January 2005

The post about EPIC has drawn some interesting comments. Here is another re-post of an item from 2004 about the changing face of media. (Perhaps we should invite the journalism students over here)

USAToday is running a story about a Chilean newspaper web site where readers determine which stories are followed-up on.

If a certain story gets a lot of clicks, for example, that is a signal to Edwards and his team that the story should be followed up, and similar ones should be sought for the next day. If a story gets only a few clicks, it is killed. The system offers a direct barometer of public opinion, much like the TV rating system — but unique to print media.

The fear of course is that the paper will turn into more of a tabloid, than a resource for news. In many ways it is.

None of the LUN correspondents have news beats anymore, rather, they compete one against the other. Edwards says he will start financial incentives, with salaries reflecting the monthly clicks each reporter accrues.

The other issue I see is abuse of the system. There have been stories of phantom clicks.

low cost workers in India, China and other countries are hired to boost traffic for online ads by clicking on text links, banners etc.

The scenario would be to drive clicks to a positive story about your product/client or drive clicks to a negative story about your competition. Thereby keeping the story alive through a few more news cycles.

Share This: email to others, bookmark to del.icio.us, etc.

Here is another re-post of a 2004 item from my blog about changes in media:

Great follow-up to the post I had yesterday about readers picking stories. Lou Rosenfeld blogs about a conversation he had with Guy Valerio of the Financial Times of London. The discussion is about using search logs to predict what stories may be out there.

If a company name shows up with great frequency in the search logs but hasn’t been covered recently in FT articles, it may indicate a developing story about to hit daylight. Guy finds that this sort of anomaly is often a useful predictor of what the FT should consider covering in the coming days. Conversely, if a company name drops off the search logs, interest in a related story line may be waning, and FT can choose to invest its reporting resources elsewhere.

On the surface it may sound similar to a per-click tracking, but the search logs can help expose what is not on the site that readers are looking for (they can’t click on the story if it’s not there).

Of course now that the cat is out of the bag so-to-speak, how long before a PR flak looking to generate interest in a client enters the name of the company in the search tool repeatedly?

I make it a habit to analyze client’s search logs and to show them how to as well. It is amazing some of the things that appear. You quickly learn what your audience is looking for.

Share This: email to others, bookmark to del.icio.us, etc.