Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

The Times, TED and the business of B2B

As Rex said today in a de.licio.us bookmark, "It's not everyday the New York Times does a story on the economics of business-to-business media." So I felt obliged to read the article and link to it.
So here, take a look.

As you'll see, the Times is making note of the decision by TED, the Technology, Entertainment and Design organization, to begin offering videos of 100 of its famous 20-minute presentations. It's a move that the Times says puts TED "at the vanguard of a trend in the conference industry, where organizers have begun to exploit assets that in years past evaporated as soon as speakers left the stage."
And it's worth noting, as the Times does, that TED's decision comes as the latest data from American Business Media indicates that revenue from trade shows has surpassed revenue from print publishing for the first time.

Note: Some of TED's videos have been available online for quite some time. For an earlier post of mine that links to my all-time favorite TED video, click here.

tags: , , , , , ,

Sunday, April 15, 2007

Birth of a magazine

If it stops raining by morning, I may walk up to the corner newsstand, where I'll buy a copy of Conde Nast's new magazine -- my second such print purchase of the year.

Yes, tomorrow marks the debut of Portfolio magazine. And I suppose I'm moderately excited. Not so much because I want to actually read the magazine, but because I've sort of enjoyed the marketing campaign.
Conde Nast has done a masterful job of building buzz by acting secretive and hush-hush about the whole thing. For weeks, the company didn't say a word. Then, as launch date neared, Conde Nast began giving "exclusives."
It's worked ... at least on me and the handful of other obsessive magazine junkies that I know.
(For more of my thoughts on Portfolio's non-marketing campaign, check out this article in Folio magazine.)

So come morning, I'm likely to be one of the first folks to buy a copy of Portfolio.
Unless of course, the rain keeps coming.
No magazine is worth drowning over.

For a look at what the ultra-secret cover may look like, click here.
For more on the Portfolio story, click here.

tags: , , , , , ,

Monday, April 09, 2007

Ethics and awards

There are few things in journalism I find as absurd or as dangerous as the notion that publishing on a computer screen rather than on a piece of paper exempts us from the norms of ethical behavior. Yet it seems that nearly every day someone makes exactly that claim.
Consider, if you will, the case of Bambi Francisco at MarketWatch. Francisco has left her job after it became clear that she had violated the ethical standards of parent company Dow Jones. And although I have no intention of defending Francisco's actions, it should be pretty clear that she was given "permission" to turn her back on the ethics guidelines by her boss, who has said "the rigid rules of the past may not always apply to the new media."
(For more on the Francisco scandal, check out what Matthew Ingram and Staci Kramer have to say.)

If I have accomplished nothing else in writing this blog, I would like to think that I've helped to remind the world of B2B journalism that the rigid rules of the past do apply to new media. Or, as I've said in earlier writings and in public appearances, "the rules haven't changed online, and you shouldn't let them."

So it pleases me to see that the American Society of Business Publication Editors has been named to the Folio 40 list for having "put together one of the most comprehensive editorial ethics guidelines for online."
Folio magazine is correct: "few organizations have tackled the subject of online ethics as thoroughly as the American Society of Business Publication Editors did in the May 2006 release of its updated ethics guide." I congratulate ASBPE for the honor. And I applaud Folio for naming the association to the Folio 40.

(Disclosure One: Bambi Francisco and I worked together briefly at CNNfn, the financial news network of CNN, which now exists only as CNNMoney. I don't remember her well. And she may not remember me at all. But in the time we worked together, I thought of her as both professional and ethical.
Disclosure Two: Longtime readers may remember that I began urging ASBPE to update its ethics policy roughly two years ago. The first reference I can find to that call is in this post from July 2005. And thus I feel some pride in ASBPE's accomplishment. To read my reaction to the new guidelines in May of last year, click here.)

tags: , , , , , , , , advertising

Thursday, April 05, 2007

The next big problem in B2B publishing

My friend Clyde at ProHipHop sent an article about how the News & Observer newspaper in North Carolina is putting a new emphasis on local coverage and online publishing. Clyde assumed, correctly, that I would be interested in reading how the staff was struggling with the new realities of the publishing industry.
But as I read the article, I found my thoughts wandering.
It's true that we've seen dozens of stories like this about dozens of newspapers and magazines trying to adjust to the Web. The story of the N&O is no different. There is nastiness and misunderstanding. There are folks with their heads in the sand; there are folks with their heads up their butts. There are turf wars and defensiveness. And too few people on the editorial side seem excited about the possibilities.
And as I read the article -- hearing of the same old problems at yet another publication -- it occurred to me that I knew something important. I knew what the next big problem is going to be in B2B journalism.

Almost everywhere I go these days -- clients' offices, universities, industry conferences -- people ask me different versions of the same question: What will be the next big thing? What they're looking for is some clue as to where they should put their efforts. Everyone wants to get a jump on what's next. No one wants to duplicate the struggles of the print-to-Web transition.
I tell them that I don't know what the next big thing will be, although I have some rough ideas. I tell them I expect someone will soon build an "iPod of reading" -- a new, portable device that changes how we read in the same revolutionary fashion that the iPod changed how we listen. I talk about epaper, and a "newsroom in your pocket." I talk about new interfaces that blur the line between creation and consumption. And I say that hundreds of people, much brighter than I, are building remarkable things. And one of those things will become the next big thing in media.
But what I don't mention is that it's unlikely that any of the people who are about to change the content world actually work in a content company.

Perhaps the great lesson of the print-to-online shift has been that traditional content companies suffered and struggled during the transition because they were structured in such a way that suffering and struggling was all they could do.
And content companies are still structured like that. Even the newest, Web-based content companies are structured like that.
And that's why our next big problem is going to be our inability to respond to the next big thing.

A few weeks ago I re-read Clayton Christensen's "The Innovator's Dilemma," which was first published in 1997.
Christensen is brilliant and complex. So I'll ask his fans to forgive me for the following brief and simplistic summary of his work.
Christensen argued that there are two types of technological advances. Sustaining technologies "foster improved product performance." While disruptive technologies, which eventually alter an industry, lead to short-term drops in product performance. Disruptive technologies generally "underperform established products in mainstream markets" and are generally "cheaper, simpler, smaller, and, frequently, more convenient to use."
Christensen's central argument was that good management practices -- listening to customers, investing in high-margin businesses, researching markets before entering them, etc. -- made it nearly impossible to respond to disruptive technologies.
In other words, a well-run traditional company is structured in such a way that it can't respond to the next big thing.
If you want to read more about Christensen's theories, you can order the book, read this summary, or check out the Web site of his consulting company.
And it's worth noting that although Christensen, as far as I know, has never examined the B2B publishing industry, he has studied the newspaper business. And he's recommended a "portfolio solution" that magazine publishers should be familiar with. In that plan, a newspaper should create a "suite of products and services in addition to the newspaper, intersecting the population on a variety of planes. The goal is to create new audiences of individuals who are not necessarily interested in the newspaper’s contents."

Past is Prologue
In the past few months I've noticed a problem. It's the same problem that Christensen has studied. It's the same problem that plagued us as we moved from the print world to the Web:
Our companies aren't structured to respond to the next big thing.
I've met with dozens of people from dozens of content companies. Some of these companies are newly Web-focused. Others are Web-only companies and email newsletter companies born in recent years.
And I'm seeing the exact same attitudes, beliefs, work rules, chains of command and silos that I saw in the print-only companies that failed to respond to the Web. I meet email newsletter folks who don't know what RSS is, because "that's not our business." I meet Web journalists who don't think about widgets "because our customers aren't asking for them." I meet managers of online companies who laugh at mobile content ("our readers want more detailed analysis than you can get on a Blackberry,") roll their eyes at online communities ("those are for teenagers") and won't visit a virtual world ("our audience are high-end serious people. None of them play computer games.)

So what's the answer?
Christensen suggested that "creating an independent organization, with a cost structure honed to achieve profitability at the low margins characteristic of most disruptive technologies, is the only viable way for established firms" to harness the forces at play.
In other words, he suggests a "skunk works," a separate company/unit that isn't about the existing product line and that doesn't serve the existing customer base.
Or, as I say at the end of this video interview with Sara Sheadel from ABM, "somebody has to think about and play with every silly idea that pops up ... and then, after you've played for awhile, you can make a determination about whether or not there is a value there."

The thoughts of others
When I think about what I should play with next, I often turn to the work of Danah Boyd. If the next big thing is related to social networking, young people, or community, Danah will know about it long before I do. Check out the text of a speech she gave at eTech.

Sometimes I think the next big thing will be a series of little things -- taking what we do and making it smaller, portable, mashable and shareable. Here's news of a development in that area involving Penton.

Finally, I want to welcome the newest voice to the B2B media blogosphere. Check out the new blog from John Schwartz, general manager of Dentalcompare, an online buyers guide.

tags: , , , , , , , , journalism education

Monday, April 02, 2007

Folks with resumes need not apply

Last week I wrote about how clips provide little value in helping me make a hiring decision.
Now it appears that Wired has gone a step further -- telling prospective hires for at least one job not to bother sending a resume, but to instead forward a blog post.
I'm not surprised by Wired's move. And I suspect we'll see more situations like this in which employers screen applicants based on their access to Web tools and sensibilities. (For example, why would any radio station hire anyone who doesn't have a podcast?)

It's also no surprise to me that I heard about the Wired job through a post on Ryan Sholin's blog. I first came across Ryan's work back when he was a student. And I often used him as an example of how young journalists should approach the new world of media. Ryan has since graduated. And he's become central to the debate over how to educate the next generation of journalists. He's also become one of the people that helps me follow -- and make sense of -- the changes in journalism.

In my post last week about clips, I also made reference to three things that I think make a college kid worth hiring for an entry level job. And number two on that list was that the student be "self-taught" -- picking up skills that weren't taught as part of the curriculum.
Well Ryan is the king of self taught. And his graduation didn't change his belief that he needs to constantly expand his skill set.
Take a look at this piece from his blog in which he takes "an informal poll on what I should learn next."

(Personal note: I experienced some problems with email last week. Several hundred old emails were lost. And for about 24 hours or so, new incoming emails simply disappeared. The problem seems to be resolved. But if you sent something to me last week and didn't get a response, please try again. Thanks.)

tags: , , , , , , , journalism education

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Three job tips for students

Few things tell me less about a prospective hire than clips from a college newspaper.
Yet most of the students I meet use clips as the center of their job-searching efforts. The students, apparently at the urging of teachers, are often quite proud of their clips. And they have come to believe that the perfect clip will lead to the perfect entry-level job.

I don't want to suggest that a clip has no value. But the truth is that when a student hands me a pile of clips, it will take weeks before I so much as glance at them. And glance is the most I'll do.
And I think that most established journalists feel the same way. We know the clips have been edited --often heavily. And we know that many of the stories that students hand to us have been kicked back for rewrites numerous times.

Most importantly, a clip ties a student to the part of the industry that is least likely to hire him -- print. When a student hands a clip to a publishing executive today he's likely handing it to someone who has already laid off a slew of print-only reporters. It's an exercise in absurdity for students to market themselves as talented print journalists to executives who have laid off talented print journalists by the thousands.

So what do I -- and many others in the industry -- look for from students?
We look for people who can help us navigate the future.
We know what many students seem not to know: no young person is likely to spend his career in print alone. But we also suspect that students are already living in the future we see for the industry: a 24-hour environment of collaboration, community, multimedia and mobile, a work/life of creation and consumption that erases the lines between professionals and audience.

When I meet students I'm looking for three things. And I urge my clients and friends in the industry to look for these same three traits. I may write more about each of these in the next few days. But for now, I'll offer this brief summary of the things that can get a kid a job.

1. Youth itself: I was in a newsroom the other day where a young person, fresh from school, was talking about the weather outside. "It's 72 degrees," she said glancing at her computer, "according to my widget." And I had to laugh aloud. Because an hour earlier I had found myself in a frustrating conversation with her boss in which I tried to explain what widgets were and how they worked.
The simple truth is that youth itself has a value in today's publishing world. We need people who live online and understand what it means. I tell students not to let anyone -- particularly older journalists and teachers -- belittle their culture. I want to hire people who send text messages on a PDA, have Facebook accounts and MySpace pages and write blogs about local bands. I don't need experts in these things. I just need people I can talk to when I want to talk about new products and ideas. And I'm just so tired of explaining to people how to use de.licio.us bookmarks.

2. Self-taught: When I look at the skill set on a student's resume I'm most interested in things that are not part of the curriculum. I know how quickly things have changed in our industry. And I know how quickly they will continue to change. And time and time again I've seen journalists complain about things that they don't know how to do because no one has taught them. Then I've waived good-bye as they were laid off.
So I want new hires who have enough sense to teach themselves what they need to know. Sure, there are skills and software that I prefer to others. But when I'm meeting students I'm thrilled by someone who taught himself Dreamweaver, whereas I'm not so impressed by someone who took a course in PhotoShop.

3. Entrepreneurial: Back when I was leaving school, with my degree in hand and a ton of clips from a great journalism program, I had the good luck to interview with someone who quizzed me incessantly about my life. And he was pleased and surprised to find that a) I had helped publish a fanzine about music in New York, and b) had been paid $15 a week while a student to type up sport scores from my school and walk them over to a local paper.
Neither of those things were on my resume. But they were the reason he hired me.
Now I'm the old guy. And I look for those same indications of ambition and entrepreneurial sense in students.
That's why I tell students that the only clips I want to see are the ones they were paid for. Nothing tells me that a writer has value like that fact that someone "valued" his writing.

I'll be talking about these issues tomorrow at ABM's Digital Velocity conference. If you're going to be there, stop by and say hello.

tags: , , , , , , , journalism education

Friday, March 23, 2007

ABM announces Neal Award winners

Congratulations to the winners of this year's Neal Awards, perhaps the most prestigious awards in B2B publishing.
I wasn't at yesterday's awards luncheon. So I had to wait until American Business Media posted the winners before I knew who had won. And I'll confess that I was afraid to look at the results for fear that eWeek would have collected a prize (for an earlier post on the inappropriateness of eWeek's nomination for Best Web Site, click here.)

But if you check out the press release on this year's winners, you'll see that eWeek was snubbed.
Rather, the big winner in online is McGraw-Hill's ENR, which won awards for Best Web site and best online article/series. Other online winners include CFO, BusinessWeek.com/SmallBiz and IDG's Macworld (Disclosure: IDG is a client.)
And the granddady of ABM's prizes -- the Grand Neal -- went to IEEE SPECTRUM, published by the the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) trade association.

Now my first instinct is to complain, to note anything and everything that might be wrong with ENR and IEEE SPECTRUM and some of the other winners. But that's just me being ridiculous. I think I'm still a little punchy from seeing eWeek nominated.
Because the truth -- when I calm down enough to see it -- is that this year's list of winners is a fine one.

Congratulations too to American Business Media. ABM's site has undergone an overhaul, and the new look -- complete with new logo and prominently displayed video -- is a great improvement over the old. ABM blogger Sara Sheadel gives the background here.

tags: , , , , , , , , journalism education

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

End game for newspaper industry newsletter

As I spoke with journalism students last week, trying to convince them that there was no longer any such thing as a career in print alone, I wish I had known this:
The Morton-Groves Newspaper Newsletter, a B2B publication that covers the newspaper industry, issued a dire warning March 15 saying that time may have run out for publications that haven't adapted to new media. "For those who have not made the transition [by now], technology and market factors may be too strong to enable success," the newsletter said.
And then the newsletter said good-bye ... forever.

After 30 years of covering the newspaper business, Morton-Groves has published its final edition.
You can read the whole thing on this .pdf file, but suffice it to say that Morton-Groves doesn't see much light at the end of the tunnel. (You can also read more about the history of the newsletter on the "Reflections of a Newsosaur" blog, where I first learned that Morton-Groves was no more.)

At the College Media Advisers convention last week, I told students and teachers that it was clear to me that we were seeing the burst of a "content bubble." In an era when everyone can be a publisher, lots of people have become publishers. We're awash in content. Few of us -- even armed with RSS, widgets and content-aggregation services -- can keep up with what's out there.
For many publishers, it's become impossible to survive in a world with so many competitors.

And now, as the bubble bursts, things are getting tougher. The monetary value of content is falling. Companies that are tied to expensive production methods (paper, delivery trucks, outdated CMS systems, large staffs, etc.) are being squeezed into oblivion.
But this is the bubble that may never stop bursting.
The low cost of entry has kept the competitors coming.
And in a global economy, much of the U.S. publishing industry will offshore work in order to keep costs low.
And that is a very, very difficult environment for an entry-level journalist.

Back when I started out in this industry, the value proposition that landed me my first job was simple: volume. For the price of a mid-career journalist, a publisher could hire me and another kid straight out of school. We wouldn't produce work that was on par with that of the established professional, but we would produce more of it.
A student today faces a bleaker equation.
Why would a publisher hire an entry-level reporter at a price that could get him three writers and a designer in Asia? Why would a publisher hire a college kid when there are experts and professionals who will blog for free? Why would anyone pay money for more words in a world where there's already a surplus of words?

But as anyone who reads this blog knows, I see endless opportunities for ambitious journalists in this new environment.
Later this week I'll share my thoughts on what young journalists need to do to thrive in the content bubble.

tags: , , , , , , , , journalism education


Monday, March 19, 2007

An online leader takes the lead

I've been on the road for much of the past two weeks, trying to convince journalism students that their future involves more than a single medium. I told print students they needed to learn to shoot video. I told broadcast kids they needed to learn to write for the Web. I told radio wannabes that they need to take digital photos. In other words, I told everyone that they needed to learn to do everything.
The reason, of course, is because our industry is moving from multiple media to multimedia. And in the very near future, no one will want to hire an entry level journalist with a skill set from the 1970s.

On several occasions, I found myself trying to make my point by reading from this post on my friend Colin Crawford's blog, in which he said that "the absolute dollar growth of (IDG's) online revenues now exceeds the decline in our print revenues."
Now comes word that Colin, long an advocate for an online-centered approach to publishing, is taking on a new role at IDG -- assuming the helm at two of IDG’s key brands PCWorld and MacWorld. (DISCLOSURE: IDG is a client.)

So first, I want to offer my congratulations to Colin. This is a well-deserved promotion and a great opportunity for a talented guy.
Second, I want to offer my congratulations to IDG. Few companies do as good a job in accepting that change is here. And Colin's promotion is further evidence that IDG knows what it's doing.
Third, I want to urge the students I've met in recent weeks to read what Colin has to say about work at a platform agnostic company.

I'll be writing more this week about my recent conversations with students. And I even have a few resumes to share with folks who are looking for the most promising among the next generation. However, I have to warn you, my list of the best of the class of 2007 is depressingly short.

tags: , , , , , , , , journalism education

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

The future of print and the future of hiring

I've said before that I'm not one of those folks who argue that print is dead. Rather I believe that "some of print is dead. Some of it isn't...yet. And some of it will live forever."
Newspapers -- and I mean the paper versions of them rather than the brands -- are in grave danger. And I see little use now, let alone in the near future, for weekly or monthly magazines that focus on news rather than analysis.
But I do believe that my infant daughter will read some form of paper when she reaches my age. And so, apparently, does author David Renard. His new book, titled "The Last Magazine," argues that the surviving products will be the independent mags that are "objects of absolute passion for both creators and readers alike."

It's unclear to me what Renard's future will look like for B2B. Trade magazines are objects of absolute passion for me. But I know that my affection for the business isn't shared by many folks -- including many of the people who work in the industry. And if there's one thing that I have learned in all my years of speaking with editors, publishers and readers it is this: those of us on the content side are often delusional about how much passion our audience feels for our work. We are seldom as good as we think we are. And we are often not as valuable to our readers as we could be.

I have learned this too: the biggest threat to the future of B2B isn't technology and new delivery vehicles, it's us. I continue to be disappointed and surprised by the number of people I meet who remain unwilling to learn the new storytelling skills. Nearly every day I see resumes by recent grads and established journalists that could have been written 25 years ago. And every day I toss those resumes into the garbage. Because neither I, nor anyone I know, has a need for someone who can only report, write, edit or take a photo.
Those skills have value. They always will. But in the competitive world of today, they are simply not enough.
I want to see evidence of video and audio skills. I want to see evidence of familiarity with CSS, RSS, HTML and every other acronym of new media. I want people who live online, consume content on mobile devices, use social-bookmarking tools and participate in Web communities. I want people who don't think they need some gray-haired, middle-aged man like me to give them permission to create -- I want bloggers and page designers and database builders who have made things even when they weren't getting paid.
I want to hire people who have "absolute passion" for the new era of journalism.

I'll be talking about such things at three different events this month. If you're going to be at any of them, stop by and introduce yourself.

tags: , , , , , , , , journalism education

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Don Tennant wins ABM's editorial integrity award

Congratulations to Don Tennant, who has just won what is perhaps the coolest prize in B2B journalism -- the Timothy White Award for Editorial Integrity. In brief, Don is being honored for being one of the good guys in an industry that still, on occasion, struggles with the basics of journalism ethics.

Don is vice president and editor in chief of IDG's Computerworld. And IDG is a client of mine. But I'm afraid I can't claim any credit for this award. Don was doing the right things for the right reasons long before I ever stepped foot in an IDG office. Don is a worthy recipient, and I'm as pleased with ABM's choice this year as I was with its choice for last year.

For BtoB magazine coverage of Don's award, click here.

tags: , , , , , , ,

Sunday, February 25, 2007

The outlook on Outlook

I was at a meeting last week with a client, listening to some tech people talk about tech stuff, when someone said something that threw me for a loop.
In brief, he was explaining the problem that Microsoft's Outlook 2007 was causing with email newsletters. And I, who likes to think of himself as fairly well versed in everything that's happening in online media, had no idea what he was talking about.

I asked a few questions. And later I did a search to see who had the scoop. And it turns out that a) there is a problem; b) B2B publishers need to be aware of it; and c) I need to do a better job of keeping track of things. Because I found a fair amount of information about this subject in some of the dozens of RSS feeds that I've failed to read in the past few very busy weeks.

The problem, as near as I can tell, is that Microsoft made a very strange, Microsoft-centered decision -- changing the rendering engine in Outlook to Word. The result is that email newsletters that use CSS just don't look the way they should.

The tech folks that I spoke with seem to think this is a temporary problem. The assumption is that Microsoft will change its policy and that things will be fine again soon. But I'm not convinced. So I'm going to keep worrying.
At the same time, I don't think this is anything worth panicking about just yet. Outlook 2007 isn't in wide use -- yet. And there are things that designers can do to resolve the problem. Although to be clear, those changes involve doing things that many publishers will not want to do -- like not using Flash or background colors.
For some advice on how to alter your newsletters to work with Outlook 2007, check out this post from Karen Gedney.

For more on this issue, check out what Kevin Yank has to say.
For an earlier post of mine about the shortcomings of email newsletters, click here.

tags: , , , , , , ,

Friday, February 09, 2007

eWeek retreats in ads-within-edit scandal

A few anonymous emails and one anonymous commenter tell me that eWeek has come to its senses.
The publication seems to have ended its offensive practice of inserting ads in the editorial.
If you're new to this issue, you can read my initial post on the problem here, or click here to read of my dismay to find that eWeek was a finalist for a Neal Award.

Now it's worth noting that eWeek hasn't officially announced that it's pulling the IntelliTXT ads. I asked Eric Lundquist, VP/editorial director at eWeek, for a comment several weeks ago. But I never received a response. Nonetheless, my anonymous friends tell me the links are gone. And as I take a quick look through the site, I can find no evidence they ever existed.

I'm thrilled by this development. And I want to thank anyone and everyone at eWeek that raised their voices against the ads. I also want to thank all of you who sent emails, posted comments and wrote pieces of your own about the scandal. Together you have made it clear -- again -- that the journalists of B2B will not compromise over ethics. Together you have reminded our industry -- again -- that the rules don't change just because a publication is online rather than in print.

For David Shaw's take on eWeek, click here.
Check out Matt McAlister's thoughts here.

tags: , , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Violating our ethics policy doesn't break our rules

Sara Sheadel at the ABM blog has written a response to my post yesterday in which I noted my disappointment that eWeek.com was a finalist for a Neal Award despite being in violation of ABM's ethics guidelines.

Take a moment to read what Sara says. You'll see that although it's unclear if the judges knew that eWeek was in violation, there is a larger problem here. It seems that although it's against the Neal rules for a print publication to violate the ethics guidelines, it's not yet against the rules for an online publication to do so.
Sara says she's "going to wager a guess that these rules may change next year. "
I'll bet she's right.

(Note: It's now been exactly one week since I asked Eric Lundquist, VP/editorial director at eWeek, for an explanation. I still haven't heard back. Thus I'm revoking the right of every journalist at Ziff Davis to complain that sources don't return their calls.)

tags: , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

And the award for most egregious violation of our ethics policy goes to ...

Some congratulations are in order ... and some disdain as well. But let's start with the positives.
American Business Media has released the finalists for its Jesse Neal Business Journalism awards. The Neal awards are among the more prestigious prizes in our industry. And it shouldn't come as a surprise that some of the best publications in our our industry -- Computerworld, CFO and Editor & Publisher, for example -- are among the finalists.
You can take a look at the full list on this pdf.

But when you read that list of finalists, you may find you are as surprised and disappointed as I am to see that eWeek is a finalist for Best Web Site.
Just yesterday I pointed out that eWeek is in violation of ABM's ethics guidelines. And it's beyond me why the screening judges at ABM would think that a site that embarrasses the entire world of B2B journalism should be considered a symbol of what is best in B2B journalism.
And it's not just the ethical failings that should have ruled out eWeek. The simple truth is that Ziff Davis' eWeek.com has other problems as well.
Take a look. Notice the incredibly slow load time. Try to make it to the bottom of the text-filled monstrosity of a home page without your eyes bleeding. This is the sort of site that must give Jakob Nielsen nightmares.
eWeek is also a functional mess. As I write this piece, I see that the link on the home page that is supposed to take me to a blog post about "the Ballmer Era," instead takes me to a slide show about Microsoft Vista.
The thing that is truly saddest about these shortcomings is that much of eWeek is actually quite good. The site does have some of the things that make for compelling online content -- the blogs and slideshows mentioned above, as well as feedback functions on article pages.
But all that is good about eWeek is overshadowed by the fact that the site is ugly, performs poorly and is tainted by unethical behavior.
(It's worth noting that one of the other finalists for Best Web site is Forbes, where the staff has fought and won a battle against IntelliTXT links.)

So what explains the appearance of eWeek on the ABM list of finalists?
Perhaps the screening judges are unaware of the IntelliTXT problem. Or perhaps the IntelliTXT links began to appear after the judges made their selections (I'm unsure when they first appeared. I became aware of them last week.) That would certainly make more sense than the alternative explanation: that the judges are unfamiliar with best practices in online design and editorial.

Speaking of best practices, Prescott Shibles says the reason three publications in the Prism stable are among the nominees is because they "all focus on editorial integrity." And interestingly, Shibles says that strengthening the line between editorial and advertising has enhanced revenue, not hurt it.

To take a look at ABM's Editorial Code of Ethics, read this pdf file. Make note that ABM is about as clear as can be on the subject of IntelliTXT ads in editorial copy. "Hypertext links that appear within the editorial content of a site, including those within graphics, must be solely at the discretion of the editors. Links within editorial should never be paid for by advertisers."

To read what I thought of last year's winners of the Neal Awards, click here.

And finally, if someone you work with someone who represents the best in B2B ethics, make sure you nominate them for the Timothy White Award for Editorial Integrity. The deadline is Feb. 1.

tags: , , , , , , , ,