In his weekly post Ken Doctor (immediately below) makes a compelling case that news companies need to provide signature name-brand content to differentiate themselves from the multitude of information providers out there. It's not a new argument, but it's one of the better presentations of it. News organizations need to provide unique, original content that they can't get elsewhere ... or in a way or format that adds value that they won't get elsewhere ... or both. The recent drumbeat has been for local, local, local, but has also included themes of investigative, watchdog, accountability, trustworthy journalism. This obviously requires journalists. "Name-brand content is worth investing in — even if it means cutting back elsewhere," Doctor says. RJI's Esther Thorson last year presented research and analysis that puts muscle behind Doctor's viewpoint, showing how dollars invested in (or denied) the newsroom impacts the bottom line. Her work is worth revisiting.
About a decade ago, while working with industry think-tank New Directions for News here at Mizzou, we worked with multidisciplinary teams from several of the industry's leading digital divisions: Belo Interactive, Freedom Interactive, Morris, McClatchy, Cox and others. Most of the companies set up separate digital divisions thinking that they needed their own leadership, skill sets, and laser focus (shed the distractions of the legacy platforms) in order to grow. Splitting off from the mother ship (usually the dominant metro newspaper in the company) gave them an agility and freedom to innovate. And for the most part, those divisions were successful. Yet once successful, most of those divisions were merged back into the mother ship -- usually under cover of "integrated local branding," not to mention some cost savings achieved by merging business and marketing functions and promoting a single brand.
How'd that work out? Some would say it squelched innovation, and slowed the growth of digital development. The industry has recently participated in a similar discussion around digital sales: separate digital and print sales teams, or one integrated sales team? We can find experts and consultants on the speaking circuit on both sides of the argument. In the second item below, Gordon Borrell offers his latest findings.
Original, signature content will replace all-access as 2012's hot topic
Digital-only sales staff perform better
How to profit from social media audience development
Game dynamics: Education, learning, not just for shoot em ups
Apple iBooks Author tool: Four opportunities for new organizations
Research: Tablet ads are outperforming print
UK's Times will let subscribers "gift" pay model articles; may add micropayments
Key to digital revenue: Simplify it for local advertisers
Borrell case study: How Pittsburgh media divide up the online market
48 million in 2012: iPad3 expected to differentiate from competition
December Nielsen: Single brand Apple iPhone just 2 points shy of multiple brand Androids
Mobile: Context is the differentiator
CJR: Counterpoint to Clay Shirkey's dismissal of digital pay models
... and yet another view of whether/when content has value
Transforming the legacy print business: One company's journey
10 elements of a perfectly optimized web page
Finding success in a social world
Social media ROI still a work in progress
Agency adopts pay-for-performance model: Are we ready?
Newspapers: Boomers are the "appealing" audience but don't forget the others
Ad revenue: 400 publishers tell KubasPrimedia what they expect in 2012
Five forces for change in 2012
LA Times: Another view of John Paton's digital first strategy
Comments
Add Your Comment