “So are you working on an iPad app?” Answer: “We’ve looked at our logs, and we’re seeing increasing traffic from the Kindle, but not much yet from the iPad, so we’ll wait awhile.”

I felt a rant coming up, but suppressed it then and will channel it now: If not now, then when?

We can look at each of the major revolutions in digital news and commerce, and see how news companies responded.

Search. Late.

Paid search. Way too late.

Video. Late.

Social. Too late.

Mobile. Largely too late.

News companies have used old yardsticks to measure new technologies, and the results have been, predictably and disastrously, too little, too late.

Now with the iPad, the advent of tablets generally, and the invention of the app metaphor as a way of navigating the digital life, news companies have another chance. The newsonomics of tablet ad revenue are uncertain — will iAds simply flood the ad market with more low-cost ads, as developers happy to get any ad revenue price their ads low? — but the tablet offers the biggest do-over potential for engaging readers anew and re-engaging advertisers, at rates somewhere between the laughably low of the web and the near-impossible-to-sustain-long-term highs of print.

The digital division head told me that the logs told him that there was insufficient customer demand to justify investment in an iPad app. This, I think, is like managing by rearview mirror.

The whole metaphor of the iPad is the app; ask anyone who uses it, and they’ll tell you they are surprised how little they use the browser and use search. So if you are counting browser views of your website coming through the iPad browser, you have no idea how a reader might use your product if it were built to take full advantage of the tablet’s abilities. In addition, consider that the sale of iAds require an app — not a browser-available site.

If this sentiment were uncommon, fine, but I fear it’s too commonly held. Wait and see. Wait — until it’s too late. That’s what I generally see happening among regional and local newspaper companies. They talk about early adopters and the high cost of a state-of-the-art iPad app, and most are waiting.

The big guys — what I’ve called the Digital Dozen — aren’t waiting. The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Thomson Reuters, The Guardian, BBC, and AP are in the game — some with better apps than others — and all planning the next generation of products. We’re seeing impressive sales in the thousands for the WSJ paid app and can wonder about the applicability of Wired’s impressive sales of 73,000 (which are on a trajectory to beat print newsstand sales) to news and newspaper companies.

We’ve already seen a great separation in product development, audience engagement, and ad revenues between the nation’s and world’s biggest news companies — each with struggles of its own — and the other guys. Yet as they struggle, they’ve gotten most of the ad revenue smartphones have so far generated, as local news media has failed to get any revenue of scale. At this point, the iPad era looks like it the opening of an even greater divide among the largest media — and the rest.

[Ken will be on vacation the next few weeks, but back in July. —Josh]

December 17 2009

18:44

Lessons on Collaboration from EconomyStory, Election Projects

"Online: Content is king. I don't disagree. But collaboration is queen. In chess the king is the most important, but the queen is the most powerful." 
- David Cohn

We in public media produce a lot of content, but historically we haven't had a lot of collaboration. That's been changing recently, and I'm fortunate enough to have a front row seat.

I'm the project manager for public media's collaboration about the economy, EconomyStory, a project funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting that brings together 12 public media organizations to cover the current economic crisis, online and on-air. The idea was straightforward: By coordinating efforts across newsrooms, we can deliver to the American public news coverage and resources that are greater than the sum of their parts, and that leverage each organization's strengths. (For a list of partners and their contributions, see EconomyStory.org).

I previously managed a similar effort, also funded by CPB, around the 2008 election. Eight organizations were involved in that project. Over the course of these two projects, I've witnessed a series of triumphs and frustrations that are deeply relevant to the current conversation among journalists, and those interested in journalism, regarding the future of news. Below are my top three lessons learned. I hope other organizations can benefit from our experience, and build on what we've learned. I'd also love to hear what you've learned from similar projects.

Lesson #1: Collaboration Isn't Efficient, But Still Worth It



At the outset of the election project, I expected collaboration to create efficiencies. After all, instead of eight organizations having eight conversations about how to cover the same story, we were having one conversation. Certainly, the thinking went, this would reduce, if not eliminate, redundancies. But reducing redundancies, it turns out, doesn't necessarily mean reducing effort; coordinating with people at other organizations that have different ways of doing things takes time -- lots of it.

For example, during the 2008 election, NPR and PBS NewsHour jointly developed an interactive map that was featured on each of their websites, as well as on over 150 local station sites. With a curator assigned at both NPR and NewsHour, the map fused local and national coverage -- in text, audio and video -- from across public media. Having a collaborative map was convenient for stations, and, in my opinion, yielded a superior end product, which better served the public.

Both NPR and NewsHour could have launched the map earlier in the election cycle if they'd pursued individual products. Instead, they took the time to jointly develop the feature's specifications and select a vendor, among other tasks -- all of which lengthened the production process.

nprnewshourmap.jpg

Was this strategic? Absolutely. Efficient? Not really. Yes, the public media system as a whole was focusing its resources more effectively; but individuals were not producing results as quickly as they would have if they'd worked alone.

Of course, collaboration doesn't always increase effort. It depends on the nature and timing of the project, and whether the partners have worked together before. My point is simply this: Don't assume that working together means saving time -- that's not the value proposition of collaboration. The value proposition is about quality, to the extent that you're equipped to turn quality into revenue.

In other words: Working together yields a superior and more distinctive end product; more distinctive end products, when promoted effectively, build audiences; bigger audiences are the raw material from which revenue may be extracted.

Lesson #2: You Need the Muckety-Mucks

The web department still operates as something of a ghetto at many media organizations. Despite pockets of leadership and innovation, public media organizations are, for the most part, no exception.

Sure, everyone knows the future's in digital, but, more often than not, the people with power and influence work in the organization's legacy media area, such as print or broadcast. I witnessed this directly during the election collaboration, which primarily involved web managers and producers at partner organizations. This hampered the project's impact, either by limiting promotion or preventing more meaningful editorial collaboration. (Much of our "collaboration" during election 2008, aside from the NPR/NewsHour map, took the form of cross-promotion -- a type of collaboration, to be sure, but not the deepest type.)

Having learned our lesson, the kickoff meeting for EconomyStory included multi-disciplinary teams from each partner organization. We then broke off into strands for in-depth brainstorming sessions. At one point, producers of several blue-chip public media programs locked eyes and admitted they didn't trust each other. Then they laughed about it. Then they started talking.

The immediate result? At least one co-production, which aired on both radio and TV, with related web content. The longer-term impact is that the channels of communication are open between these organizations, including at the executive level. This sets the tone and empowers people at every level to explore creative ways of working together. Now it seems I hear each week about a new collaborative effort between some subset of our project's partners.

Lest you think the lesson here is that change only comes from the top down, I'll underscore that the idea to collaborate for the election and the economic crisis was largely hatched within public media's web community. This community just needed to engage the right executives in order to begin realizing the full power of its vision.

Lesson #3: Autopilot? I Don't Think So.

People were enthusiastic when they left the kick-off meeting, but then they returned to busy offices, overflowing inboxes, and lengthy to-do lists. In other words, it was going to take more than goodwill to drive the project forward. Specifically, success was going to require:

> Formal Communication Channels: For the election project, partners relied on the phone and email to stay in touch with each other, and with me. This time around, I introduced Basecamp, a project management tool from 37 Signals. I made it clear at the outset (and in partner contracts) that participation on Basecamp was a requirement. Sound harsh? Yes, but I knew I was dealing with busy people who needed extra prodding to remember to share information outside of their own shops.

It's been a huge success because it's far more effective for partners to share information with each other, than for information to flow only from them to me. Why rely on a switchboard operator in the digital age? 


One success story: near the beginning of the economy project, a producer at PBS posted a programming pipeline, including information about an upcoming Frontline special called "The Warning." It was about a lone regulator who warned of the potential for economic meltdown in the late 1990s. A producer at Marketplace saw this information and ended up commissioning a series of original radio reports, including an interview with the regulator, Brooksley Born.

This may not sound like rocket science (and it isn't), but without this project, and without a central information-sharing hub, it wouldn't have happened.

frontlinemktplc.jpg

> Strong Central Staff: After the election project, it was clear that there were central project functions beyond project management that needed attention. For one thing, we needed to actually promote the partners' work, both to the general public and to public media stations. After all, it's hard to provide a public service when the public doesn't know what you're doing.

Also, in order to maximize editorial collaboration between partners, we needed someone with a bird's eye view of the project, as well as a journalist's sensibility, who could look for specific opportunities for partners to team up. We added these roles to the mix, bringing on freelancer and public media vet Katie Kemple to head up marketing; Public Radio International managed station outreach; and Lee Banville from NewsHour served as "editorial facilitator."

The combination of Basecamp and additional project staff has spurred more informal collaboration on EconomyStory compared to what we saw during the election project. The Frontline/Marketplace example above is just the tip of the iceberg. It's critical to have a central team that works to keep partners focused and engaged. In addition, those of us at the center of the project are then able to identify strategic successes and areas for improvement.

Conclusion

Learning to collaborate is a lot like learning to manage. A junior manager often thinks it's easier to do things herself, rather than take time to train someone on her team. While this approach may allow her to deliver results more quickly in the short term, it's not sustainable over time. Similarly, collaboration between news organizations is often time consuming at first -- but it's essential to their long-term success.

As more and more news organizations shut their doors, or reduce operations, lean organizations and newly freelance journalists need to learn to work together in new ways if they're going to survive. They need to be scrappy -- and public media organizations are nothing if not scrappy. There may be hope for us yet.

Amanda Hirsch is a consultant to independent media companies and non-profits, and the former editorial director of PBS Interactive (as well as MediaShift's former editor). She is also a writer and performer. You can follow Amanda online on her website and on Twitter at @publicmediagirl.

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

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