Tag: newspapers
Right as I was getting out of newspapers I was talking with our circulation manager, who had just heard of a revolutionary new idea that was going to save the industry. As a baseline, let's say the paper cost 75¢ per issue (I worked at a moderate-sized daily). You buy it from one of the little metal newspaper houses, 75¢. Grocery store, 75¢. Buy a subscription, you get a little discount, but there's one flat rate you pay.
Then, one day, some economic geniuses from high atop the mount gazed into their scrying balls and noted, "Hey, rich people have more money." From this fact, they extrapolated a theory that rich people would be more likely to spend more money than non-rich folks. Thus was born our new Model for Journalism™: income-based pricing.
As you might have guessed by even a passing knowledge of the current state of the journalism industry, this did not solve the problem. Now, they rolled this out with a modicum of sense. They didn't just suddenly jack up the rates on everybody; when subscription renewals came up, they just modified the increase so it was higher for some people than others. Because they lacked detailed demographic information on individual customers (I shudder to think what they would have done had this initiative been launched in 2024), they based it loosely on Zip codes. (This had the added benefit of making sure that neighbors wouldn't be discussing the price of the newspaper and find out they were paying vastly different rates.)
It worked, kinda? For a little bit, anyway. Some people were willing to pay more, and the sales people were instructed that if customers put up too much of a fight, they could resub at the new standard rate. But there are two crucial flaws to this approach; I won't name them yet, because first I want to talk about how this idea has absolutely exploded across the entire American marketplace.
Anyone who's been to the grocery store knows that prices have gotten significantly higher since COVID. As have fast food prices, concert ticket prices, and streaming service subscription fees.
Some will point to the laws of supply and demand, which is a) facile, b) not relevant in industries like streaming, and c) not nearly enough to account for the rate of increases we've been seeing in consumables. The real reason, of course, is greed: Those selling think they can make more money by raising prices and enough consumers will continue to fork over the money to offset those who don't.
Here's where we get to the issue: This economic model ignores how people actually work.
In our newspaper example, raising rates did two things: First, it made people reconsider their model of what a newspaper is. For a long time, getting the newspaper was just what you did: it's how you stayed informed and, as a teacher of mine once put it, "It's what cultured people do."
But by significantly raising the price, you force people to think of the thing they're purchasing's overall utility to their lives. What was once an automatic, "Yes, of course we pay for the paper," now gets framed, internally, as "Does the paper provide $x amount of value to me?"
The second thing that raising prices does is increase awareness of the competition. In newspapers' case, this was pretty broadly known, but there was a significant percentage of people even in the early 2010s for whom getting the news via a single source delivered to their house every morning was more convenient than seeking out online or TV news sources.
But once that price goes up? Suddenly the hassle of trying to sift through information on the internet doesn't seem so daunting. You're more willing to experiment, because you're saving so much money. And now the newspaper has to stand on its own as a value proposition, which isn't a good strategy for a medium that is objectively and definitively slower, more expensive and less adaptable than its direct competition.
And we're seeing the same thing happen now in real-time, in a variety of industries. Subway jacked up its prices 39% 2014-2024; a week ago, they had to hold a corporate emergency meeting because sales are so low. McDonalds announced its first quarter-to-quarter sales drop since 2020. These and other companies assumed they could jack up the price and enough people would cover at the new high to offset those who bailed. And, worst-case scenario, if it's too high, they can always drop the prices back down.
But that's not how people work. When people feel like they're being screwed, they get bitter and hold a grudge. When people are forced to confront and try new alternatives, sometimes it turns out they liked the new option better than the old one, anyway. And any brand loyalty they may have once held is completely obliterated, so you're not only starting from scratch, you're actually digging yourself out of a hole.
Such is life when you're focused solely, maniacally on the short-term. You might find yourself with no long-term options back to success.
Permalink
I can't remember what phrase they specifically used for this, but I think it was named after some economist. Economists, famously, are really bad at predicting the results of actual people doing things in the world.
It's always a good idea to test your code — and I did. I swear.
My problem did not lie in a lack of testing, but rather a lack of testing using real numbers or real data. For readability purposes, the election results data numbers are formatted with a comma separating every 3 numbers, much in the way numbers always are in non-financial or -computer contexts (e.g., 1,000, 3,334,332).
That's still a lack of testingI thought I was soooo smart linking to everything, except now all the links are dead and useless.
There is one thing that any aspiring programmer must realize when they set out to replace a tool: YOU CAN'T REPLACE A TOOL AT THE HEART OF A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR CORPORATION ON YOUR OWN. I knew this academically but, as is often the case when setting out on these adventures, my brain chose to heed that advice only when it was convenient to do so.
I often live by the mantra, "If someone else can do it, that means it's possible." It works well something like 75 percent of the time — it prevents me from feeling daunted when facing large projects, but it can be turned around as well.
Listen to your programming brain, not your programming heart10 years later, the projects for the GameTimePA URLs are still live and running, but the main newspaper's domain isn't. But they're pointing to the same server!
Show people what journalism is, what interactive journalism can be. Show them it’s not all “a reporter shows up, talks to people, goes away and later something appears on the website/in the paper.” Show them that journalism can be curation from the public, soliciting input and feedback instanteously, that comes together in a package with our deep knowledge and library of photos of the area.
And I thought, “Damn. That sounds like FlappyArms.sexy, except actually relevant to journalism. I gotta get in on that.”
Flap those sexy arms as you fly to read more
It was what you’d call a “hard-and-fast” deadline: Our contract with Caspio for database and data services was changing on July 1. On that day, our account — which to that point had been averaging something like 17GB transferred per month — would have to use no more than 5GB of data per month, or else we’d pay to the tune of $50/GB.
Our biggest data ab/user by far was our user-submitted photo galleries. A popular feature among our readers, it allowed them to both upload photos for us (at print quality) to use in the paper as well as see them online instanteously. Caspio stored and displayed them as a database: Here’s a page of a bunch of photos, click one to get the larger version.
We had to come up with something to replace it — and, as ever, without incurring m/any charges, because we don’t have any money to spend.
Find out how we did it (spoiler: we used computers)My first big in-house migration to save money!
No one is saying that all stories, or even most will be written by computers, but it’s not difficult to imagine that a good number of them will be simply because most stories today have significant chunks that aren’t deeply reported. They’re cribbed from press releases, interpreted from box scores or condensed from the wire. If we leave the drudge work to the computers, we can free up reporters to do things that computers can’t, and actually producing more, better content. It’s quite literally win-win. The primary losers are those companies who will buy too deeply into the idea that they can generate all their content automatically.
We've been arguing about AI stories since 2014I still wholeheartedly think that entirely generated content is essentially useless to end-users.
What we wanted was an easy way to get photos from any device (photographers frequently work using only their phones or tablets, because it’s one less and/or lighter piece of equipment they have to lug around versus a laptop) and push it to three places — the web, print and our archive. The simplest solution seemed to be getting the file into our system and then moving it around from there.
Enter Dropbox. It’s extraordinary how even free services can do what used to require expensive services that were frequently more unreliable. Using the free 2GB Dropbox plan, we made sure that all of the devices were syncing to the same account, as well as to the “new” automater machine.
Find out how we synced on no budgetThis would be much easier nowadays, as you'd just have a cloud-based Digital Asset Management system, but the budget would also be MUCH higher.
There's a reason the inverted pyramid exists and has been adopted by the journalism profession as the general template for telling a story: It makes sense for a lot of them. You start out with a very specific idea and then go broad the more you write. It keeps young writers from getting too bogged down in specifics, while also making sure they're not taking the 10,000-foot view on everything.
It's a guideline ... And that's all it should be: a guide. It's not inviolate, and it's by no means the best format for every story out there. Even more so than the idea that each story should be expressed in the best format possible, there are almost zero stories where a strict inverted pyramid is called for.
Walk before you can run, but once you can run don't walk everywhereGod, I wrote about writing a lot.
This problem was compounded when we decided on the scope of the project Our high school football coverage is run by GameTimePA, which consists of the sports journalists from the York Daily Record, Hanover Evening Sun, Chambersburg Public Opinion and Lebanon Daily News. The four newsrooms are considered a "cluster," which means that we're relatively close geographically and tend to work together. Since the last preview, however, GameTimePA had expanded to include our corporate siblings in the Philadelphia area, meaning we now encompassed something like 10 newsrooms stretching from Central Pennsylvania to the New Jersey border.
And we're all on different CMSes.
How ever will this dilemma be solved? I bet they use code
Rarely is the question asked, "Is our children tweeting?" This question is likely nonexistent in journalism schools, which currently provide the means for 95+ percent of aspiring journalists to so reach said aspirations. Leaving aside the relative "duh" factor (one imagines someone who walks into J101 without a Twitter handle is the same kind of person who scrunches up his nose and furrows his brow at the thought of a "smart ... phone?"), simple (slightly old) statistics tell us that 15% of Americans on the Internet use Twitter.
(This is probably an important statistic for newsrooms in general to be aware of vis-a-vis how much time they devote to it, but that's another matter.)
For most journalism students, Twitter is very likely already a part of life. Every introduction they're given to Twitter during a class is probably time better spent doing anything else, like learning about reporting. Or actually reporting. Or learning HTML.
I know this idea is not a popular one. The allure and promise of every new CMS or web service that comes out almost always includes a line similar to, "Requires no coding!" or "No design experience necessary!" And they're right, for the most part. If all you're looking to do is make words appear on the internet, or be able to embed whatever the latest Storify/NewHive/GeoFeedia widget they came out with, you probably don't need to know HTML.
Until your embed breaks. Or you get a call from a reader who's looking at your latest Spundge on an iPad app and can't read a word. Or someone goes into edit your story and accidentally kills off a closing </p> tag, or adds an open <div>, and everything disappears.
Suddenly it's "find the three people in the newsroom who know HTML," or even worse, try to track down someone in IT who's willing to listen. Not exactly attractive prospects.
Heck, having knowledge of how the web works would probably even help them use these other technologies. Not just in troubleshooting, but in basic setup and implementation. In the same way we expect a basic competence in journalists to produce their stories in Word (complete with whatever styles or code your antiquated pagination system might prescribe), so too should we expect the same on digital.
Especially in a news climate where reporters are expected as a matter of routine to file their own stories to the web, it's ludicrous that they're not expected to know that an <img> tag self-closes, or even the basic theory behind open and closed tags. No one ever did their job worse because they knew how to use their tools properly.
I'm not saying everyone needs to be able to code his or her own blog, but everyone should have a basic command of their most prominent platform. It's time we shifted the expectations for reporters from "not focused entirely on print" to "actually focused on digital."
Permalink
Thanks to Elon, no asks if our children are tweeting anymore. There's a big advantage in learning how to use all your tools properly, even if it doesn't seem like it.
Some level of skepticism should be present. As debunking performs a fairly vital part of paranormal investigating, at least for Whispering Spirits, you'd expect the group to be somewhat wary of what it finds. You'd expect each of them (or at least some of them) to examine things with a critical eye, always naysaying each other and operating on a basis of "normal until proven not."
You'd also be wrong. Most of the debunking, it seems, falls to one man — Bobby.
Let's investigate what's going on here, shall we?They were a great bunch of people, and I absolutely ate it writing the story for the newspaper the next day. This version is so much better.
Poems for our "bureau" reporter in Santa Fe, whose stories I'm always left waiting for when I'm laying out:
Sitting at my desk
wondering if you're still alive
unmoved either way.
Four stories at noon
two out, two new by midday;
none ever find me.
He's slaving away
Interviewing, contacting;
AP filed at 5.
A blank page, staring
waiting to be filled with news ...
Angry Birds high score!
Permalink
Rest assured — or be disappointed, for that matter — my next stint does not involve starting my own snowplow company or buying an old ambulance and renting myself out as a medic for hire. I've managed to snag myself a gig as an online editor for the Farmington Daily Times, a small outfit in northwest New Mexico that produces some darn good journalism ... but could use some help on their interwebs (and, hopefully, I'll get to do a little copy editing and page design while I'm at it).
Finally, a stable job (journalism!)Reading my old humor/satire often feelsbadman.jpg
But none of that does any good. I know that's a tough prescription to take (much akin to a "Tough shit" offered when an accusation of unfairness is raised), but it's true. I struggled with it myself in those first few minutes after I went back to my desk after the meeting. I kept flashing back to that first meeting with the publisher, with the thoughts of loyalty running through my head: "I moved to Spokane, I quit my job, I gave my word that I wouldn't jump at the next incrementally better job ... You, on the other hand, laid me off/let me go/fired me six months in."
(These phrases sound like they're different, but only if you're not on the receiving end.)
Let's get prepared for what lies aheadReally? A West Wing reference?
It’s pretty clear to everyone — people in the stands, his coaches on the sidelines, the other team’s defense — that the best way for G-Prep to win is to put the ball in his hands. Even if you know what’s coming (and since Sankey had 41 carries en route to 359 yards, it wasn’t exactly a secret), it’s still really hard to bring him down.
Follow this link or get run overStill unclear how I got assigned as unofficial sportswriter. We had a whole sports stringer! His stories were just boring.
Minor league baseball. Even the name sounds so ... inferior. “Minor league” has that connotation in today’s parlance: cut-rate. Second-fiddle.
Not good enough.
Feels like a major story to me"redundantly named Vancouver Canadians" might be my favorite phrase I've ever written.
I don't often do much reflection, but this felt like a big step. Looking back on the one-year mark working at my college newspaper, the Washington State University Daily Evergreen, after getting involved on a lark. Then they put me in charge of the thing??
Look back over my shoulder