Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
General Discussion / St Louis Police Order Reiterating Rights Of Journalists
« Last post by Daniel Crump on November 17, 2017, 04:22 PM »
Can't say I have ever had an issue doing my job around police. I have however heard some pretty cringe worthy stories from colleagues north and south of the border. Given how often journalists and police services interact this might not be a bad idea everywhere (though monthly might be slightly excessive). Thoughts?
General Discussion / WW1 photographers
« Last post by Jim Cochrane on November 10, 2017, 04:55 PM »

this is a link about WW! photographers that I found interesting. Perhaps you will too. JC
General Discussion / Re: Universities Could Take Over Newspapers
« Last post by Ken Gigliotti on November 05, 2017, 10:51 AM »
Seventeen years ago in digital time is the opposite to dog years for heritage media. If people were talking about partnerships for print media,no one should be surprised. There was an experiment in Headingley just out side of Winnipeg in the early 1980's that investigated the idea that newspaper copy could be viewed on a local cable TV channel. This was just rolling ,typewriter copy , not a page of a newspaper , no pictures , no design. It failed. It was designed to fail in my opinion. But these ideas were driven by the government investigations of newspaper ownership and operation  the newsrooms. The government threats would force great change.

 The newspaper business was well aware of systemic scoliosis way back then. It was clear by “the Deal” that closed newspapers that few could survive in Canada's largest cities where competition existed. Prior to “the Deal” aggressive newspaper wars like the one in Winnipeg had no winners, the Southam chain was hemorrhaging money (and still is),  the Winnipeg Free Press was losing circulation to a dead heat.

The Deal created a windfall that financed the Renaissance of the newspaper business that fallowed. New buildings ,new presses and design , it was great fun if you were lucky enough to be there to see it from the inside.  The Renaissance  improved a very sick business. Costs began rising and corporatization  seeped in , and the slippage began again. After the 1980's resurgence of newspapers came the mainstreaming of the internet in Canada in 1991, Facebook in 2004, YouTube 2005 and the Simon Personal Communicator (IBM idea)became the iPhone smart phone in 2007. Smart phones and tablets really caused a panic. Real change could not happen because quarterly newspapers still made lots of money, in a declining year over year march. Thomson saw it first and sold out in 1996..

It seems longer than it was. Digital years may be only three months long.

But one of these desperate ideas will likely stick until the newspaper business decides it needs saving. Right now it cannot change because it doesn't want to. That is changing. Even an illiterate photographer like me spitballs these ideas because it is my experience that people who care about newspapers have to come up with acceptable  ideas or they will have them imposed by corporate masters and they may not like the result.
We speak truth to power , but not loudly inside our own walls. Kg opinion
General Discussion / Forbes 100 Years Old- Solves Print/Online Puzzle
« Last post by Ken Gigliotti on November 04, 2017, 12:37 PM »
Forbes Magazine turns 100, Editor and Chief Steve Forbes makes some interesting observations about the success of the business magazine that also makes sense for the newspaper business.

The bi-weekly magazine has unlocked a success formula both in print and online. The online product protects the printed product. A paper product publishing three days a week would save many millions of dollars for local papers in large Canadian cities. The online world opens up the possibility for many, on-time or just in-time products, separate, local weather (and road report) crime, pro sports NHL and CFL  come to mind.
Crime and courts should  no longer be in the mainstream product.These areas have become so disturbing that they could be in a separate product , these are black box items not for general reading with children or young families. Young families are afraid of what their kids will see on local  news or CNN,they want to avoid trying to explain the world to young kids. This is a new reality. But a black box product would be popular on it's own in a much wider audience.

It means doing more but spending less. There is a way.
The online product is  very different from the magazine. Forbes now publishes in 28 languages,68 countries, and operates 26 websites , 38 licenses , there is a Forbes India, Forbes on Fox, Forbes Women,and Forbes Travel. Talk about covering all the bases and growing places. Every newspaper has these very same ties. The magazine changed with the times.Forbes says the magazines print circulation is at it's highest point in history.

The magazine was started in 1917 by his grandfather B.C. Forbes  during WW1 and the same year as the Russian Revolution. The original name was Forbes -Devoted to Doers and Doing.The magazine survived the Great Depression by going with all freelance writers. I guess the freelance input would always be fresh ,hungry  and provide a variety of writing styles and points of view to this day.

The newspapers flourished also during this time taking a very different approach to staffing and these were golden years , before and after the Depression. If you look a individual newspaper website histories and NP history in general it seems their history and accomplishments started and ended by 1920. It became an industry of old buildings and old presses till 1980's. The offset press came into vogue less that twenty years before the internet.

The online product Forbes produced was done with a separate staff headed by Steve's brother Tim and an online content editor and it produce 99% different daily content than the bi-weekly magazine. Some newspapers like the Toronto Star kept a separate staff for their online product working in a different building and lower wage scale. At first most newspapers approached the web product like a hobby  using held stories , and dumping stories that would not make the paper. The web product originally was held back to preserve the paper product. Online stories were released at night after the paper product was printed. The idea was to use the same staff and management  to move the papers stories onto the web.The morning paper made newspapers followers in the media space when they were once leaders. 

The web destroyed standard reporting , Steve Forbes saw it first and adapted with a content formula that attracted millennials in the 2000's the way the magazine attracted readers in WW1.The content was designed to “teach a a morality tale,provide a tool box to the reader for success...  to go beyond mere news and information.

I take that to mean that instead of proving random disconnected information the idea was to provide information that helps and inspire the reader to be better at what ever they are doing.

Newspapers instead focus on the failures, and the detail of failure, the sorrow and the impending future sorrow, without regard for the reader. Modern sorrow is not what this next generation wants to focus on. The newspaper way as applied to business  would focus on every failed enterprise , out of work employees and the pain of failure as well as  lost investment.

This is not a rejection of sorrow, just the portion size. Several generations have gone to school, accumulated great debt and have no job to show for it. This is an inter generational great depression for young people. They are hurting and the newspaper industry is oblivious to this pain. Our business names and profiles every micro generation. Gen X were called slackers. They are coming to power now and will never buy a newspaper.Why should they? The Greatest Generation that defeated the Nazis in WWII was made up of many generations, those who were of junior rank at West Point during WWI were generals in WWII along side of twenty something privates and sergeants.The Baby Boomers also spanned many decades.

Forbes is famous for it's magazine cover and it's 400 Richest people list.The list was started by Steve Forbes father, his staff at the time told him the list was impossible to tabulate. His father made the list anyway and the rest is history.What is notable is that in 35 years 1600 different people appeared on this list and only fifty remain from the original list. Warren Buffett commented that none have ever been short sellers. That is a sign of change. Number 374 on this years list ,his great-grandfathers cut hair in Italy,he cut hair and sold a line of hair products and is worth $2.1 billion. Yale student and Vietnam Vet came back from the war and started FEDEX. His Yale professor did not like the idea when he was in school. These small profiles would be very inspiring to anyone. There are 400 in this months magazine. The list also shows that Donald Trump has lost $600 million since becoming president. People are voting with their dollars, not going to Trump hotels and golf courses.

The web problem to heritage newspapers  was like the Star Trek ,Kobayashi Maru, a problem where every answer is the wrong one. The web diminished the paper product in every way. The answer was to hold back the promise of the future web in favor of a declining paper product. Forbes created different content with different and competitive staff and were successful.

The  Forbes content model created a magazine-a-day that was different from the printed magazine by having a thousand contributors  create new content. The magazine brand pushed  positive content that gave the readers a tool box for readers to be successful.

The idea is not to fire all the reporters. The idea is to make the information meaningful to the reader. This needs to be reflected in the original assignment. Can  new  readers be made to feel safe, can there be a constructive aspect , a context for knowing the details o the sorrow in every community.

Staff writers and columnists lives are an arc, they will revert to the comfort of things they did before. The newspaper stories become stories revisited by new reporters for a fresh take ,but the readers feel they have read these stories before.

Newspapers fall into a rut of things that re-occur every year like clockwork. This is another problem that gives the readers feeling of deja vu.The list of things newspapers can not do is long.

One solution is creating different content for both web and online on a scale that a local newspaper can handle.

 Create useful  content to the reader. Help the reader succeed. Opinion by Ken Gigliotti
General Discussion / Re: Universities Could Take Over Newspapers
« Last post by Warren Toda on November 04, 2017, 01:05 AM »
Quote from: Ken Gigliotti
People pay enough for their smart phones and adding a local paper and a national (or US) paper would not be an option. People will have to decide how they spend their money.

Don't you think that people are being trained to expect most things to be free and supported by advertising? Facebook, Twitter, newspaper websites, various smart phone apps, etc.  If it's not tangible, why should I have to pay for it?

When newspapers ask to be paid for, some people will say that information should be free. Of course, information has always been free and will always remain so. It's the gathering, organizing and deciphering of information that costs money.

Everyone is free to gather their own information. Is it too much work for you? Then pay other people to do it for you - buy a newspaper!  >:(

Quote from: Ken Gigliotti
The local newspaper is more likely to expand alliances that are already in play.

TV news exists because their networks provide viewers with a lot more than just news. All those Seinfeld reruns, game shows, afternoon soaps, etc, help pay for the expensive TV news broadcasts. Can newspapers do the same? Can they offer readers more than just the news? A web site is a multimedia platform just waiting to be used.

Some newspapers have bought into other businesses outside of journalism, I guess to provide other revenue streams. I haven't heard if any of these have had any degree of success although some did fail.

Remember when CTV merged/partnered with The Globe and Mail? TorStar then reacted by starting some sort of partnership with the CBC. It seems that these went nowhere and then died because no one had a game plan.

Could (or should?) government-funded CBC permanently partner with a newspaper chain? Would that be considered a concentration of news media? If a newspaper partners with a university or college, that wouldn't trigger any media concentration issues.

So I guess video on newspaper web sites is dead again? Most of what I've seen on Toronto news web sites is crap shot by reporters. What happened to all that special video training that photographers did?

My point is that, after 16 years, papers still have no idea about video. Heck, after 22 years online, they still don't know what to do with photos. It took some papers 20 years for their websites to stop being replicas of the print product. And this is where student thinking comes into play.

Students today probably didn't grow up with print papers. They have no print bias but instead they have an online bias. They grew up with online video and online photo galleries. (I get a kick when I show photo prints to teens who have never seen large photos they can hold in their hands.  :)  )

Quote from: Ken Gigliotti
I think there is alternative that allows an alliance that is beneficial providing many information products ... It could produce ... a travel group ...

This has been talked about for at least 17 years. I was in the room at one newspaper when this exact topic was brought up to newspaper executives. The CEO and VP laughed and said, "That will never happen. Newspapers are for news."  Back then, the suggestions included partnering with a well-known music-TV channel and a certain fashion-TV channel; another suggestion involved a large, national travel agency.

There are many online opportunities for newspapers. The problem is that most of them don't have any interest in changing or taking any risks. But they're happy to throw money into a sinking ship. Most papers are happy to sit back and see what the NY Times does. Student thinking would come in handy here.

General Discussion / Re: Universities Could Take Over Newspapers
« Last post by Ken Gigliotti on November 03, 2017, 10:40 AM »
I guess what I am talking about is an evolving product. If newspapers continue to decline, local news will fall first. The few big papers will get bigger. It only makes sense with a subscriber base. People pay enough for their smart phones and adding a local paper and a national (or US) paper would not be an option. People will have to decide how they spend their money.

Big papers could add on local coverage by subscription. The next shock to the economy with AI could wipe out existing newspaper products and it is coming soon. It could collapse the tax base of governments. The US is circling the wagons and Canada is very likely to get hurt badly, because big and powerful countries(corporations & media) will only get bigger and meaner. (Boeing/Bombardier, softwood lumber , car manufacturing  all positioning for the China market)

In the meantime local dailies will depend more and more on paid student labour and internships ,or a revolving door of ever changing staff trying to move up to the last two big newsgroups or the CBC research department.

The local newspaper is more likely to expand alliances that are already in play. It is not the end of paid journalists , but it may be the end of job-for-life journalism. There is a very good example I can write about in the next post.

I think there is alternative that allows an alliance that is beneficial providing many information products though many demographic groups and languages and a world wide web of students, politics,and ideas. It could produce a news group a travel group, politics, sports,and personal communication.

The idea is to connect every future generation to a world wide news group of certified and reliable information. This is what child carriers did during the evening paper collections on a local level. Information that people will trust needs a champion. Paid advertising will fallow the free product. This may have a pie in the sky sound but ownership of NP's is already on university boards and it only takes one university start the experiment. The business can still report local fires, mvc's , sports and politics but a world wide connection to Africa,the Middle & Far East has global reach. Digital reach.

This is a very big idea, bigger than newspapers. Universities have networks of research, newspapers have information networks to. I don't have confidence that NP's have the courage ,nor see the danger in this overwhelming digital advance.

The irony is that the "White Man" will be overwhelmed by digital change the same way First Nations Peoples were three centuries ago. They did not see it coming either. One nation of stateless digital natives is emerging.

Failing to do something will leave the future of news to the commercial interests of a few (2) fast expanding internet players. This is getting to be a good talk.
General Discussion / Re: Universities Could Take Over Newspapers
« Last post by Warren Toda on November 02, 2017, 11:47 AM »
Quote from: Ken Gigliotti
Without big dollar resources they have managed to rethink and re-engineer the idea of newspapers with afresh approach.

The "big dollar resources" of a news organization are the employees. It's easy to rethink a newspaper if you don't have to pay anyone. Newspapers love to partner with journalism schools since it means free student labour.

Quote from: Ken Gigliotti
This news asset stripped of its printing press capital, and real-estate, with a product that is online only would put the investment of news on a level playing field.

The two biggest costs in running a newspaper were always (1) the cost of paper and ink, and (2) the cost of employees. School papers have neither of those two things.

Many newspapers now no longer own real estate and many have sold their presses. But they don't have people working for free. So a direct comparison between a news organization and a school paper can't be made.

Newspapers will eventually be mostly online as their print subscribers literally and figuratively die off. But until then, the major problem isn't the sheets of paper but rather what's on those sheets of paper.  And this problem extends to what's on their website pages as well. This is where "student thinking", not free student labour, comes in.
General Discussion / Re: Universities Could Take Over Newspapers
« Last post by Ken Gigliotti on November 02, 2017, 10:24 AM »
The story I have in my hand says this was a year long project , “in  an unprecedented reporting collaboration” , 34 students at four Canadian journalism schools,-Concordia, Ryerson, Regina and Uof BC,and three news organizations ,-the Toronto Star, Global News and the National Observer. The story was on the Winnipeg Free Press Think Tank page(oped)Oct 28 2017.This is a very special idea I hope our business does not fumble.

I am imagining a newspaper business where millennials will not come to the the newspaper business (NPB), I think the newspaper business will go to them. There is a demographic shift where one generation is completely taking over from the last.

Winnipeg has two universities and each has excellent newspaper. Red River College has a journalism school and it's paper is online. When I see these products I am always impressed with not only the presentation but the content. Without big dollar resources they have managed to rethink and re-engineer the idea of newspapers with afresh approach. Constant change is built in.

NPB ownership will require a place to divest it's greatest asset the news.
This news asset stripped of its printing press capital, and real-estate, with a product that is online only would put the investment of news on a level playing field. Note that the playing field is changing and the overwhelming choices in degrees of truth will need clarification. A NPB outside the corporate umbrella has a chance to be great again.

The NPB already has a close relationship with journalism schools, and the job isn't rocket science. The news product could use a refreshing that it cannot get through it's current structure.

With greater student leadership in a media they understand and are totally immersed in , the NPB could only thrive. The online culture is always moving and it just getting started.

The current NPB has reached it's potential years ago and is now only repeating the same stories with different authors on a ever repeating cycle.
General Discussion / Re: Universities Could Take Over Newspapers
« Last post by Daniel Crump on November 01, 2017, 02:01 PM »
Hey Ken,

If I understand this all correctly it is quite interesting. My paper, The Uniter, has found itself being in what seems like a rather unique position for small locals in Canada. We are a NFP, based out of the UofW, but not a student/campus paper. We do receive some funding from the student association and do some campus reporting, but we do equal (maybe even more) reporting that serves the surrounding communities (West End, West Broadway, Downtown, Etc..). The staff, as well as volunteers, are also a mishmash of non-students, students, and alumni. We are still figuring out this model and what it means to be in the position we are in. Was wondering if I could pass your opinion piece here on to my colleagues as it may be of interest to them. In return I'd be happy to post any conclusions/thoughts a discussion on this topic might yield.

Let me know, thanks!
General Discussion / Re: Universities Could Take Over Newspapers
« Last post by Warren Toda on October 31, 2017, 05:23 PM »
Quote from: Ken Gigliotti
I think in small ways local newspapers can start a limited partnerships with journalism schools ...

They've been saying this for at least 15 years and probably much longer. The problem is newspaper owners who are interested only in running a business rather than a news organization. Schools have the exact opposite motivation.

Look at the link to The Conversation that Ken mentioned in his post. Scroll to the bottom and look at all the universities connected to this. And just one news organization.

News organizations are their own worst enemy.

Quote from: Ken Gigliotti
This product would be online and free to be successful.

Nothing is free, not even success  :) 

But at least it would be free from the confines of old thinking.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10