[Screenshot of today's "carousel" from the Desert Sun homepage]Update on Dec. 27: There's now a lively debate in the comments section, below, about this post. You don't have to register to leave a comment. But I moderate all comments before they're published.
Gannett and other publishers have been using technology to automate work almost since the industry was born. One of the last big waves was pagination, which let newspapers eliminate high-paying jobs in the composing room by shifting work to the copy desk. Now, as Gannett rolls out its new website design across the company, technology increasingly is replacing work done by reporters, editors and photographers, too. Here's how.
That screen shot, above, shows the "carousel" at the Desert Sun in Palm Springs, Calif. It's a software feature in the new website design that presents a selection of three stories with artwork that automatically rotate on the site every few seconds. A newsroom staffer loads the stories and art. Then the software takes over, efficiently refreshing the page around the clock.
Now, a smart publisher will tell newsroom staffers that automating lower-skilled tasks frees them to do smarter work -- like First Amendment-driven investigative projects. But I'm not betting the farm on that. The carousel is just one way Gannett is using technology to replace work done in newsrooms. Here are some others:
- Photographs, videos, community news stories, comments and other user-generated content that readers give to Gannett for free. It's just a matter of time before papers and TV stations start using reader-submitted stuff as main features online, in print and in broadcasts. (Maybe that's already happening.) Who needs photogs and reporters when readers will do the work for nothing?
- Databases. Those data centers Gannett is adding to websites can be good resources for readers. But they also pay dividends to publishers after the initial set-up cost: Databases "report'' information to readers -- but don't expect pay raises, vacations and other benefits. Even better: They won't unionize!
Got other examples of technology replacing newsroom talent? Use this link to e-mail me. See Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the sidebar, upper right. Or leave a note in the comments section, below.
You're missing the mark with this post. The carousel on the new Gannett-wide home pages is the culmination of a long-term trend away from automation and toward more labor-intensive web sites. There's no way a news site can get away with merely three top stories a day -- editors will be planning and producing them throughout the day, on multiple shifts. This is a far cry from the daily automatic dump from the print edition.
ReplyDeleteTo be successful on the database side, you need all the difficult-to-find skills of computer-assisted reporting plus the high-dollar skills of a programmer, or the additional expense of a tool like Caspio. Even then, you need to understand how to find data, clean it and represent it in a way that's clear and useful to readers. This is hard and requires human decision-making. The debacle over state salaries in Lansing illustrates that we've only just begun to understand how data should be used or represented. This is as far from automatic as a good investigative piece.
This leaves us user-generated content. It's a wonderful addition to local sites and a great way for news organizations to connect with readers, but it's an infrequent tool for news gathering. It's great for natural disasters, holidays and the op-ed section, though.
One of Gannett's challenges is that it hasn't done enough in the field of automation and information technology. You mentioned the need for a "Manhattan Project" in one of your previous posts, and that means much, much more automation and streamlining than we've seen to date.
All excellent points. On the website front, absolutely true: It was only yesterday that sites were more like static catalogs to what was in that day's newspaper.
ReplyDeleteAnd on databases, I didn't mean to suggest that the way Gannett is doing it replaces reporting in any meaningful way. As with too many things in the current climate, Gannett is building its datacenters on the cheap: Get free or nearly-free government databases, give them a quick clean-up, then dump them onto the website. There they sit, getting more out-of-date by the nanosecond.
I'm not against technology; I wouldn't be blogging if I was. I'm against the mis-use of technology, which in this case would be substituting bad content for good.
Mr. Editor you are missing the point!
ReplyDeleteStop with all of the conspiracy theory stuff. There is no plot to take away jobs. I 100% agree with the original post for the need to infuse newsrooms with technology. Technology is our friend and we need to embrace it at a far quicker pace than we are today. Journalists are learning everyday how to use the web, print and other platforms to offer storytelling to readers in new ways.
Don't turn this into an angry "down with the man" blog. As you have seen many Gannett employees are reading your thoughts but don't fall into that silly notion there is a hidden agenda when you see the company offering automation with the web. Your comments about the database projects being cheap because they are using open government records is also very lame. Everyone is trying to understand the power of data in the storytelling process.
Newsrooms have to dramatically improve their speed in digging up and serving more and more information to satisfy the new digital consumer appetite for news. This new site with these tools is just one way the company is trying to help each news gathering organization.
No company is perfect but the very idea you are trying to stir people up on this topic is silly. You say you understand technology but if you really did you would not have made such ridiculous comments. I think you need to take the rest of the holiday off.
Gee: Maybe I *do* need a vacation! ;)
ReplyDeleteDon't defensive comments make you entirely wonder about motive?
ReplyDeleteDoesn't it make you wonder if anyone in "local" markets would have known about the Bhutto assassination had CNN not covered it? Would folks in those local markets be scratching their heads wondering why stock prices plummeted? Sometimes, world news is important.
ReplyDeleteMethinks I smell a troll...
ReplyDeleteYeah. I'm going to have to sort of disagree with you on that. Ummmmk?
ReplyDeleteI don't see either examples as replacing newsroom talent. In fact, they require more talent.
There seems to be an assumption that technology automatically eases the workload or that it is a ploy by management to eliminate workforce.
Folks seem to forget: technology shifts workload and also creates new demands.
People may poo-poo the carousel feature (which is found on many non-Gannett Web sites), but I have better things to than to swap out a main art element every five minutes. I think it's wise to automate the drudgery of moving bits instead of requiring employees to perform the operation 24/7. I disagree with your notion that this is a misuse of technology or an attempt to replace newsroom talent.
Keep in mind with that automation comes additional workload in preparing and scheduling that content.
I also think your comments about databases are simplistic.
The acquisition, scrubbing, formatting and building of databases can be pretty time consuming, especially if you are dealing with entities that not accustomed to such requests or struggle with their own technology.
Databases — including the collection of calendar events and sports stats — have increased the workload in the newsroom. Small staffs (that's non-metro papers to y'all) struggle to keep up.
Granted, a lot of the databases are low-hanging fruit and — as you say — done on the cheap. But the important thing is that they are being done and people are learning by doing them. THUS GROWING TALENT.
Three years ago these capabilities were beyond most small and medium-sized newspapers. I think (and hope) you will see growing sophistication with databases, especially at non-metros.
My head's spinning, but I sure like what I'm reading.
ReplyDeleteOn the last comment, I would add this: "Requiring more talent" and actually hiring and keeping more talent are two different things.
Also, all these cool new Web features will work only as well as the underlying software and support; the company will get what it pays for.
And, as to to whether software is replacing newsroom staffers, let me suggest this: Look around your newsroom. If you're collectively producing more stuff -- stories, video, slide shows, podcasts, blogs, etc. -- today than you did a year ago, and if you're doing it with fewer people, than I'd like to now how. I don't think there are very many folks left in Gannett newsrooms who aren't putting in at LEAST 40 hour weeks. So, either everyone's working longer hours now than a year ago (possible) -- or technology is doing work that might instead be done by humans. Boring work, maybe; paying work, yes. Just a thought.
nice catch, but this isn't an automated task at all. just as with layout of the paper, all of this is manually done by a person. so, what you see here is a mistake. which people make. machines can only do as they are told.
ReplyDeletei only wish that there was a magic machine that just picks stories at random and hopes to display them correctly...
i'll take the criticism, just do it with accuracy next time
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete