Fresh useful insights for people advancing quality, innovative and sustainable journalism
You might have heard: Digital media is wrestling with ad viewability, with little agreement on whose responsibility it is to move the industry forward
But did you know: News startups are looking to avoid the viewability issue by designing ad-friendly sites from the start (Adweek)
Ad viewability is a contested issue with publishers and advertisers, but some news startups are hoping to get around the issue by designing websites that are ad-friendly. Lauren Johnson writes that LittleThings, a year-old viral news and lifestyle site targeting women, will reveal an ad-friendly design during the fourth quarter of this year, and the redesign will be able to provide advertisers with more accurate data about how users interact with their ads. However, Johnson writes that the challenges of mobile ads throws a wrench in the plans of many of these publishers, due to smaller screens and a lack of data-tracking cookies.
+ Noted: Some publishers are using “out-stream ads,” video ads that run on text-dominant Web pages, as a way to increase mobile ad revenue (Wall Street Journal); With 20 million monthly readers and a valuation of $100 million, Mic expects to generate $5 million to $10 million in revenue in 2015, up from $0 in 2014 (Business Insider); Condé Nast breaks its tradition of not negotiating ad rates, a decision that “bows to the reality of digital” (Digiday)
Should errors on old stories still be corrected? (The Buttry Diary)
Steve Buttry asks, is there a statute of limitations on on correcting errors or updating flawed stories? Errors are often corrected soon after a story’s publication, but a flaw that’s pointed out years later may not be as likely to be corrected. Writing on a case involving The New York Times, Buttry writes that news organizations should still make the correction. Former chair of the SPJ Ethics Committee Kevin Smith says: “If the new facts significantly change the original story, they have an obligation to completely correct those in a way that rivals the original reporting and, at a minimum, apply corrections prominently.”
Chinese journalist detained for fabricating and spreading false information about stock market (News.com.au)
A Chinese journalist admitted to spreading false information that led to “panic and disorder” at China’s stock market, according to reports by state-run news agency Xinhua. Wang Xiaolu, a journalist for Caijing magazine, wrote a story in July that said the securities regulator was studying plans for government funds to exit the market, which China Securities Regulatory Commission denied and called “irresponsible.” Caijing magazine said in a statement posted on its website it “defended journalists’ rights to do their duty under the law.”
Once a ‘high-stakes affair,’ political press conferences are now a farce with journalists playing along (Salon)
Political press conferences were formerly events where politicians were “girded for pitched battle with the assembled journalists,” but Robert Mann writes that the political press conference has devolved into “little more than a theater production starring the politician.” Journalists are bit players in this production, Mann says, with politicians looking to make news with carefully scripted statements. Mann writes that reporters often have no choice but to submit to these productions: “If the reporters cause trouble — if they annoy the candidate or her staff with unreasonable demands or overly hostile questions — campaign staffers can make life much less comfortable for them. … To get ahead, they go along.”
NPR ombud defends use of screengrab from WDBJ video (NPR)
Though NPR did not use or link to videos from the WDBJ shooting, it drew criticism for its use of a screengrab taken from the shooter’s video. NPR ombudsman Elizabeth Jensen says NPR showed the appropriate restraint is choosing not to air the videos, and says its use of the screengrab was justified. Jensen writes: “[The pictures] and the audio could have been described instead of shown (as they have been here) and yes, they are disturbing. But a killing that takes place on live television is shocking and had NPR stripped out every audio or visual element it would have somehow failed to convey succinctly just how shocking it was.”
How The Washington Post’s homepage redesign was inspired by print (Poynter)
The Washington Post’s redesigned homepage was revealed last week, the final piece of its sidewide reboot. But it’s not drastically different from its predecessor, which director of digital products and design Joey Marburger says was intentional. The new homepage was inspired by the print front page, as the Post was looking for the ability to emphasize big stories online the same way it can in print. But, Marburger says the bigger changes are things that readers may not be able to see: “The term people use a lot is more dynamic. Really what that means for us is we can manipulate and change the homepage faster, at the true pace of news.”
+ Killing the comment sections prevents audiences from asking questions, and Jennifer Brandel says letting audiences weigh in on what stories to cover opens up new editorial opportunities, presents a marketing opportunity for newsrooms, and leads to stories that are often popular with readers (Medium)
The post Need to Know: Aug. 31, 2015 appeared first on American Press Institute.
from American Press Institute http://ift.tt/1JGIvrT
0 التعليقات:
Post a Comment