The Cincinnati Enquirer's new "social media strategy" encourages Twitter use for updates, and for staff to get on Facebook to help "brand" some reporters and increase their exposure, says CityBeat. The alt-weekly contrasts the strategy with Florida Today's much-discussed memo to limit Twitter use for work-only. Cincy says: "You are more than just a reporter for Enquirer, you are a hub of information and a local expert in your field -- now act like it."
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Cincy | Staffers told: Twitter yourself into a 'brand'
The Cincinnati Enquirer's new "social media strategy" encourages Twitter use for updates, and for staff to get on Facebook to help "brand" some reporters and increase their exposure, says CityBeat. The alt-weekly contrasts the strategy with Florida Today's much-discussed memo to limit Twitter use for work-only. Cincy says: "You are more than just a reporter for Enquirer, you are a hub of information and a local expert in your field -- now act like it."
8 comments:
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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Very progressive attitude, and smart. Kudos to Margaret or whomever is helping the staff understand communication in 2009 (instead of our normal 1909 model.)
ReplyDeleteSmart, yes. Very smart, if they are "twittering'' a brand. But I'd venture to say that 80 percent of what we're talking about here is less-than-productive yapping about what drinks are cool, who got drunk and went home with who, "what Im doing now'' and other self-absorbed nonsense. Twitter/Facebook are the new Rolodex? Hardly. They are the new Windows Solitaire game, built for wasting time.
ReplyDeleteOne blogging economist is suggesting that the New York Times buy Twitter.
ReplyDeletehttp://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/haque/2009/04/twitter_1.html
Interesting. Maybe several of the larger chains can get together on this (they'd have to get together to be able to afford it).
So, an economist suggests a company that lost money in the last quarter (NYT) buy a company that doesn't make any money at all (Twitter).
ReplyDeleteNo wonder we're in such a fucking mess.
This Cincy news is weeks old. And it addresses using Twitter and FaceBook for work, not for personal reasons.
ReplyDeleteThere is a 23-page or so memo circulating that makes for interesting reading. You should get your hands on it Jim.
Now the dwindling reporter corps has more versions of breaking stories to write from a simple Tweet and Facebook link to a blog post to a breaking online version to the print version. And they are expected to join in conversations on local blogs, forums, etc. Just two years ago they were warned NOT to participate in the comment section of blogs - even their own!
We know how florida today feels about technology. See the job posting for a $30,000 programmer!
ReplyDeleteToo bad the Enquirer does not take the same "you're an expert, now act like it" attitude when it comes to the actual newspaper. There the message is more like "shut up, shovel it out, do what you're told or take a walk."
ReplyDeleteI think edicts like this cross the line on labor laws, even for someone who may be considered exempt from OT.
ReplyDeleteThe company essentially is enslaving the reporter 24/7, making him a celebrity whose privacy rights become the same as a public official.
One goof or an ill-advised candor after a glass of wine could cost you your career, because this stuff has perpetuity on the 'net and is easily accessible to any judgmental potential future employers.
We don't get paid enough for that sacrifice, IMHO.
Plus, the opinions we're allowed to state have to be the company's opinions and not our own. The company wants to create the false light that its employees are expressing themselves as individuals when they are not. I've seen two different people let go and another disciplined for posting something the glass-office types Monday-morning quarterbacked differently. That's just not fair.
When I came into journalism, reporters didn't get bylines, even, unless it was an unusually detailed news story or exceptionally well done feature. It was all the company's work, paid for from people working under the company's direction, not the individual's creative work. I think returning to that approach would help to lead us back to objective journalism.
The other thing that gets me is the assumption that good journalism can be done without the gatekeeping process of editors.
We are professional newspaper reporters, not pajama wannabes. We deserve to have multiple editors to make sure every word and every detail of any post is accurate and well written, especially when our byline is attached. Gannett owes us that.