An ITSUN introduction

I'm starting to work through a theoretical model I've labeled the Information -Technology - Social Use Nexus , or ITSUN. Thinking about that nexus pointwhere the three areas converge is where the wealth of opportunities for creative, compelling content lie.

This model is not a bullet-point list of how to save your paper or a list of multimedia techniques, but rather a conceptual framework to get newsrooms thinking in a different, more holistic direction. Getting reporters to do multimedia and all the other fashionable trendy examples of "convergence" are merely the final tools and applications of thinking about your news. Those applications should be the last in the chain, and they could be far more effective if approached with a more integrated perspective.

The three components are multidirectional in that there isn't a mandated directional flow or starting point; they all are quite fluid, and their meeting point - that nexus - isn't so much a point but a a very malleable, organic dimension, as all three elements can influence and change the others. Start anywhere and see where the ideas take you.

Let's do a brief breakdown:

Information: This is often a starting point, but it doesn't have to be and perhaps it's best said that it shouldn't be.

Information is a broader term than "news", and it is imperative that news organizations understand that they must be willing to provide all kinds of information - regardless of source. This means offering a wealth of outside links, information and input from users, etc.

As Rich Gordon wrote in his recent excellent article, sites need to be less a of a destination and more of a hub:

A site that becomes a network hub would take advantage of what makes the Web unique. It would attract users from many different Web sites, retain some of them for a while by offering good contextual links, route people to relevant material elsewhere, and capitalize on conversations that take place on the Web -- on blogs, on discussion boards, and in user comments.

His observations already point towards the relationship between the other two components, especially in his further elaboration:

The argument for a network-building strategy can also be found by observing another hugely successful online genre: social networking sites. Social networks enabled by sites such as Facebook and MySpace also drive enormous traffic by enabling connections among people, and between people and content. That's how MySpace came from nowhere to become one of the most heavily used Web sites in the world.

More on this later. The key thing here to remember about information is that media companies must expand their traditional notions of "news", scope, authority, and source.

Technology: technology is much more closely related to social use than to information, but the close relationship of information and technology spawns new ways of social usage which in turn generates new information. For a news organization, this means not only keeping a close eye on technologies but more importantly, reconditioning your newsroom to deliver info in whatever platform may emerge. It does little good to look at new technology when your news room cant even get you breaking news in a timely fashion.

As a case study, consider Bakersfield’s recent pdf -6 page afternoon e-supplement. I was initially sceptical of this product in and of itself but then it hit me: its just a staging ground to get their newsroom more ready for a true hand held, continuously updated e-paper a la "Minority Report". An afternoon pdf edition is great copy desk practice for the constant flow and redesign that an E-paper will require.

Social Use: This is where the two previous components and the readership meet and breed to create new ways of looking at, using and morphing content. See the second Rich Gordon quote above. For me, Social Use is the most critical component to focus on.

Newspapers constantly wring their hands over the ever elusive younger reader (20 to 34 years old). The debate continues to rage in newspaper circles about a) if that demographic is forever lost to newspapers) and b) what kind of content to create for that readership. Question A is an antiquated question, because I think the answer is a resounding yes, especially when papers won't make the paradigm shifts necessary to accommodate it. And question B is almost certainly the wrong question to be asking because it's not about what people read or even on what platform they'll read it (technology will always change), but what they want to do with that information (and how in turn will that information be used and obtained.

People go to the web to *do* things: it's a task oriented function. In news, the current scope of service is for readers to find out about "events that matter," for information or resources that's relevant to them. We can extend that scope of service by evaluating our newsroom in terms of the three components (and note how each question can encompass more than one component) are we providing quality information (acting as a hub)from a variety of sources (internal, community, outbound links) on the most useful technology platform and is it useful enough for users to share with others and back to the newsroom, thereby increasing community, loyalty and value?

So the first questions newsrooms need to be grappling with are NOT "do I give a reporter a digital video camera, do I start podcasting, do I do multimedia" etc. J-school curriculae are full of such multimedia classes, but those are skill sets, like riding a bike. But these skills do not not sufficiently engage the paradigm shift that needs to occur. Such questions are only techniques and tools that may (or may not) help you implement good solutions.

The deeper questions newsrooms need to ask themselves are what new kinds of information are readers needing that they are extrapolating and using, perhaps from what we are already providing (or not), what kind of technologies are developing to meet that need, and (here's the real kicker) what role are we prepared to play in meeting that need? Are we fully prepared and committed to servicing this reader-created nexus and to share in its creation and use to provide even greater value?

Most newsrooms aren't asking these kinds of questions, and as I mentioned in the previous post, most J-school programs aren't addressing these issues either. The grasp of how internet usage should interface with journalism seems to be pretty varied even among young reporters, who ought to know better. To understand the nuances involved in exploring this outlined nexus requires a whole different training - which is why at this point, If I'm hiring staff, I'm no longer looking at J-school grads, I want savvy bloggers with backgrounds in sociology, epistemology, diktyology (network theory) and semiotics. Thats my new criteria for applicants.

Why those disciplines are important, and how they relate to the ITSUN idea I'll explore in a future post.

Changing a media career: dead tree to CRT

As of today, I am no longer the "web ed" at The Santa Fe New Mexican. I wrote a little farewell post for our readers here, and I'd like to thank all those who expressed their support via the comments.

I can post here that the new position I am taking is as Digital Content Manager for KOAT-TV in Albuquerque. It's a newly created position across the Hearst-Argyle chain, and Albuquerque is the first test case. So I'm the guinea pig, so to speak :) A lot more to it than this, but in short I'll be responsible for planning, developing and optimizing digital initiatives for the station. Technically, I'll be reporting to Internet Broadcasting Systems, which manages the Hearst-owned television sites, among other properties.

The position appealed to me for several reasons. Primarily, it is a chance to think more strategically and conceptually. As a colleague recently advised me, it was time for me to find a job where I can be utilized more for how I think and what I know, rather than being weighed down almost single-handedly with what needs to be done for the day-to-day operational tasks (though I'm certainly not afraid and not beyond doing whatever it takes to make the operation effective, current , and valuable). This gig allows a more birds-eye view, and that had tremendous appeal.

The chance to implement and team -build creative initiatives is ineffective without backup, and this was another selling point for me. Over the course of several visits and interviews, I've seen a tremendous amount of energy and enthusiasm across the board, from KOAT to IB to Hearst-Argyle. Just as important is the confirmation of buy-in, support and resources I saw to back up that drive. Everyone's committed and pumped up, and in turn that inspires me to inspire further.

The other challenge and appeal was the switch in media platforms. Coincidentally I had started to look in general at other media platforms to see what they were doing on the web, so this opportunity was another bit of auspicious timing.

My initial impression from that early research shows something of a paradox at play (note: what follows stems also from research, observations, and colleague discussions. It is an assessment of the newspaper industry as a whole, and is not directed at any specific newspaper. I have tried to be as former-employer-neutral as possible).

Newspapers want to innovate on the web -they're desperate to do so because of collapsing circulation and advertising, etc. - but print culture has two very heavy counterweights to innovation: a) it is a very risk-averse culture in general, and b) philosophically, fully mining the potential and nuances of the Information - Technology - Social Use Nexus (ITSUN, which I'll be writing more and more about), is quite antithetical to their deeply -established professional practices, methodology, and training . These two factors alone create a downward spiral of inertia and hesitancy, and in tandem conspire against fully committing the innovative ideas floating around newspaper new media circles into full swing.

Gradually, more and more papers are coming around - but they're not taking what initiatives I do see far enough or deep enough, marrying them to that described nexus effectively enough, and none of it done with the urgency I think necessary. There is still a lot more thinking and talking than doing out there.

Frankly, I don't see this changing much over the next ten or twenty years, because the fundamental paradigm shift needed that will enable the print professional mind-set to wrap around what's happening now (much less what's coming ahead) needs to be occurring in print journalism curricula and newspaper internship programs now. Teaching multimedia story-telling techniques is great, setting up comments is even better, but its all still surface, its not a deep enough core shift, unless one starts to explore the intent and purpose behind those techniques. I run the risk of digressing here, so I'll explore this idea in a later post.

By contrast, television already has a leg up on several fronts. Technologically, there are already hours of video at one's disposal (though even then I think it could be better optimized for web use). More critically, TV is better equipped philosophically (not nearly as risk-averse, more comfortable with the idea at least of emergent technologies) and professionally (much better poised for breaking and continuous news, for example).

These factors, when viewed against a general newsprint industry-wide quagmire and malaise, led me to ask myself -what platform is better poised to remain and succeed as a viable and valuable resource of information into the next ten, twenty years? Even based on my early research, the answer was clear - so when it came time to seek other frontiers, I kept an eye out beyond the newspaper arena.

TV's advantages aren't quite the magic cure, however. The paradox I alluded to earlier lies in the fact that the TV news industry is in a relatively healthier condition than their print counterparts ( though there are some signs that the TV landscape is changing also). They haven't felt the crisis-driven need to innovate as acutely, so local TV news web practices have been a little complacent, generally.

Newspapers are trying to innovate, but face obstacles to successful implementation. Conversely, TV perations have fewer hurdles, but haven't been pushed to innovate.

The KOAT operation struck me as a clear exception to TV's comfort zone - they're pushing themselves, and want to push even further forward - and so it will be my goal to help build and guide that drive, and bring some cutting edge concepts and ideas into the TV digital presence.

Its a fresh challenge, because I'm also aware that you can't apply the best newspaper online innovations automatically to TV. The user goals and expectations are different, the crosspoints of web TV's SUTIN are different enough to require some fresh applications.

I'm energized and excited...