In more than 2,420 published posts, this will be my most prominent acknowledgement that I've screwed up -- and it starts with the photo of those two men, above, at a Grammy awards party in Louisville, Ky., covered by The Courier-Journal's Metromix unit. That's some terrific work. I can't explain why I like that photo series so much, although it certainly starts with the fact it's so different than the usual fare -- and I'm talking about what I see in print papers.Metromix, MomsLikeMe and the other new all-digital offerings fall outside journalism's mainstream, and especially the culture of the traditional newsroom, where I spent 20 years working for Gannett. Now, I've never laid eyes on any of the women (and I'll bet many of them are women) responsible for putting out Metromix and MomsLikeMe pages.
But here's what I imagine: You don't always feel 100% appreciated by the "real" newsroom. Maybe it's because you work offsite. Or maybe you were hired only recently, and never worked the weekend cops shift, or ran around election night with your hair on fire.To the extent I've encouraged that digital division between old and new, I'm sorry. Here's the reality: Metromix, etc., look like money-makers to me. And as a former print journalist now struggling to make an online living, I'm more sensitive than ever to the realities of paying for the news.
What's next?
The challenge for Metromix and Moms is their shoestring budgets. For a little bit more money, their original reporting, photography and other social media could easily compete with the diminished strengths of the traditional newsroom. For all I know, Metromix and Moms could be the next newsroom, rather than solely a source of racy photos to bolster homepage traffic.
I'd like to focus more attention on the good work and success stories at Metromix and Moms sites -- as well as the inevitable mistakes. This isn't meant to be a happy-news-only discussion. It might mean launching a separate, password-only blog at some point. As always, I value your feedback.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.
[Credits: Latasha Lewis and members of 2-Fresh and the Fly Gang hung out at Ice Breakers Friday night; today's front page, Newseum]
I can't fathom that people that are into such stuff will go to our stodgy slow-ass Web sites to check these pics out.
ReplyDeleteAnd some of the discussions on Moms sites make me gag. A recent Wisconsin post about conserving energy: "We have a 2,500 square foot house and it's soooo hard to heat at these prices. We have turned the temp down to 66 at night and put more layers on."
Puh-leeze. Try a dose of reality, bitch.
Isn't the whole purpose of these sites to draw a huge audience and then deliver targeted audiences to advertisers and marketers? Why would quality count?
ReplyDeleteThe point isn't huge audience, it's for advertisers who want to target a (for moms - greatly) desired audience. It's niche. it's not hard hitting journalism, doubt that was ever the goal.
ReplyDeleteOh - and until you have been stuck in a house month after month tethered to a bottle or naps every three hours... a site like this can be the only connection to a mom's reality, and in her world, that's what matters!
Does anyone bother to tell the moms about Ripple6 or those cloud communities?
ReplyDeleteI doubt they care. My knowledge speaks to the mom market only - - but they just want the thing to work.
ReplyDeleteAt the C-J, our Moms editor isn't a part of News - she's a member of the Marketing Department. Any of the content comes directly from News, while her main goal is to keep the forum conversations going and help advertising with promotions. And 3:10 had it right - it's a hugely desired audience.
ReplyDeleteThe Mom interface is clunky, which can't be helping matters.
ReplyDeleteBoth sites are designed to drive up the online numbers so we can tell advertisers that X amount of visitors come to these sites, which Gannett hopes will draw advertisers to these sites along with a print package. They hope by combining online and print, both products will benefit. Bottom line is, that online and print numbers are down — unless someone can provide information to the contrary. Still I do not feel online or Metromix or Delaware Moms can support the company in it's present model. It will take at least five years to see any returns from these sites. Craig — you listening? Also, what are you planning on purchasing soon with that 2.5 million you plan on taking from community papers? Something is in the works. Spill the beans.
ReplyDeleteThe thing I feel that they completely missed the boat on, is the value of the targeted audience (particularly on moms). Mom's is a segment, never going to bring in 10 million page views a month - so how do you make it an entity worth pursuing? You give it a higher CPM (a MUCH higher).
ReplyDeleteThe value is there, other mom sites are getting far more - keeping the same pricing model as the main news sites, devalues the targeted audience and hardly brings in enough money to keep it alive.
The idea is not always to combine online and print - the digital sales team at the CJ does sale combined packages from time to time, but they are also extremely successful with selling online only packages. And their online numbers are not down. They continue to increase their revenue and bring in bigger sales.
ReplyDeleteOur Moms site generates a little over 200k page views month - which definitely is something that is used as a selling point. The inventory is pretty much sold out, and that's not using a much higher CPM - it's the same section rate used for the rest of the site.
The point being, at 200k pv, inventory will be sold out - capping your earnings. There are other local mom sites out there garnering a $50 CPM and more, selling out of inventory, with same page views. Bundled or not, if the average CPM for the site is only $12 - the business proposition there isn't really that strong when times are tight and resources limited.
ReplyDeleteMoms was really created to sell on a national level. If you went to the kickoff "pep rally" meeting in August 2008 at Gannett Corp, all the cool stuff was saved for the big national advertisers that corp was trying to bring onboard before the sites was even launched. Big problem, corp soon realized they couldn't sell something with no users or pageviews - LOL! Strange around Oct '08 the focus changed to more local support and "we are hear for you" and "we really need you" conference calls from corp. Now in 2009 our marketing budgets have shrunk to nothing and corp has given us all ridiculous revenue and pageview goals - out right laughable! Its very true momslikeme is not meant to be editorial but a community of hungry mommy consumers and household decisionmakers for advertisers to target their message to.
ReplyDelete