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: , , , , , ,

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

"Gatsby," writers and new media


Come morning I'll be on the road, visiting three states in eight days.
And on this trip, when time allows, I'll be reading "The Great Gatsby."

I've read Fitzgerald's masterpiece before, of course. And like many writers, I went through an obsession with the book -- reading and re-reading it constantly back in high school (Hunter Thomson claimed to have retyped the entire book in an effort to absorb Fitzgerald's talent.) But obsessions fade, and it's been at least two decades since I last read "Gatsby."

So why now, at 48 years of age, am I returning to "Gatsby"?
A few weeks ago I was in my car listening to NPR when I heard a wonderful piece about "Gatsby." It featured actors reading selections of the work. There was audio of a trip to Long Island with a Fitzgerald expert. The host and his guests discussed movie versions of "Gatsby,"dissected the book's influence on writers, Fitzgerald's understanding of America and his mastery of the craft, and looked at the Gatsbys of our own time.
At the end of the show, there was a reference to more material available on the Web. When I got home, I logged on and looked.
And by the time I finished absorbing the multimedia presentation, I was obsessed again.
I'd urge you to take some time to do the same. Visit the Web site of Studio 360. Drill down. Follow the links. Listen to the audio.
And then come back to this post.

In the past few weeks I've heard from a number of folks who are upset -- some of them tremendously so -- by two recent posts of mine. In those posts I downplay the usefulness of clips in making a hiring decision and I celebrate those young journalists who take the time to master new skills.
The critics, if I understand their complaints, think I should put more emphasis on the ability to "write" and less on the mastery of new media.
Now it's easy to dismiss some of these critics as morons. (Consider, for example, the ridiculousness of the comment in this post, in which an anonymous person demonstrates an inability to think or write.)
But not every criticism comes from an idiot. Rather, most have come from reasonable folks with a love of good writing. Most, in fact, have come from folks who write for a living and do so with some skill. In other words, most of the criticism has come from folks who have likely had a "Gatsby" obsession, or a "Vonnegut" obsession -- folks just like me.

The truth is that my critics and I share a love of writing. That's why we got into the world of journalism in the first place. Where we differ is on how we feel about the new forms of storytelling. I adore the new forms, and I accept that they are superior vehicles for conveying a story online. Furthermore, I accept that what makes for good writing in print is vastly different from what makes for good writing online.
Consider, if you will, "The Great Gatsby." It is arguably, the greatest piece of American writing in history. In fact, for the sake of argument, let's say that it is the greatest piece of writing in American history.
Now click here and try to read it.

What you'll find is that even "Gatsby" cannot sing on a computer screen. On a computer screen, a multimedia presentation about Fitzgerald's masterpiece works better than the masterpiece itself.
Writing well is about choosing the right medium as much as it is choosing the right word. And the computer screen (or a PDA) is not the right medium for Fitzgerald. Nor, in fact, is the computer screen the appropriate place for most types of long-form writing.

So yes, when I think about hiring young people, I'm not very interested in their ability to write in long form.
I care more about reporting ability. I care more about ambition and entrepreneurial spirit. I care more about multimedia skills than print skills because I accept that young journalists are entering a business where the page is not as important as the screen.

"In my younger and more vulnerable years" I dreamed that I would write like Fitzgerald. I dreamed that I would create a book that was wondrous and beautiful and without peer. I may do that yet. And if I do, I pray that you read it in print and not online.

In the meantime, I'll look for the next generation of long-form writers in the bookstore and I'll look for the next generation of journalists online.
And I'll continue to try to do what I hope I have done here -- writing well for online by telling a story, making a point, uploading a photo, linking elsewhere and beginning a conversation in less than 800 words.

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: , , , , , ,

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Unstuck in time

I've been thinking about an idea for a post.
It's about writing. It's about "The Great Gatsby," the future of journalism, our delusions as wordsmiths, the advantages of multimedia, and a few other ideas.
I'd planned to write it today.
But moments ago I heard on the radio that Kurt Vonnegut had died.
And suddenly I don't feel much like writing about writing.
I only want to write about Kurt's writing.

For those of us of a certain age, Kurt was the greatest of writers. He spoke to us in a way we longed to be spoken to. He was older, but unlike so many of his peers in the Vietnam era, he was wiser too.
And for writers of a certain age, he was what we aspired to be. He was brilliant and unusual and self-depreciating and lovely and gentle and fierce. And he had transcended the rules of our craft -- creating stories that were nothing like what had come before.

If you know Kurt's work, you know how difficult much of his life has been. His mother committed suicide. He was a prisoner of war in the second World War. His son developed schizophrenia. Kurt tried to kill himself in 1984. He was heavy drinker, a compulsive smoker and he struggled with depression.
But when he wrote -- God, when he wrote -- it was perfect.

The opening line of Kurt's best-known book, "Slaughterhouse Five," is "Listen: Billy Pilgrim has become unstuck in time." It's a reference to the hero of that book -- a POW who moves back and forth in time. It was also a reference to Kurt's often-stated belief that linear time was an illusion (He liked to "prove" that point by saying that if time progressed, then it was logical that he would be a better writer in his later years than he was in his early years. But since there was no suggestion that he was getting better, there was no reason to believe that time moved in one direction only.)
But if you've read "Slaughterhouse Five" you know that it's about more than time or war. It's about the enormity of small lives. It's about what is implied by becoming unstuck in time -- an understanding that all things are happening at the same time for all time.

And if you accept the premise of that book, than you know not to mourn. Because if everything is always happening, has always happened and always will happen, then Kurt is still writing. Just as Kurt is still a POW, just as he has always been dead, has always been a new father, always been a struggling businessman, always loved his wife, and always, always been lighting a cigarette.

Just as somewhere out there, I have always been doing this -- sitting at a computer, typing a line that Kurt had written on a cartoon tombstone in "Slaughterhouse Five:" "Everything was beautiful, and nothing hurt."
Just as I have always been hoping, always will be hoping, that it is true.

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

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Coverage of my presentation at ABM

Last week I spoke at American Business Media’s Digital Velocity conference, where I had the chance to share some of my thoughts on the next generation of journalists. If you were there, you heard me talk about what we should, and should not, be looking for when interviewing recent grads.
If you weren't there, don't worry. Folio magazine was kind enough to send a reporter. And you can read Folio's coverage of my presentation by clicking here.
And heck, even if you're not interested in what I had to say, you should still take a look at the Folio article. Because it also quotes one of my co-panelists, Jason Brightman. And in the less than a year that I've known Jason, I've come to believe he's one of the smartest guys in our industry.

And as long as I'm talking about quotes, my ego dictates that I also point to this post, where Bryan Murley calls me a "one-man quote machine."

(Addendum: As Sara from ABM points out in a comment to this post, there's now also a video available of an interview with me from the Digital Velocity conference. Click here to take a look.

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

Sunday, March 25, 2007

InfoWorld blazes a print-free path

PaidContent is reporting that weekly magazine InfoWorld is about to shutter its print edition.
I haven't seen a confirmation yet from parent company IDG. But I have no reason to doubt the news. What started as a report in Sam Whitmore's newsletter (sorry, the story is available only to subscribers), then spread across the blogosphere, now appears to be true.
And I for one am thrilled.

I don't mean to belittle the pain that some on the InfoWorld staff will feel. It's likely that a small number of folks will be laid off. (Rafat at PaidContent says his source reports that "there won’t be too many layoffs as most of the team had been working on multiplatform already: print, online and events.")
But even one layoff is painful. Heck, I lost a gig last week after stepping into the middle of a nasty bit of office politics. And I had given up two other paying gigs to take on that assignment. So believe me when I say to anyone who is about to lose a job at InfoWorld: "I feel your pain."
Heck, even those who keep their jobs at InfoWorld will feel some pain. No matter how we look at the changes in media, it's clear that part of what is happening must be described as "loss." InfoWorld, the magazine, existed. Soon it will not. So something is lost.

But something is gained, too.
And it's more than the business opportunities offered to a magazine brand that transitions to the new era of connection, conversation and containerless content.
What is gained is a trail to follow, and vindication for the trailblazers.

Allow me to explain.
IDG is a client. And in the past few years I've had numerous opportunities to speak with the journalists and publishers of that company. Some of those conversations have been one-to-one. But most have been speaking gigs. I'd stand at the front of a room. They would sit. And we'd talk about the future.
And at IDG -- as is true of every single place I've spoken in the past five years -- most of the audience could be divided into two groups. One group consisted of those who were excited about the future. The second group consisted of those who saw the future solely as a possible threat to their present.
At IDG, the first group was larger than it was at some other companies. But even at IDG, a company that many folks would describe as visionary, there were always a few folks in the second group.
The Group Two folks always sat together (they always knew their compatriots, even those from other magazines). And they spent an enormous amount of energy rolling their eyes whenever anyone appeared excited about what the Web meant for journalism.
The Group One folks were most noticeable for how they reacted after I finished my speech. They had tons of questions. And many of those questions involved the people in Group Two. "How do we get them excited?" "How can we help them learn multimedia skills?" "How can we make them less afraid?"
And therein is the key -- while the folks in Group Two were interested only in protecting what they had; the folks in Group One were interested in helping Group Two to adapt.

The advice I gave to the kindly folks in Group One was to ignore the laggards and slow wits of Group Two. (Although on bad days I've advocated murder.) I told the people in Group One to move ahead on their own. Clear a path. Create a trail of your own. And in the end, when you have reached a clearing and the road behind you is free of obstructions, you'll find the folks in Group Two will follow -- still complaining, but at least moving forward.

In the past few days I've watched a handful of cowboy movies. That's not a typical activity of mine. And I'm not sure what it's about, but it's probably related to the recent anniversary of my father's death. He loved the cowboy movies.
And if you watch enough cowboy movies, you start to picture the world as a cowboy movie.
So today I see the staff at InfoWorld as scouts on horseback. They have moved further than many would have dreamed possible. They have reached a clearing. The clearing is not their final destination. But it's a place quite different from where they started.
And they have sent word back to the rest of settlers. And now everyone, even the folks riding mules and donkeys, are on the road.

Matt McAlister is an InfoWorld alumni. He says that somebody at IDG "had to step forward, and InfoWorld is as well positioned to make that transition as anybody."
Scott Karp also sees InfoWorld as leading the way for the rest of the publishing industry, but that "of course, there’s a big gap between a B2B magazine making the transition and a local newspaper making it across the chasm. But we’ve got to start somewhere."

Thanks to Rex for tipping me to the InfoWorld news first. Rex tracks the industry so I don't have to.

tags: , , , , , ,

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: , , , , , , ,

Monday, February 26, 2007

And the Oscar goes to my little brother

Allow me a brief personal note today:
Congratulations to my baby brother David, who won the Oscar last night for Best Picture.
In reality, the Oscar is an honor to be shared by everyone in the cast of "The Departed." But at least in my eyes, it was David who made the movie.

His part was small. He's in one scene, sitting with "Mr. French," uttering obscenities and racial slurs. But as many of you know, "The Departed" is based loosely on the story of James "Whitey"
Bulger
and the land of my birth -- South Boston, Ma.
And David was the only Southie native in the movie. So for those of us born and raised on those streets, he gave an air of credibility to the flick.

Some of the handful of readers of this blog who know me personally know about my misspent youth and the series of connections between me, Whitey, the FBI and all things Southie. As for the rest of you, let me make the following vague, but informative comment, and then leave it at that: I have never been convicted of a felony while an adult.

And if you want to see a movie about Southie that more accurately reflects my life, check out "Good Will Hunting." I'm really very much like the stunningly attractive genius played by Matt Damon.

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: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Reconnecting

One of the readers of this blog posted a kind message in the comment section of this post, noting that my work on this blog has grown infrequent.
I'm flattered to think that anyone misses me.
And I assure you -- I miss all of you.
Few things in my working life bring me as much pleasure as does this blog.

No excuses ... I have been remiss. I've been on the road too much of late, and I let this work slip. But I promise to begin posting on a regular schedule again soon.
And if you're one of those few people who really, really, really miss me -- you should seek professional help. But you can also get extra doses of me and the things I talk about at three public appearances next month. I'll be visiting the campus of Northwest Missouri State University, speaking to teachers and student journalists at the convention of College Media Advisers, and serving on a panel at American Business Media's Digital Velocity conference.

In the meantime, thank you for reading. Thanks for staying in touch. And thanks for your patience and support.

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: , , , , , , , ,

Monday, January 29, 2007

eWeek crosses an ethical line

Well that didn’t take very long.
Just a few weeks ago, I predicted in Folio magazine that “at least one major publisher will do something unethical this year and then try to hide behind a claim that ‘things are different online.’
Now along comes Ziff Davis, acting ridiculous, and making me look like a prophet.

Ziff Davis’ property eWeek has begun running those same IntelliTXT ads that have led to scandal elsewhere. Regular readers of this blog know that VNU committed the same sin late last year, but pulled the ads after I complained. And anyone who follows the ongoing battle over ethics in journalism knows that the staff of Forbes magazine had to fight off IntelliTXT ads back a few years ago.

Look – there is no room for argument on this issue. We have been through this time and time again. If you want to hear how repulsive I find it when a publishing company so flagrantly violates the ethical standards of our industry, you can read my earlier post about VNU. If you want to see what the ethical guidelines of ASBPE actually say about this issue, you can also find that information in my earlier post.

In the meantime, I’m going to let Matt McAlister speak for me. I first heard about the eWeek problem through a post on his blog. And he summed up my feelings perfectly when he said "media sites scrapping to maintain profits on the page view model are bottom feeding for clicks with clutter and misleading links. Instead, they should spend their resources courting relationships with readers."

Look. Everyone knows that Ziff Davis is in trouble. After nearly going bankrupt a few years ago, the company has been searching for a buyer for a year. Bidding ended a few days ago, and no sale has been announced yet. But regardless of how things turn out, it’s unlikely that Ziff Davis’ owners, private equity firm Willis Stein & Partners, will get back anything close to the $780 million they paid for the company in 1999.

Ziff Davis has had a dismal performance of late in print. But online revenue has risen. And that has given investment bank Lehman Brothers, which is advising Ziff Davis on a sale, something to push. And when you have a private equity company and an investment bank both intent on boosting online revenue in the short term to help drive the sale of the company, you’re going to wind up with some embarrassing behavior.

So let’s be reasonable – selling IntelliTXT ads isn’t going to do anything to help turn the company around. There just isn’t that much cash involved in these things. Selling IntelliTXT ads won’t even provide enough of a short-term lift to help boost the price of the company. This is an absurd and offensive practice that won’t help a troubled company.
And let’s be frank – Ziff Davis isn’t in trouble because it didn’t have IntelliTXT ads until recently. Ziff Davis is in trouble because it’s run by people who think it makes good business sense to trade their reputation, their ethics and the morale of their staff for a few pennies.

Note: I sent an email to Eric Lundquist, VP/editorial director at eWeek, several days ago. He has not responded to my request for a comment.

tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Requiring feedback on feedback

Yesterday I wrote about the changes in how CNET is compensating some of its writers, and how those changes could affect the rest of us.
Now I see that CNET is changing how its reporters interact with readers -- requiring that they respond to every question that comes in via feedback functions. And once again it seems obvious to me that something significant has happened. The search for online community, the acceptance of conversational editorial, the rise of user-generated content -- all these things are becoming ingrained in how we do our work.
And nothing could please me more.

For an earlier post of mine about online communities, click here.

tags: , , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Paying journalists for results

I tend to have a pretty optimistic outlook on the changes in journalism. Sure, this can be a confusing time. And of course, we're all facing pressures that we couldn't have imagined a few years ago.
But for me, the world of new media is one of endless opportunities rather than countless threats.
So it shouldn't surprise anyone that I'm not upset by the news that CNET has introduced a pay-for-performance system for some online writers. But I'm not so insensitive to suggest that no one should be upset. Because this could, once again, represent a fundamental shift in our careers.

First, let me take a moment to note the significance that this change is coming from CNET. The San Francisco-based company has been at the fore of a number of significant changes in the journalism model, including comparison-shopping tools and the use of editors in video reviews. And although CNET wasn't the first news operation in Second Life, it was certainly the first to have one of its reporters attacked by flying penises.
More importantly, CNET's article pages have become a model for Web writing and design. Take a look at this piece for example, and pay particular attention to the "High Impact" graphic. CNET uses that box to make the "nut" graf of print-style feature writing more Web friendly. And close observers of online journalism will have noted that the Wall Street Journal -- king of the "nut" graf -- has adopted the "nut" graphic for its online edition.

Now CNET may be taking the lead again by creating a new compensation system for writers at its ZDNet unit. (You can hear ZDNet writer Mary Jo Foley talk about the system in this podcast.)
In brief, ZDNet is paying its bloggers based on the number of clicks they receive -- rewarding writers who generate traffic.
That's likely to cause worry among some journalists, who fear that publishers will begin rewarding writers who "cater" to an audience by creating content that is popular but has little journalistic value.
But I agree with Steve Rubel that since the ZDNet blogs are written by "veteran journalists," it's unlikely "that the performance based compensation changes their ethics one iota." And I agree too with Scott Karp that for professionals in search of hits, "quality will increase your odds a lot more over the long term than pandering and sensationalism."

And that, in a nutshell, is why I'm not worried about pay-for-performance journalism. I don't expect it will lead to a race to the bottom. I don't expect it will cause publishers to replace high-end prose with low-brow content. Rather I expect pay-for-performance to become a way to reward the best among us -- those exceptional few writers that bring readers. And I see pay-for-performance as a way for forward-thinking publishers to keep their most valuable employees from striking out on their own in search of readers and rewards.

tags: , , , , , , ,

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Time to brag about yourselves

If you're proud of some of the work you've done this year, this is the time to brag about it.
Tomorrow marks the deadline for entries to two contests that seek to reward the best in our industry.
First, consider entering your magazine and/or electronic products in the ASBPE Excellence Awards. ASBPE has added 16 categories this year, including one for multiplatform journalism. Second, make sure that the folks in your events and tradeshow department know that tomorrow is the final day for entries to Folio's FAME awards for magazine events.

But if you miss those deadlines, don't panic. There's still time to enter the Tabbie contest, which looks for the best in global B2B publishing. The Trade, Association and Business Publications International group, or TABPI, has added two categories this year, including best B2B Web site.

(Full Disclosure: Both ASBPE and TABPI have been kind enough to ask me to help judge some of the categories in this year's contests.)

tags: , , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Sharp ends and sharp minds

"Skillset is important. But mindset is most important."
That's a quote from Rob Curley, one of the sharpest guys working in media today, writing about what the next generation of journalists needs to bring to the job interview. You can read the rest of Rob's thoughts by clicking here.
Or you can just wait until I speak at the College Media Advisers convention in March, at which time I'm likely to steal many of Rob's ideas.

(My thanks to The Guardian's Kevin Anderson, who pointed me toward Rob's most recent quote. And my thanks to Kevin also for including me with Howard Owens and Steve Outing on the list of journalists that "are at the sharp end" of the changes in our industry. I assure you all, if I have anything at all to contribute to the conversation, I stole it from Rob, Howard, Steve, Rex, Mindy, Matt, Adrian or any of the dozens of other folks, all much sharper than I, that populate the journalism blogosphere.)

tags: , , , , , , ,