“At WDEL-AM in Wilmington, Delaware, our reporters produce stories using video cameras instead of cassette recorders,” news director Christopher Carl says in a comment on Poynter.org. “The audio is used on the radio. Reporters then produce video packages for out website – WDEL.com. WDEL.com users can then choose to watch individual video stories or a daily 10-minute video newscast. On weekends, users can watch a recap of the week’s big stories. Wilmington, DE is a a market with NO local commercial television station. [via CyberJournalist.net]
Category Archives: Journalism
Dave Winer: “Reform journalism school”
“It’s too late to be training new journalists in the classic mode. Instead, journalism should become a required course, one or two semesters for every graduate. Why? Because journalism like everything else that used to be centralized is in the process of being distributed. In the future, every educated person will be a journalist, as today we are all travel agents and stock brokers. The reporters have been acting as middlemen, connecting sources with readers, who in many cases are sources themselves. As with all middlemen, something is lost in translation, an inefficiency is added. So what we’re doing now, in journalism, as with all other intermediated professions, is decentralizing. So it pays to make an investment now and teach the educated people of the future the basic principles of journalism.”
What happened to the news?
A scary little story in today’s USA Today about the findings of a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism. According to Project Director Tom Rosenstiel,
“The dirty little secret of the information revolution is it has been more about repurposing or repackaging news than gathering it.”
In recent years, because of their own cutbacks, radio and television have increasingly been relying on newspapers and wire services to do their newsgathering for them.
If you think the news is thin on local radio and TV stations now, imagine what it would be if they didn’t have newspapers to rewrite. If,however, your local radio station long ago abandoned any pretense of news, you’ll be okay.
“Do what you do best. And you link to the rest.”
That’s what Jeff Jarvis calls “the new architecture of news” in an excellent post at Buzz Machine. He’s writing about newspapers but it applies to any news organization:
“They try to cover everything because they used to have to be all things to all people in their markets. So they had their own reporters replicate the work of other reporters elsewhere so they could say that they did it under their own bylines as a matter of pride and propriety. It’s the way things were done. They also took wire-service copy and reedited it so they could give their audiences the world. But in the age of the link, this is clearly inefficient and unnecessary. You can link to the stories that someone else did and to the rest of the world. And if you do that, it allows you to reallocate your dwindling resources to what matters, which in most cases should be local coverage.”
“Instead of saying, “we should have that” (and replicating what is already out there) you say, “what do we do best?” That is, “what is our unique value?” It means that when you sit down to see a story that others have worked on, you should ask, “can we do it better?” If not, then link. And devote your time to what you can do better.”
What do our news networks do “best?” Easy. We cover the legislature and state government in our respective states. Big newspapers do a great job on this beat but not much with audio. Yet. Some TV stations jump on a story if it has local appeal (and time allows). I still think we do the audio thing best. For now.
By chance or design, our websites have had this same focus. We’ve stayed close to what we do best.
I won’t get into pros and cons of our current network/affiliate business model. That’s too big an issue for this little blog. But it begs the question: Do enough people care about the legislature and state government to give us an audience that will be attractive to advertisers?
I should add that we still attempt to cover news from throughout the state. But it’s getting harder. At the same time, it’s getting easier to find out what’s going 500 miles away. But we are dependent on our affiliate radio stations to cover local stories of statewide significance. And many local radio stations have cut their news departments. As a statewide network, we are the sum of our affiliate parts.
I posted last month about one of our reporters killing a link (that I had added) to a “competing” news organization. Jarvis’ post is for him. If a news outlet was at a press conference that we couldn’t attend and posted a story, we can’t be afraid to link to them. Not if we’re serious about serving our listeners/readers. The fiction that “if they don’t know about it, it didn’t happen (yet)” doesn’t fly anymore. They know about it. And we should help them know about it. Whoever does that best wins. [Thanks, David]
Matt Taibbi on Bush budget
“Here’s the thing about the system of news coverage we have today. If the Walton family, or Lee Raymond, or the heirs to the Mars fortune actually needed the news media to work better than it does now, believe me, it would work better. But they have no such need, because the system is working just fine for them as is. The people it’s failing are the rest of us, and most of the rest of us, apparently, would rather sniff Anna Nicole Smith’s corpse or watch Britney Spears hump a fire hydrant than find out what our tax dollars are actually paying for. Shit, when you think about it that way, why not steal from us? People that dumb don’t deserve to have money.”
This excellent column is a painful reminder of times I argued (with news directors) that we should give people the news they want, not the news they “need.” I was more of a ratings pimp than ratings whore, but I was wrong.