What Simon Cowell can teach you about the future of news
Wanna big life? A big successful career? Wanna create something that makes a difference in the world? Maybe reinvent news?
The answer, we’re all told, is to think big.
“Your vision of who or where you want to be is your greatest asset” wrote Paul Arden, himself a successful advertising guru. For proof, look no further than two sheets of paper published by the Guardian newspaper today.
Named “the scribbled note that changed TV“, it is the result of a meeting between three people in 2001: TV executive Alan Boyd, and two music producers, Simon Cowell and Simon Fuller. Over an hour they discussed an idea for a new TV show, initially called Your Idol.
It’s a fascinating document for those of us who’ve followed Your Idol, into what became Pop Idol, American Idol, and now X-Factor. But it’s more interesting because it teaches us something about the power of thinking big.
Look at some of their notes:
“Gone With The Wind…never before have 50,000 people been auditioned”
“Arena, big space…multi camera”
“Nation’s No. 1 show”
These guys could have just pitched another reality show to be made in the style of Come Dine With Me or Celebrity Masterchef; and it would have had all the cultural resonance of those forgettable formats.
But they had an ambitious dream to create a product so big, it rivaled Gone With The Wind.
Their success shows the power of having an almost overwhelming dream to change the world. I once sat in on a talk with Alan Boyd in 2006 at City University: he claimed American Idol had introduced the concept of text messaging to the entire US, who until then just phoned each other.
When you have goals and a positive outlook, you have something to aim for. Having goals which get your heart racing is key to building momentum – because then you can’t imagine not achieving it…and you’ll do whatever it takes to get there. Cowell & Fuller had not met Boyd before this session, but somehow they got themselves in front of him.
So, as much as I’m loathed to hand something to him, take a leaf out of Simon Cowell’s book. Think big.
With the future of news & journalism still uncertain, this attitude is so vital in making sure we create an exciting future for it. I like to think someone reading this blog might have just the idea which will blaze the trail for the next 50-100 years: if that’s you, don’t settle for second best. Aim high!
Journalism & the environment
On the weekend dozens of climate change protesters climbed onto the roof of parliament in the latest stunt to get public attention for the cause. They used ropes and ladders to scale perimeter fencing before climbing up onto the roof of Westminster Hall.
The purpose: to ask MPs to sign a climate manifesto on Monday morning.
I write about journalism and multimedia for most of the time, but because it’s Blog Action Day today, I’ve been thinking about where the two meet. And the answer, it seems, is not in many places.
Let’s think about how the mainstream media cover the issue of climate change. It is of course well documented in broadcast news, with reports every few weeks (for example, from the BBC’s David Shukman). Big newspapers like the Guardian and Times have their own ‘environment’ sections online, featuring the calls of action of Bibi Van Der Zee among others.
And of course there have been landmark cinema releases including Al Gore’s glorified powerpoint presentation, Inconvenient Truth and Franny Armstrong’s Age of Stupid.
As for new media, when I checked 63,000 climate change related websites had been bookmarked by delicious. 69,000 videos are on Youtube with the similar tags.
Are we more informed as a result?
It’s an important question because there is little argument climate change is the most significant and global threat facing us today, and tomorrow. And for the next century.
It deserves more than 90 seconds in the 6 o’clock news every few weeks, and a feature in the G2.
The mainstream media, I think, have missed a massive opportunity to really inform the public on a regular basis. It affects us all, there is an appetite for news, analysis, advice on climate change. Yet it has no regular and protected space on our TV screens, supplements or radios (with the exception of One Planet on the BBC World Service).
Does it not deserve a regular, accessible, digestible and regular form of coverage?
I would love to see a weekly magazine show, dedicated entirely to the environment. It would have the usual magazine-format mix of the latest news, interviews with important people in the fight against global warming, reviews of the latest green cars or gadgets, and practical advice on cutting your own carbon emissions.
The closest we ever came to that last item in the UK was Newsnight’s failed Green Man experiment.
Importantly this new video-magazine would not be preachy, it would accept the realities and practicalities of modern living, but show us solutions to those problems.
Perhaps we could all become united around this weekly offering, which shows us how to work together and take small steps as individuals to limit the effects of climate change, and make those dramatic Westminster protests unnecessary.
Just a thought. I suspect though it will be for new & social media to fill the gap.
Is there an Atlantic divide in digital journalism?
The past year has seen some remarkable pieces of multimedia journalism.
From a stunning biography of a drug addict turned boxer, to a fluent and comprehensive look at the drugs trade in Mexico, to a mind-blowing flash based project on the Great Lakes.
And that’s just the professionals.
Look at the journalism students and you have memorable stories like Maisie Crowe’s film about a boy with a rare genetic condition and Chris Carmichael’s portrait of a family losing their home.
Here’s the thing: they’re all coming from journalists and newsrooms – in America.
Clockwise from left: ESPN, Boston Globe, NYTimes, Chris Carmichael
A quick visit to the New York Times, the Washington Post, NPR and ESPN reveal a plethora of enticing, exciting and well produced multimedia projects. Go more local and you can find stunning multimedia from the Boston Globe and the Roanake Times.
More and more have their own designers who work with flash to give them an asthetic appeal as well as journalistic clout.
So what does the UK have in response? The Guardian’s multimedia page has a healthy selection of new videos and the occasional audio slideshow, not to mention some worthy experiments in data sharing, for example this attractive interactive on UK public spending. And there is some nice video pieces – including this excellent alternative look at exam results by John Domokos.
But there are few interactive flash stories, and nothing on the scale of War Without Borders or One in Eight Million (both NY Times).
The BBC News website is (for obvious reasons) packed with original video and audio, and on big stories you’ll find a decent interactive map. But nothing with the ambition and groundbreaking attitude we see over the pond.
You’ll find the occasional audio slideshow, for example this tidy piece marking the anniversary of the Lehman Brothers collapse, but again they are left as slideshows alone and not developed into something bigger.
And it gets worse when you leave London, with some worryingly unimaginative pieces, in small windows; you see pieces like The Fallen (NY Times) and think “in a different league”.
So come on, UK newsrooms, where are you?
Of course it’s all about money, or the lack of it. It is not as if UK media don’t have the talent. But can money really be an excuse? American papers afterall have been hit harder than British ones with more big city closures and layoffs: almost all UK papers that were in print a year ago are still in print today. And of course there are many talented freelancers and independent producers making great stuff, but even that is hard to find.
So what else is it? A lack of ambition? We just don’t get multimedia? Or are we just not interested?
The postcard below awaits your thoughts…
G20: multimedia experiments
Protests are always a magnet for the media. Scuffles make great pictures for TV, chants make great sound for radio; the mass of people suggesting some great social movement.
Why should multimedia be any different?
It was no surprise all the big news organisations were employing blogs, twitter, online audio and video for today’s G20 protests. They’ve used them on news stories several times over the past few months.
What I think makes today different is this is the first time newsrooms have had significant warning of a news event, to flex their multimedia muscle and see what it’s capable of.
They had time to think ideas, get creative and explore. So, how’d they do? Here are some UK media examples:
BBC News: interactive map
Immediately popular was BBC News’ interactive map which appeared mid morning.
The movable image covered central London, and as reports from the ground were filed, they appeared on the map.
The stories were multimedia; everything from text, audio, video and images.
Guardian: audio boo uploads
The Guardian were out in force at the protests, with journalists employing all sorts of technology to help them in their quest.
One of the favourites was the new audio sharing site Audioboo, unique from places like Soundcloud and Mixcloud in that it only really works if you have an iPhone.
So excited were Guardian journalists by this new technology it seemed they were happy to upload all and every interview they conducted, including the one pictured, with Rory O’Driscoll.
“Sorry, were you expecting some a little more, err, involved?” he told the reporter, clearly not at all bothered about what was going on.
Guardian: twitter reporters
Someone (on Twitter in fact) commented, on seeing this image, that there must have been more journalists on the streets than protestors.
What these provide though, were unfiltered, immediate dispatches from the scene.
Stuck in an office, those of us in Web 1.0 world were forced to watch Dermot Murgnahan and the rest of the Sky News reporters stumble their way through the protest.
“Oh look, a policeman’s fallen over” was just one remark, along with a car-crash interview with Russell Brand, the comedian who’d clearly taken the wrong turning on his way out to get some milk.
These Guardian dispatches though – raw, mispelt, abbreviated into 140 characters, gave you the very latest – and of course they’ve not been through an editor.
Who said any story couldn’t be told in 140 characters or less?
The BBC had a similar live update system with similar benefits.
This one though included chosen comments from viewers/listeners as well as BBC correspondents (and in some cases media students) on the ground. It looked good, and continued until 2100…but I’d wager cost a lot more than any other news organisation would manage.
So lots going on, and it felt – for once – there was more to be seen online than on TV. Has this set a precedent? I hope so. Throughout today, no-one was tweeting/blogging about the G20 coverage they heard on the radio or seen on TV. They were sharing links to sites like the above ones.
The key benefits: immediacy, raw information, and interactivity.
But for that, do I feel the coverage of the protests was any better than the old media? Hmmm, that’s not so clear cut.
‘They didn’t…so they aren’t’
Have a read of Michael Rosenblum’s blog about why some newspapers failed and others didn’t.
It’s the subject of a lot of chatter, debate and writings, but Rosenblum cuts right through it all and delivers this crisp diagnosis of why papers are screwed:
“US papers have been eviscerated because of Craigslist. It stole the classifieds and their income.
“Ironically, the offices of The [San Francisco] Chronicle are just a few blocks from Craig Newmark’s apartment in San Francisco. The Chronicle could have started Craigslist, they could have bought it, they could have owned it. A Chronicle that was married to Craigslist today would have no financial troubles whatsoever. They could afford to send the best journalists all over the world to do the best journalism. But they didn’t … so they don’t.
“The New York Times once could have bought Google for $1 million. But they didn’t. They didn’t because they didn’t think that internet search engines had anything to do with their business. A strange postion for a paper whose very motto is ‘all the news that’s fit to print’. If The New York Times owend Google (or part of it), there would be no question about their becoming the engine for journalism in the 21st Century. But they didn’t.. so they aren’t.”
How to avoid being “that annoying PR person”
The phone rings – London number.
“Newsdesk, Adam speaking.”
[Excitedly] “Hello Adam, it’s Christabelle here calling from Markettowers PR*, how are you?”
Markettowers. Bollocks.
[Tersely] “I’m OK thanks.”
“Great, that’s great. Hey look, I’ve got a great story which I think you’ll really like – with some great local stats.”
“…go on”
“Well we’ve done some research into when people fill in their tax returns, and discovered that 18% of people in your area leave it until the last day.”
“Right.”
“And we’ve got David Nobody from Tesco.com available for interview tomorrow morning to talk about why we should get them in sooner – can I book you in for a slot?”
“Send a press release and we’ll take a look delete it immediately.”
And so another London PR agency calls with another lame story. It’s one of the minor annoyances of local journalism, albeit a neccessary one, as once in every 15 calls, they bring you a story with some tickle factor that you know will make a light mid-bulletin filler.
It wasn’t until I saw a job ad in the Guardian that I realised what the game really was: it advertised a position at a marketing agency – and the job was to “sell” (their word) stories to radio stations.
Essentially it’s a glorified call centre job. And when I also spotted they get paid £10k more than me, my patience for PR hacks fell through the floor.
So if you work in PR, if – heaven forbid – it is your job to ’sell’ stories to busy journalists, please read the following advice – it might stop your press release entering the recycle bin.
Don’t call anywhere near the top of the hour
Radio journalists in particular read the news at the top of every hour. Calling anytime after 00:40 will most likely result in a brisk “sod off”. It’s different for newspaper and TV journos of course.
Pitch in 10 seconds or less
It’s a skill journalists are trained to do, so you should too. If you can’t explain your story in less than 10 seconds, don’t bother.
Do your research
I have actually had calls offering me “great local stats” for the wrong county. The phone was hung up pretty soon after. Also, for many local media, regional stats are not local stats.
Do your research
I’ve had calls offering stories about where to invest your money-when most of my target audience shop at Iceland. Sell it to Classic FM, not me.
Do your research
Local commercial radio does bulletins of no longer than 3 minutes. They never do longer interviews unless its with someone off X-Factor. So don’t pitch long 2 ways. Journalists need short clips.
Don’t keep calling
Newdesks fully realise the more times you call, the more desperate you are, ergo the fewer other outlets have used your story, ergo your story blows. Call to pitch, and don’t call back. If a journalist likes the story they’ll make the call – we’re quite clever, you know.
And know your client will very rarely get a name check
You may pitch them as ‘David Nobody from Tesco.com” but 9 times out of 10 they’ll be referenced on air as ‘Money expert David Nobody”. We’re not interested that it’s Tesco, sorry.
*not a real company
The online news site that IS making money
Non-retail/business sites on the internet find it difficult to make any money.
And news never makes any money. So combined, websites offering news content are usually loss makers.
Except for one:
Hubdub: the world's news forecaster
Well…OK it’s not a news website. Instead it asks its users to gamble play money on how actual news events will pan out.
And never mind play money, Hubdub is making some real money too. According to @jemimakiss at The Guardian:
“Hubdub has raised £810,000 in funding from a mix of angel investors, software venture firm Pentech and the Scottish Co-Investment Fund.
“This new round of funding will support more partnerships; at the moment those sites have a page on Hubdub, but the startup wants to extend that to other news sites to make a lightweight ‘powered by Hubdub’ feature available on external sites.”
Great news for startups. But what can journalists learn from this? Well if anything it’s that with sites like this community is king. It’s the ability to interact with other users which sees a quarter of a million people log on a month, not news.
And also the importance of having a good fundraiser on your team. I bet £800k from a mix of investors took a lot of slog on the ground.
Oh, and out of curiosity, I’m giving it a go – bet against me, I’m called NewsJedi.
7,747
It’s difficult in journalism sometimes to get across the scale of something, which is inevitably huge, but also so slow moving it’s barely noticable. Reporting climate change is the obvious one which springs to mind.
But the current recession/economic downturn/credit crunch is another difficult one.
My patch is bearing the brunt of job losses, but how do you convey the scale of it all, especially at a national level?
Well I’ve just spotted this at the bottom of a Guardian article online, the simplicity of which can leave you with no doubt. Sometimes maybe, you just let the figures speak for themselves:
Guardian Unlimited
BBC local TV plans stopped (or maybe just paused)
BBC Local TV paused? Or Stopped?
So after speculation earlier this week, the BBC Trust confirmed today plans to launch 65 new local websites have been scrapped.
From a practicing broadcast journalist (and fan of video journalism) point of view, I think it’s disappointing. The potential for hundreds of new jobs in the market’s been lost.
I also agree with Roy Greenslade’s aside, that the BBC has made a mistake in not realising broadband is the future.
The local competition (newspapers and radio) are hailing it as a great victory – they claimed it would threaten their services.
This one is tricky though.
I get edgy when commercial outfits complain the BBC is a threat because of the size of its wallet. If you’ve got the ideas, and the talent (you don’t neccessarily have to pay through the nose for that) then money doesn’t matter. Papers particularly have the enviable contacts.
But their VJ offerings aren’t great. Getting written hacks to create decent VJ pieces hasn’t yet provided any gems.
Most of all, the the chance for diversification has been lost.
Human Rights: 60 years on
This year marks 60 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was first penned.
The Observer’s Review supplement’s put together an excellent special today on how the rights have ultimately been ignored over the last six decades.
What’s struck me recently is how little any of us know about our human rights. I’m an educated sort of bloke, good upbringing an all that. But ask me any details on what are the fundamental protectors of my free existence, and I can’t answer much.
I know there’s something about freedom of religion, and freedom of expression and freedom from torture. And that Eleanor Roosevelt and World War Two had something to do with it.
But scarily, that’s it.
How, I wonder, are we all supposed to ensure our Human Rights are protected, when we don’t even know what they are?
3 comments