Thursday, December 06, 2012

USAT | Already-short stories now even shorter?

Maybe it's my imagination, but stories I'm reading lately on USA Today's website are getting shorter and shorter and shorter. They're more like blog posts fashioned out of story fragments. This was particularly noticeable with the weekend coverage of the Jovan Belcher murder-suicide.

Is this a new way of boosting story count? Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the rail, upper right.

23 comments:

  1. Good observation, Jim. Kramer and Callaway want lots more stories and videos on the web. That means more pieces of sugary sweet advertising spots to sell. Think traditional blog style items turned into separate little stories with a 'your ad here' sign. Plus room for popup ads on the sides. Notice the constant rotation of stories as well, The sad thing is the website is clunky, hard to navigate and readrs are fleeing in droves. Kramer says he isnt worried, that readers will adjust. I am not so sure.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There are too many good news organizations out there for readers to adjust to reading USA Today. Once you lose readers, it's hard to get them back after they find something else they like better. Duh!

    ReplyDelete
  3. "USA TODAY: The nation's rag"
    Said to me by a newsroom employee in 1984!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Old media consultant's advice: "Never give a reader/viewer/listener a reason to go elsewhere to get the information they want because when they find it elsewhere, they won't be coming back."

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm now looking at a six-paragraph USAT story described as an "analysis." Is that where the paper is headed?

    ReplyDelete
  6. My head is about to explode concerning all things USAT.

    Sure the stories are shorter. They've been on a mission to dumb down the paper and website for at least five years. And that's saying a lot for a news brand that isn't exactly known for producing high-brow content or deep reporting.

    USAT needs to go away. Get out of the news business. You don't have the horses, ethics or desire to be a major player in the world of legitimate journalism. So just become whatever piece of crap you can be with the budget-friendly morons you hire and retain these days. Run drawings of stick figures and write nothing but stories in bulleted form. Just don't try telling us that you want to compete with the Times, Post, etc., for readers with brains.


    ReplyDelete
  7. I just today had usat in my hands for first ring in several years. What a shock. It is less than a shadow what it used to be in all ways. First of all, the front page looks worst than my high school newspaper. That logo is horrible! Why mess with something that was recognizable for this. Second, the content witten and graphic is terrible. Finally, practically no ads. What a shame. I won't bother again.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It is amazing that for all the ugliness and write-around-the-edges "reporting'' in the blog that no one realizes, notes or reports that almost every major Gannett editor has been at Tysons for two days now.

    Guess that is too "real'' to matter. Instead, back to the myths of the day, Gannett Blog-style. Sorry for the interruption.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 4:02, that also demonstrates that anyone actually in a Gannett newsroom would know that and would be yapping about it here in the blog.

    Instead, it's the homebound and the unemployed and the bitter who post here, none of whom actually know what's going on.

    Funny.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 4:02 What's on the agenda for this meeting of editors?

    ReplyDelete
  11. USA TODAY = visual storytelling.
    Translation: lots of pictures and short stories for today's attention span.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Remember, this place is riddled with television people, including CDO David Payne. We're seeing that clearly in the new site.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Since you asked, the agenda is what you already anticipated. Editors are talking about content, not stories. The previous comment was right on target, get as many copy blocks and videos on the website as possible to sell. Content of the "content" doesn't matter, it is all about drawing readers to the website. But this is a gamble. Will readers stay ore return when they find out the information they want or need is not there? Sites will offer occasional enterprise stories to try to add legitimacy to the website, but the reality is that there will be a time when there will be no real editors (who needs them?) Instead, there will be a group of very young, very low-paid "reporters" who will send their news nuggets directly to the website with perhaps a single supervisor of some kind. There will be no need for an information center or a building, maybe a small storefront. It's all about playing off the brand of some respected mastheads in the country. That's the vision of a rapidly approaching future. Will advertisers catch on to the ruse? Is it true that people don't want to read news stories anymore? We will soon find out.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Gsmnett editors are here for rhe how many does it take to screw in a lightbulb seminar.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Follow the #gciturbocharge hashtag on Twitter and you'll find out.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If all usa today and gannett properties are becoming a more organized version of youtube, and, say, local sports scores and weather with a sprinkling of news headlines, there will be little to distinguish "the brand." so why would someone be willing to pay for content? Consequently, what is the advantage for advertisers? Lets take this a step further. If low paid "reporters" are behind most of the content, why would sophisticated consumers buy in? Even locals get when someone shiny and new comes into their community and has no perspective on the community. You can fool people for only so long.

    ReplyDelete
  17. How can reporters have space to mainstream and find those Moments of Life if their stories keep getting shorter?

    ReplyDelete
  18. We couldn't out-Chicken Groupon into irrelevance, so now we're going to compete with Patch?

    In the race to the bottom, the winner is the first one to piledrive into the floor.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I cant navigate this new website. It is disorganized, there is no emphasis on news that might be important to readers and it seems the ever changing pages are given little to no thought. If digital is the future at usa today, it looks really dim,

    ReplyDelete
  20. "I cant navigate this new website."

    When someone starts with this, I usually assume the person is a dimwit.

    Unlike most of the dimwits, though, the rest of the person's post actually tries to cite some specifics. It fails miserably, but at least the attempt is made.

    ReplyDelete
  21. There must be plenty of dimwits out there, then. because views are way down. you must be one of the. overlords of this clunky mess, 2:41. No worries. You're safe. No accountability for messing up royally at this sorry ass operation. Just for yucks, though, what is your go to website for thoughtful, well organized content?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Define well-organized, dimwit. My guess is you cannot.

    On a day like today, I'd say nfl.com does a good job. During the week, not so much.

    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.