Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

1. Chris
   

   June 4th, 2008 at 3:13 pm

   Use of a wiki - Does it any of the five basic kinds of wikis: second draft, crowdsourcing, supplementary, open and logistical.

2. Todd Zeigler
   

   June 4th, 2008 at 4:00 pm

   Wikis are a good idea.

   It occurs to me that we might also look at the kind of ads they are using. Meaning are the ads:

   *Traditional display ads
   *Contextual ads (do they use Google Adsense)
   *Interactive ads
   *Insterstials

   The big problem newspapers have is that online readers are worth much less than print readers. So it might be interesting to see how they are trying to monetize online.

3. Dave Mastio
   

   June 4th, 2008 at 4:04 pm

   I think this one is critical and the technology way predates the web: Can readers easily find direct email addresses for all editorial staffers with their positions identified. There are so many newspapers where this is next to impossible or it is eight clicks in or only a handful of people are identified or you can only email people thru those mysterious forms.

   But what is more critical for making journalism a conversation instead of a lecture than simple email access to the players at the newspaper.

   Here are some other ideas for editorial pages:

   Does the editorial board have a blog?
   Is the blog used to start conversations and gather information before the newspaper takes an official position?
   Are the members of the newspapers editorial board identified?
   Is all local opinion content available on the web?
   Does opinion content go up throughout the day or is the editorial page still on the paper publishing schedule?
   Does the editorial page link to other sources of opinion in and about the community (i.e. blogs)?

4. Bill Armstrong
   

   June 4th, 2008 at 5:39 pm

   Is there a way to track the level of hyperlocal content the papers include?

5. Jack Lail
   

   June 5th, 2008 at 6:00 am

   From your list, I would think you would need some measure of whether the newspaper is significantly investing in breaking news. That would seem a no-brainer, but it’s probably not. Yet, it remains the single most important factor in moving the audience needle.

   Are stories time-stamped. Do stories show signs of being updated, both a creation time stamp and an updated/modified time stamp. Are there breaking stories or web-first stories outside of the hard news sections such as entertainment, sports. Is the breaking news commodity AP national/world news or community/region specific breaking news?

   Another area to consider. Is the site doing significant amounts of outbound linking in order to provide additional context by linking to information source sites, to other viewpoints or reporting from bloggers, to additional coverage on other news sites, even competitors and to popular user generated content sites like flickr or YouTube?.

   Is the site providing internal links to previous coverage to allow the user to “catch up” on a story or issue?

   I like Dave’s idea about finding staffers. Here’s another duh test. Can you ascertain what city the Web site is in or primarily focuses on from the home page.

   Much of your list focuses on features on the edges of what actually audiences appear to respond too. Some of these may be emerging and thus important as developing tools, and others might merely be bells and whistles. (We’ve had a computer kiosk in our lobby so people could self-service order ads … looks cool, nobody ever uses it; they’d rather wait in line at the reception desk and talk to a human. Go figure.)

   Regarding the reference to IM alerts? Do you mean cell phone SMS alerts?

   Another not addressed is what is the site or newspaper doing on other sites: Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, flckr, Feedfriend, etc. Maybe that’s what you mean by widgets, but creating a Facebook group around some content area wouldn’t be a widget.

   Another quibble is more philosophical. One could be doing everything listed below and not be investing resources in a very successful site from a business/bottom line standpoint. How resources are being allocated in sales and marketing may not be ascertainable from observing the Web site with a checklist, but those resources provide the critical oxygen needed to keep producing a high quality site.

   You could look at some things. Is the site doing rich media advertising? Is the site using large ad forms that are more popular with advertisers because of their relative effectiveness? Are their ads in videos - pre-roll, post-roll, or layered in the video in the lower third? Are emails sponsored? Are alerts sponsored? Are widgets sponsored? Is that good or bad? Does the site maintain a quality user experience in its overall presentation of advertising and news (the advertising annoyance factor)?

6. steve
   

   June 5th, 2008 at 10:49 am

   Is print function available? Is it sponsored (by existing on-page ads, or by a “print-page sponsor”? What format does it end up providing (no images, etc.)

7. Tom Mallory
   

   June 5th, 2008 at 1:06 pm

   I second Jack Lail’s comment on the crucial importance of breaking news coverage, not just copying the paper online.
   One reality check: A lot of these features are investments in the future that have yet to pay off, and times are tough. Things like video and interactives take a lot of resources and, unless they’re well-targeted, just don’t deliver much bang for the ever-scarcer bucks. I wouldn’t recommend profit margins being part of this, but what about some measures of readership or site effectiveness?
   And thanks for doing this.
   ttm

8. Todd Zeigler
   

   June 5th, 2008 at 1:54 pm

   Thanks for all the comments and keep them coming!

   I think Jack and Tom get out a key area we need to expand into with this version. How are the papers attempting to monetize and what are the results? Do websites with more features outperform those with less? What features lead to greatest increase in eyeballs? Etc.

   These are hard questions to answer with just publicly available data, but it is worth trying.