<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>OJR</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr</link>
<description>New articles from OJR</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<item>
<title>How journalism startups are making money around the world</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/pekkapekkala/201211/2094/</link>
<description>By Pekka Pekkala: For the last two years I have had an opportunity to participate in an ambitious global research project: how journalistic startups are making money in the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom, France and five other countries.

The project is called Sustainable Business Models for Journalism. What did we find? First, bad news: there�s no single, easy solution or amazing new business model that solves all the problems that traditional publishing models have.

But looking through some of the very grassroots operations around the globe, you find some similarities among the sites. Probably the most comforting lesson from these young and old entrepreneurs is the fact that there�s probably no need for an amazing new business model. Journalism is just going through a transformative period from a monopolistic, high-revenue and low competition model to a highly competitive global marketplace. And the ideas and advice we got from these entrepreneurs was not that much different from the advice you find in traditional business literature, startup manuals or even biographies of successful companies.

Here are some general conclusions from the 69 startups we interviewed. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:01:34 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>How a youth Reporter Corps could help reinvigorate local journalism</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/dgerson/201210/2093/</link>
<description>By Daniela Gerson: Emma asked if I would write her a recommendation for AmeriCorps. Usually, I would have said yes without hesitation, but this request struck a nerve. The recent college graduate was among a dozen or so young adults who wrote about their predominantly immigrant community for the news site I edit, Alhambra Source [www.alhambrasource.org]. She told me that she wanted to join AmeriCorps to serve a city across the country that the federal government determined was in need. My instinct was that this was not the best use of her skills: She could probably make a more meaningful contribution reporting on her own Los Angeles community.  

That conversation started me thinking about the need for a program in the style of AmeriCorps � or Teach for America or Peace Corps � for journalism in under-reported and diverse communities. Call it Reporter Corps. The service-learning model would train young adults in journalism and teach them how their government works, pair them with a local publication in need of reporters, get them some quality mentors, provide a stipend, and set them loose for six months or a year reporting on their own community. 

Just about a year after my conversation with Emma, I am very pleased that the first class of six Reporter Corps members started this month at Alhambra Source, with support from USC Annenberg and the McCormick Foundation.  </description>
<pubDate>Sun, 28 Oct 2012 08:26:00 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>If Newsweek wants to survive, it should learn from its peers</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/alih/201210/2092/</link>
<description>By Andrew Lih: Unsurprisingly, but sad nonetheless, Newsweek announced the last weekly print edition of the magazine will be December 31. Starting in 2013, it will join the ranks of U.S. News and World Report as an all-digital publication, leaving TIME Magazine as the only popular U.S. weekly still on the newsstand. 

Printed Newsweek was in bad shape. According to The New York Times, it went from 3,158,480 paid circulation in 2001 down to 1,527,157 this past June. Barry Diller signaled earlier this year that IAC wouldn't keep bleeding money to keep Newsweek alive. 

Of course, we've seen this trend before. The advent of the web in 1994 killed the last prominent news monthly when LIFE magazine stopped printing and went to nothing but special editions in 2000.

Today, social and mobile media have taken it one step further, making the U.S. newsweekly an aging relic. It's easy to focus on the losers in this game, but a number of folks have thrived in this same space. It's not too late for Tina Brown and The Daily Beast to learn from successful peers.

Fundamentally, news lies at a triple-point that attempts to balance three goals: speed, accuracy and depth. Hitting the mark with any two translates into success. It's a bonanza if you can hit all three.

Who has learned to adapt to the acceleration of these factors in a digital age, and who should Newsweek look to? </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2012 08:58:00 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>Taking TV news to the next level in an era of disruption</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/gabekahn/201209/2091/</link>
<description>By Gabriel Kahn: In a media landscape defined by disruption, television news has pulled off a remarkable feat: it�s basically unchanged. 

Sure, we�ve gotten more news choppers and better graphics on weather and politics. There are a few interesting TV news apps. But, for the most part, your local TV news broadcast looks much as it did a decade ago. It�s pretty much locked into its time slot of 5 p.m. or 10 p.m. You sit, you watch. The anchors work their way through weather, traffic, sports and the smattering of local stories brought to you from the roving news truck. If you stick around long enough, maybe there is a great story at minute 22. 


Sixty years of TV news in two and a half minutes. | Credit: Leila Dougan

But what if you could harness all the emergent technologies to reshape TV news into a brand-new product, one that maximizes audience engagement, personalizes broadcasts to your interests and allows you to dig deep into digitized news archives?  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2012 17:55:00 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>The Case of Philip Roth vs. Wikipedia</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/alih/201209/2090/</link>
<description>By Andrew Lih: As Wikipedia becomes an increasingly dominant part of our digital media diet, what was once anomalous has become a regular occurrence.

Someone surfing the net comes face to face with a Wikipedia article -- about himself. Or about her own work.

There's erroneous information that needs to be fixed, but Wikipedia's 10-year-old tangle of editing policies stands in the way, and its boisterous editing community can be fearsome.

If a person can put the error into the public spotlight, then publicly shaming Wikipedia's volunteers into action can do the trick. But not without some pain.

The most recent episode?

The case of Pulitzer Prize winning fiction writer Philip Roth. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:13:00 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>5 lessons learned: Improving civic engagement through a local news site</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/dgerson/201209/2089/</link>
<description>By Daniela Gerson: Four years ago a team of communication scholars, researchers and journalists set out to create a community news website that would increase civic engagement and cross ethnic barriers in a predominantly Asian and Latino immigrant city. Since Alhambra Source launched in 2010, it has grown to more than 60 community contributors who speak 10 languages and range in age from high school students to retirees. Their stories have helped shape local policy and contributed to a more engaged citizenry within a diverse community. Below are five lessons we�ve learned about creating a community news website that fosters civic engagement. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2012 08:55:39 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>National party conventions, graphic photos, social media's bull$#!t, open data, and a world stream</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/bfrank/201208/2087/</link>
<description>By Brian Frank: Here's a quick roundup of stories and conversations that caught our attention in the past week, the first in what will gradually become a regular series.

Convention City: For the next two weeks, we'll be barraged with reportage from the Republican and Democratic national conventions. As MediaShift points out, a lot of attention among media observers will be paid to how a variety of digital tools are deployed, much like it was during the Summer Olympics. The media industry blog has already put together a helpful list of resources for following the conventions. Meanwhile, the Washington Post has launched a new feature it's calling The Grid, which is an interesting way to scan through all their various social media and reporting channels and get the latest on the RNC (and next week the DNC). </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2012 11:52:00 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>My response to The Hartford Courant�s �Spanish-language strategy� with Google Translate</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/webjournalist/201208/2086/</link>
<description>By Robert Hernandez: "Como una cortes�a para The Courant, por demostrando ignorancia y falta de respeto a su propia comunidad, d�jeme decir: lo cagaron."

If you were to translate this using Google Translate, guess what� it would be wrong. Anyone who is bilingual wouldn�t be surprised. But they would be surprised in hearing that a news organization would solely depend on using this primitive service as their �Spanish-language strategy.�

Sadly, this isn�t a joke: Hartford Courant�s Spanish site is Google Translate by Poynter.

But, instead of just being disgusted or insulted by The Courant�s �strategy,� let me offer some tips for an actual strategy. </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:35:00 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>What's missing from the debate on "rebooting journalism schools"</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/Geneva/201208/2084/</link>
<description>By Geneva Overholser: "Rebooting journalism schools" has been a hot topic this spring and summer, culminating at the recent convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) in Chicago. 

A key figure in the discussion is the Knight Foundation's Eric Newton, who headed a group of foundation leaders calling on America's university presidents to put "top professionals in residence" and to focus on applied research. Newton had previously challenged journalism schools to consider a new degree structure to "put professionals on par with scholars and give the highest credentials to people who are both." This Newton post offers a good sampling of the discussion to date.
 
Another leading voice is the Poynter Institute's Howard Finberg, whose speech in Europe in June helped launch the debate.  Finberg followed with a good summation.

It's a lively discussion. Lots of truths have been spoken, lots of silly things said, and many topics worthy of debate have been raised.  Here are a few points I think need adding (or stressing more than they have been to date): </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 18 Aug 2012 19:11:00 MST</pubDate>
</item><item>
<title>Shazam! NBC may have just given us a glimpse into our transmedia future</title>
<link>http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/bfrank/201208/2082/</link>
<description>By Brian Frank: Now that the Olympics are over, we can reflect on the performances we witnessed not only from the athletes (awful, great, and everything in between), but also from the network that brought London into our living room and onto our smartphones (ditto). NBC caught plenty of flak for tape-delaying a giant portion of the events rather than broadcasting them live. For frustrated sports enthusiasts and vitriolic Twitcrits armed with the #NBCFail hash tag, that was something of a mortal sin, not least because in this media-saturated age spoilers pervaded the atmosphere like a greenhouse gas.

There are economic factors to consider, however. NBC paid about $1.2 billion for exclusive U.S. broadcast rights to the Olympics. The company had to recoup that money somehow. Rolling the marquee events, highlights, and personal stories into a single primetime package consolidated eyeballs and, by extension, boosted ad revenues. The strategy seems to have worked, as ratings for the London Olympics were reportedly the highest of any in decades. People clearly tuned in despite the time-shifted broadcasts. NBC Research President Alan Wurtzel even told Reuters reporter Liana B. Baker  that people appeared even more likely to tune in when they already knew the results.

Of course, it's tough to credit any strategy, alone or in combination, when the company had a monopoly on coverage. Television viewers didn't really have anywhere else to go, so the only solid conclusion one can draw from NBC's ratings success is that a lot of people wanted to watch the Olympics and did.

Whatever you think about NBC's broadcast strategy, though, you have to give them some credit for pushing the envelope just a little further on the digital front. The company's transmedia approach to covering the Olympics was a promise, even if not quite fulfilled, of a future in which the Internet and TV (and, really, all media) finally, harmoniously, converge into a kind of unified and, yes, very social experience. </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 11 Aug 2012 17:02:08 MST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>

