Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Memo: Gannett launches pilot test that would drop AP feeds from U.S. websites in favor of USA Today

Tightening its belt more, the nation's biggest newspaper publisher has quietly begun testing a service that it expects will replace some Associated Press news stories on websites of its 84 U.S. community newspapers, a memo obtained by Gannett Blog says.

The Dec. 19 memo by an employee at the company's Gannett Digital subsidiary describes an "AP Feed Project" that involves USA Today and an unspecified number of Gannett's newspaper websites. The project, the memo says, is "a pilot (and eventual company-wide rollout) where we will ask newspapers to swap out their AP news feeds for the USAT equivalents. The cost savings for making this switch is estimated to be about one million dollars per year across Gannett properties."

That $1 million savings figure is clearly too low, I would think -- even for news that's only going to websites. Or, is the reference to news "feeds'' involve a very limited menu of stories, so relatively small savings?

In a statement, AP spokesman Paul Colford told me: "We have not received a cancellation notice from Gannett. We know Gannett, like many newspaper companies, is exploring content options during these difficult economic times. If a cancellation were to be filed, it would take effect two years from the time it was sent. We are serving Gannett and we expect to continue serving Gannett."

I obtained the memo from a reader who does not work at Gannett Digital. The memo is signed by a Gannett Digital rollout manager. I have spoken to that person on the telephone, and they declined to comment. (I am withholding the employee's name to spare them any additional grief.)

Midwest daily tapped for test
The Gannett Digital memo asks a paper in the Midwest to offer its website for the pilot test, so Corporate can "get feedback on the process before deploying to the rest of the markets." I can't reveal the paper's name because it might expose my source.

The memo continues: "Please let me know if you would be interested in helping us with this pilot and providing your feedback. The two steps on your side would be swapping out the AP feeds with their USAT equivalents (which I would provide to you), and making sure that your co-brander is updated with the latest design, which shouldn't require too much bandwidth on your end. We hope to begin over the next two weeks, with the understanding that turnaround times may be slower during the holiday season."

The paper said yes immediately; the test began, my source said, "when Corporate asked us to submit a list of every AP feed we use."

USAT as ContentOne's 'national head'?
The pilot coincides with the launch, now underway, of Gannett's new web-based news service, ContentOne. It's debuting during President-elect Barack Obama's high-profile inauguration.

CEO Craig Dubow (left) told Wall Street stock analysts last month that the service would "completely change the way we share content across the company." Dubow did not say ContentOne would replace the AP. But, he noted, the service "is the logical next step from our local Information Center initiatives, creating a national head to the local content gathering bodies."

Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write gannettblog[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the green sidebar, upper right.

[Image: today's front page, Newseum]

25 comments:

  1. If my local paper drops AP, I will drop my local paper. It's bad enough the local news has been cut. But if I can't get sports scores and state and national news, there's no need to get the paper.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Another blow to AP.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What is the purpose in this?

    ReplyDelete
  4. So ... what happens to GNS? Has GNS been folded into ContentOne — or just folded?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yikes! This post has appeared three times in a row.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This has already been tried outside Gannett. The Star-Ledger in New Jersey published an AP-free issue last fall as a test.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Makes sense to me, and would save a lot of money _ certainly more than the $1 million cited in the memo. I find the $1 million figure mysterious, and suggests the person who wrote it is not in a position to know how much GCI is paying AP for its information. Perhaps only the smallest papers are involved in this, which would explain that figure, but then what use would USAT be to them?

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is not a blow to AP. Gannett is throwing down the gauntlet and forcing readers to choose between their papers or a worldwide news service. Gannett will lose. I agree with Anon. -- if my local paper drops AP, I drop the paper.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I can understand the move for national news, but did they really think this through for the state wires?

    ReplyDelete
  10. 6:28 -

    Why not get all that info online - its free....

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ummm.... What about all the AP content that USAT uses? Like sports notes, agate, state news, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Are even Gannett executives dumb enough to think that USA Today copy can come anywhere close to replacing AP copy? Or do they just not care about everything we would be losing? And do they have any idea that local papers can't get any stories from USAT before deadline already?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I called this six months ago on this blog. The Republic has been discussing this for months.
    Jim verified the information with Managing Editor Lovely and it was denied. Go figure

    ReplyDelete
  14. 7:36 -- perhaps they are planning on still charging each of the Gannett sites something to use the new USAT service?

    ReplyDelete
  15. OK, but what role does Gannett News Service have in the new arrangement? Will GNS still be responsible for local news, or is USAT going to do that as well? I always felt the days for GNS were numbered, but it never went away. Last point I can make is that this plan, once underway, will just make the local papers clones of USAT. Why not just have local staff put local stories into USA Today, and sell only that?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Perhaps this is only meant to replace the web only parts of AP? (Custom Wire) That might explain the lower dollar figure would it not?

    ReplyDelete
  17. The advantage of this is it gives readers of GCI papers news they can't get elsewhere. Maybe that would put some energy back in these papers, and give them some identity that distinguishes them from the rest. The disadvantage is the routine AP copy will no longer be available. They will be able to find it on the Internet, and query USAT to chase it, but will there be a response? USAT now is notoriously indifferent towards the community newspapers.

    ReplyDelete
  18. What makes me doubt this memo is that it takes up to two years to cancel AP because of the contracts they write. Corporate needs the money now, and would have already notified AP if it was taking this step. This all leads me to believe it is only involving some part of AP costing $1 million.
    I can also see them scrapping the sports agate AP provides, and other routine stuff. But AP also provides state copy which USAT doesn't provide and which would be difficult to find others to replicate.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. The hed and speculation here are way ahead of skimpy and don't-add-up facts. (Story's a little more cautious.) Memo says "where we will ask newspapers to swap out their AP news feeds for the USAT equivalents." Does that mean swap AP feeds for USAT-generated stuff? Or swap AP feeds that typical papers get for *AP feeds* that USAT gets?

    And where else would USAT get material for a feed but AP? Guess where USAT print gets its famed 50-state digest? AP chooses one of its items from each state and delivers a file for final USAT editing.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 11:34 pm: Maybe Gannett isn't doing this solely to save money. Maybe this is an emergency plan to establish a national news network should the unthinkable happen: The Associated Press fails.

    Think about it: What if 2009 turns out to be cataclysmic, and many if not most newspaper publishers end the year in bankruptcy court? What happens to the AP? Remember, it's basically owned and heavily supported by newspaper industry.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I don't know about that fully, Jim. I was let go in December and I recall plenty of conversations about pricing and the ridiculous new structure of AP. Our paper discussed the possibility of canceling AP for greener pastures of other news services many times. Never once was it because we thought AP would fail - too many rely on it for some of their needs. But, at the time, we did know that some of the bigger papers were considering it and some had already gone through with cancellation. I suppose anything is possible, though. Hell, Gannett says the furloughs could stave off more layoffs - that's the best joke I heard all day.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anon 12:10 got this right. Ignore the sensationalist headline. The pilot is USAT providing the AP feeds that they take in to the other Gannett papers. There is some great info provided on this blog, but crap headlines and fearmongering stories like this really make me question Jim's motives sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  23. From a sports perspective, this would alienate even more readers. Some Gannett papers use AP to cover local pros when they are away, and no AP would mean no local pro coverage. You are basically ceding the market for pro sports. In my community, I often see readers checking the competition for what my Gannett paper no longer provides.

    Local local needs to be balanced with pertinent national news in all sections or else you become so provincial that you drive readers elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  24. A paper can trim its AP services to keep what it needs and jettison what it doesn't. For USA Today and the company, it's good for the Gannett papers to use more USA Today content. It expands the USAT profile and gives the papers something that's different from other papers. In many cases, the USAT content is better edited and more unique. The main difficulty is that USAT copy often moves through the paper's editing system too late to get to Gannett papers, and many USAT stories tend to hold for days because of space considerations, etc. If those issues were addressed, then more USAT copy could go to the various papers and not just the websites.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I know my paper would be happy to use USAT stories in print if they moved at a reasonable hour. And all too often, a budgeted USAT story ends up not moving at all. Re: the cost of AP and the fact that it's a member-owned cooperative of newspapers, why isn't the price AP charges all nonprint Web portals incredibly higher than it is??? These sites are eating our lunch and dinner by providing AP stories with newspapers paying most of the freight

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.