Jim Morrison and the importance of relevance

From my NETT blog:

What are the most important factors to consider when you’re communicating ideas to people? How do you get your message across successfully?

From my days as a journalist writing for newspapers and magazines through to my current work presenting digital marketing messages or lecturing to students, a few common themes have emerged in terms of what works consistently.

Actually, I exaggerate – there is really just one fundamental rule in successful communication: make your concept relevant to your target audience.

This is expressed as a couple of acronyms:

• WIFFM – what’s in it for me?
• WSIC – why should I care?

If you can understand what matters to your audience and work out how to relate your message to their concerns, you’ll get your point across.

This principle isn’t limited to written, visual or verbal communication messages: it extends to the communication of ideas, and can include the dissemination of those ideas through a variety of media.

Take music, for example. My favourite band of all time is the Doors, led by the late great Jim Morrison. The Doors tapped into the Zeitgeist of the 1960s with music that protested against traditional mores.

Their sometimes dark messages about love, fitting in and pushing back against parental barriers struck a chord with young Baby Boomers who were just starting to flex their muscles and question the structures of the world that they were inheriting.

Read the full story

Business time for content providers

Here’s an excerpt from a blog I posted on Zazoo this week:

“There has been a lot of debate in journalistic circles of late about the state of denial most journalists and media academics are in regarding new media.

“A recent blog on Poynter.org recounted an exchange between digital media entrepreneur Elizabeth Overholser and journalism students at the University of Southern California’s Annenberg School of Journalism. Osder refuted one student’s lament that online news business models aren’t working. Then she advised the students that to figure out which online business models can work, ”Start with the impact you want to have. Figure out what audience you need to assemble to have that impact. And what kind of content is needed to do that. Then price it out: How much money do you need to do it?”

“According to Overholser, a J-student groaned in reply, “If I wanted to do that, I’d have gone to Marshall (USC’s business school).”

“Osder countered that while that response was understandable, thinking through the business side of journalism “forces you to be relevant and useful versus arrogant and entitled.”

“I say: hear, hear!….”

Go here for the rest of the entry.

More on the future of news

Here’s a link to a post on the OurPatch website by someone near and dear to me, about a new report on news consumption habits from the Pew Internet and American Life Survey.

Journalists: Business is not a dirty word

At the Future of Journalism Conference at Harvard last week, 100 journalism researchers and professors heard repeated messages that the mainstream media must embrace, not fight, the blogosphere and that serious reporting can survive by catering to niche audiences. Here is a summary of a report on the conference from the journalism institute Poynter.org (the full report is here).

Carl Sessions Stepp, a University of Maryland journalism professor, said journalists should consider themselves entrepreneurs and find ways to make more money from existing news services like archives. From Gutenberg to Google, he added, “Young marginal upstarts with great ideas is a journalistic tradition.”

Robert G. Picard from Sweden’s Jonkoping University, said that although journalists hate the words “business” and “money,” they must develop new revenue streams. He said news organizations should abandon their “all you can eat buffet” offerings of mediocre coverage of all subjects. Instead, Picard said, they should provide higher quality news for smaller audiences, present information in various media, and reuse and reconfigure existing content.

Clyde Bentley, a Missouri School of Journalism professor, said, “we’ve had our head in the sand” about the blogosphere’s impact.

The debate over bloggers’ influence “is over,” he said. “Blogging is a numbers game. It’s there and we’ll just have to deal with it.” Noting that 120,000 new blogs a day dwarf the country’s 1,427 dailies, he said editors should treat the blogosphere like a giant wire service.

Bentley said that while consumer demand for content decreases, their demand for content navigation increases. “There will always be a place for the journalist who can craft a story better than anyone else, but there will be a bigger place for the journalist who can help media consumers find the information they want.”

Time to get with the program

There has been a lot of debate in journalistic circles of late about the state of denial most journalists and media academics are in regarding new media. An article today in ClickZ echoes what organisations like the Poynter Foundation have been saying for years – journalists need to get their head out of the sand and embrace the Internet, because, like it or not, it is changing the face of journalism. Being a good writer isn’t enough in the 21st century; you need to be able to write web copy, operate a blog, do your research and link out to your sources, even use a video camera.

I used to be one of those journalists: I studied hard so I could get into a top journalism program, honed my reporting and feature-writing skills for four years, and believed writing for a quality newspaper was the greatest job there could be (until I would move on to writing best-selling novels).  I ended up moving to Australia and the first job I landed was in the rough-and-ready world of B2B publishing, where they expected you to do a bit of everything - becoming an editor much too soon, dealing with people management, taking photos, and, worst of all, becoming familiar with P&Ls and the realities of advertising-based publishing. I hated it at the time, but it took my blinders off and prepared me for dealing with change. I became involved in Internet publishing more than 10 years ago because, with my blinders off, I could see that this was the direction in which communications, including journalism, was going.

I recently did a stint back in traditional publishing and was amazed to see that the attitude of journalists hadn’t changed in the past 10-15 years. Most of my staff, despite being Gen Y, refused to engage with the publication’s website, because they were convinced that regular deadlines, well-designed pages and the feel of a magazine in your hand was what journalism was all about. When I talked about content management systems, email newsletters, multimedia, blogs, etc., they started muttering about job descriptions and the union award. Like others who have been writing on this topic, I blame the university programs, who are still churning out journalists who are too good to do anything other than report and write.

Much as it pains me to say this, as someone who grew up and started their career believing in the purity and hyperspecialisation of journalism, the Internet, new ways of communicating stories, and citizen journalism are all a fact of life today, and journalists who won’t admit this and who won’t widen their perspective and their activities will end up bitter and unemployed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.