Google News To Reward Updates, Local Sources

SearchEngineLand.com posted today that Google News has updated its algorithm.

The two key enhancements:
1) Updates to its “news cluster” when a source adds updated or new information to a breaking story. The site doesn’t simply show the most recent publisher to post a story, but rather rewards the sources that first broke the story. Implications: more exposure for sites that stay with story; opportunity for editors to abuse this by making frequent, meaningless updates.

2) A “signal” that gives weight to a quality publisher who is geographically close the story. While a marquee news brand might dominate coverage of a big story, Google News isn’t forgetting about the little guys with deep roots at the center of the action. Implications: worthy rewards for original reporting with local context.

Google News, in a recent blog post recognizing the struggle to balance quantity and quality, assert it’s not “just about including every story; it’s about helping you find the stories that matter most to you” (hear that, Topix?). Rewarding quality local publishers and the consumer all in one fell algorithmic swoop? One more reason to put stock in news aggregators.

A Recipe for Local News Online

pegasus.gif
Take a heap of staff stories. Stir in a cup of AP and aggregated articles. Fold in some user-generated content and material from media partners. Don’t forget that pinch of secret algorithm.

What you get is Pegasus News, a tasty blend of local news, events, commentary and ads. Mike Orren, former publisher of Texas Lawyer, created the recipe more than a year ago to serve the Dallas market. One unique ingredient is The Daily You, an algorithm-based feature that learns a user’s interests and delivers customized content.

Pegasus News was an interesting little experiment – until July. That’s when Seattle-based Fisher Communications, owner of 19 TV stations and eight radio stations in the Pacific Northwest, bought the site and announced plans to duplicate the operation in other markets.

Fisher aims to use its sales muscle to help Pegasus garner more ads and leverage its database of registered users. Nothing frightfully original there. The real cash may come from Fisher’s plan to license the Pegasus model in other markets. The idea is to market an out-of-the-box solution to media companies and others eager to grab a share of local traffic and ad buys.

Pegasus isn’t a journalistic powerhouse just yet. Some of the staff articles are a line or two long. And the lead item in the “Your Neighborhood” section might be a notice about a lost Yorkie. But with the Fisher sale, Pegasus sheds its ma-and-pa status and became a real player in the mad dash for local traffic.

Orren, the master chef who may soon see his creation become a national franchise, took some time the other day to talk about Pegasus, the Fisher sale and the future of local news online. Here’s the Q&A.

What changed at Pegasus after the sale?

The major change is that we’re no longer operating like we’re broke. It’s a big mindset shift from not knowing if you’re going to live out the month to working on a five-year plan. Consequently, most of the change in the first few months has involved getting systems in place; patching things that were previously held together with shoestring and bubblegum.

That’s mostly stuff that isn’t public-facing, but I suppose there has been some change in our thinking about which features to roll out when. We’ve changed the key decision point from “how sexy will it look to an investor” to “does it improve the site experience?”

We had about 16 full timers and two part timers pre-acquisition (all of whom worked for four months plus without pay before we did the deal). We now have 18 full time and six part timers. Most of the addition is in sales, and there’s been some shifting of roles.

What’s the status of the Fisher/Pegasus plans to expand to other cities? What factors go into choosing?

We are all very committed to getting things right with the DFW site and not propagating our mistakes all over the country. With our lack of resources before, we really didn’t have much of a sales operation and that’s what we’re focused on now. That said, once we’ve got that clicking — and we certainly hope that’s during ‘08 — we’ll look at rolling to other markets.

As far as factors for choosing a city, there are all the same ones we’ve always entertained about market composition — but one of the most important is having key media partners that can accelerate our growth, as opposed to doing it ourselves like we did in Dallas. So obviously the bigger Fisher TV markets like Seattle and Portland are high on the list. But we’re also interested in partnering with broadcasters and print properties in cities where Fisher has no footprint.

Talk a bit about “panlocal” vs. “hyperlocal.” What’s the difference?

The problem we’ve always seen with the whole hyperlocal trend is that there is a very finite number of people in a neighborhood or a suburb who are interested enough in that community to go to a separate source, even online. That means you may have a very active community that’s meaningful to those people who are passionate — but it’s not a business. And, the fact is that a narrow geography is only one of many factors that connect me to people where I live: Are you a parent? What kind of music do you like? What sports do you follow? Where will you eat on the way home tonight? The universe of people who find that information useful is larger, which means there’s enough of an audience to be meaningful to more than the 10 businesses closest to you (many of whom probably have locations all over the metro area).

So by being Panlocal (broadly local, niche and neighborhood) — and then customizing — you can reach people on all of those dimensions, increasing your universe of community members and advertisers.

In other words, if you can put hyperlocal content in front of someone while they’re checking NFL scores, traffic and where to eat tonight, there’s a larger audience for it. It’s what the newspapers should be doing instead of having all these separate hyperlocal products.

How does the business generate revenue? Are these streams enough to carry the Dallas operation? As background, this is from a Donna Bogatin blog post with Fisher Senior Vice President Rob Dunlop in July:

Fisher envisages a three-prong business model for the monetization of Pegasus:

  1. Targeted, local merchant advertising leveraging the local media sales know-how and clientele of Fisher’s TV and radio stations,
  2. Traditional database marketing leveraging Pegasus’ relationships with its registered users,
  3. Licensing of the new Fisher-Pegasus panlocal Internet media model to offer prosepctive partners “speed to market” entry into the online local news business.

We’re still focused on the first two — and you have to remember that we basically had no salesforce pre-acquisition, getting ads mostly over the transom. We’ve been building our sales team the last few months and should start seeing that impact in Q1 ‘08.

What we’re selling now is primarily display advertising with progressively higher CPMs for run-of-site, geotargeted (within a square mile) and behaviorally targeted. There are also section sponsorships and targeted email and SMS messages.

One of the differences we see on the ad front already is that people are more willing to talk to us post-acquisition and less skeptical that we’re for real. Fisher brings a real sense of legitimacy and comfort to the advertisers we talk to. So while the revenue didn’t become self-sustaining overnight, we’re certainly moving in the right direction. And once the momentum is right, we’ll be ready for Fisher and non-Fisher markets to replicate the model.

How’s your traffic doing?

Traffic’s certainly grown throughout the year, and tends to go in spikes and plateaus. We’re up around 280,000 unique visitors monthly and about 10,000 registered users. We’ve done that pretty much all on word of mouth and organic search. We’re starting to do marketing tests on everything from event presence, to SEM, to billboards, to direct mail.

How would you describe the Pegasus “secret sauce?”

I don’t know if it’s a secret sauce so much as an amalgam of best practices we picked up from watching others in the space. The blend of content sources and the customization are a big part of it. I’d also say that our “voice,” which is distinct, has a lot to do with it. While we’re not The Daily Show, we try not to be so deadly serious about everything. We try to approach everything with a wink without ever being mean. That’s something you don’t see a lot in traditional local news. And, a funny or off-the-wall picture with a zinger caption can make something like a run-of-the mill press release interesting to a lot more people.

We also work really hard to make everyone who engages with the site feel like there are real people behind it. Customer service requests and email inquiries are almost always answered same-day. We’re active on our comment boards. In the increasingly rare case that a user posts a substantive comment and no one from the community engages them, a staffer does so. We’re very transparent and often blog about our challenges and solicit advice from the community. So I think that there’s both a sense that we care, that we’re curating and that we value what everyone else brings to the table.

The Coming Consolidation Wave

Singer Mary-Chapin Carpenter once noted that “sometimes you’re the windshield, sometimes you’re the bug.” And I suspect many local news operations have felt a bit like both in recent years.

As print circulation and advertising swoon, the newspaper industry, and news providers generally, have looked for a lifeboat online. And there have been some promising pieces of news in the online advertising market.

The Newspaper Association Of America’s Randy Bennett recently pointed out that in 2003, newspapers collected a mere $1.2 billion from their online operations; last year the figure was nearly $2.7 billion. “We’re growing at a double-digit rate,” he says.

But as The Washington Post’s Paul Farhi notes in this column (which comes from the January issue of The American Journalism Review), there are some serious challenges on the horizon. Overall traffic growth for online news sites in general has slowed to a trickle, and there seems to be some audience consolidation taking place.

–After years of robust increases, the online newspaper audience seems to have all but stopped growing. The number of unique visitors to newspaper Web sites was almost flat – up just 2.3 percent – between August 2006 and August 2007, according to Nielsen/NetRatings. The total number of pages viewed by this audience has plateaued, growing just 1.8 percent last year.

–Newspaper Web sites are attracting lots of visitors, but aren’t keeping them around for long. The typical visitor to nytimes.com, which attracts more than 10 percent of the entire newspaper industry’s traffic online, spent an average of just 34 minutes and 53 seconds browsing its richly detailed offerings in October. That’s 34 minutes and 53 seconds per month, or about 68 seconds per day online. Slim as that is, it’s actually about three times longer than the average of the next nine largest newspaper sites. And it’s less than half as long as visitors spent on the Web’s leading sites, such as those run by Google, Yahoo! and Microsoft.–As competition for visitors grows, news sites are rapidly segmenting into winners and losers. In a yearlong study of 160 news-based Web sites (everything from usatoday.com to technorati.com), Thomas E. Patterson of Harvard University found a kind of two-tier news system developing: Traffic is still increasing at sites of well-known national brands (the New York Times, CNN, the Washington Post, etc.), but it is falling, sometimes sharply, at mid-size and smaller newspaper sites.Local news sites benefit in theory from having a built-in relationship with local readers. But as these statistics show, that relationship will disappear unless you work hard to engage the readers, and keep them coming back. It’s impossible to compete with the scale of a CNN or NY Times, and it’s not even enough to be the dominate news voice in your local market.

It’s about integrating your audience into your web site(s). Finding ways to engage them and keep them on your site for longer periods of time. That involves a rapidly evolving mix of forums, games, news features, videos, UCG and whatever else it takes.

Take a look at the front page of your site today and ask yourself this question. “If I didn’t work here, how long would I spend on this site?”

A Very Simple Question…

Do you consider yourself knowledgeable about the online community in your area?

Then answer this question.

Name three prominent local blogs and/or bloggers.

If you can’t do that, then you aren’t nearly knowledgable enough about your local online scene. If you don’t want to use these blogs as any part of your news coverage, that’s your call. Don’t want to ever link to local blogs from your site? I think that’s a bad call, but it’s your choice.

But if you don’t have a clear sense of who is blogging locally and why, then you have no baseline for deciding what your news organization should be doing online.

User-generated only gets you so far

Editor & PublisherWho knew? Good local news coverage that people want to read depends on good journalism.

 

Steve Outing, proponent of citizen journalism and columnist for Editor and Publisher, shares an excellent cautionary tale about his experience relying on user-generated content to create a business.

 

The idea seemed solid: Create a site centered on an expert contributor (say, a climbing enthusiast who knows what she’s talking about and can write informatively) but count on energetic climbers out there to jump in and provide lots of great content. Read Steve’s post because I’m glossing over details, but fundamentally, the user-generated stuff as a whole just wasn’t good enough or consistent enough to attract a big enough audience to make a business. Too much crap, not enough real information that readers found worthwhile.

 

It will be a while before the primordial ooze of user-generated content evolves into a living, breathing reliable news provider without a strong framework of  people who are paid to find stuff out and tell the world about it.

 

The number of people systematically gathering news in an organized fashion matters. Having thousands of user/gatherers out there sending comments, photos, videos, documents and more is a tremendous opportunity. But that mass needs help. As the economic model crumbles for old-fashioned newspapers and TV stations, the old-fashioned gatherers, writers, choosers and filterers continue to have value.

Online News Consumers Are Not Depletable Resources

Lost RemoteAn article on LostRemote got me thinking. Are traditional news sites not learning from the successes of other online businesses?

iMedia Connection had an extremely interesting article about Brian Shuster a few months back. Shuster is known as the Prince of Pop-ups and he made his start on the Internet in the adult industry. The lesson that Shuster learned can be summarized in this one quote.

“The Internet works in a very counterintuitive way,” Shuster explains. “Adult webmasters like myself figured out pretty early on that they could often make more money advertising their competitors than they could selling their own product.”

Shuster believes that you can make more money steering traffic away from your site than you can by trying to keep consumers on your page. Shuster believes the Internet is a medium that rewards depth. It allows consumers to follow narrow and niche passions in-depth, and Shuster believes mainstream websites treat Internet users like a depletable resource. It does appear that some mainstream sites are learning from news aggregators like Digg.com, but the adoption is certainly not a whole hearted effort that rewards the consumer 100%.

Shuster believes that sites can only create so much original content. No news site can possibly contain enough original information to satisfy a user interested in a breaking news story or a topical news article. This is where Shuster believes sending these consumers elsewhere can actually be more profitable for a site.

The internet is not like a paid newspaper or time-slotted TV show. I can read every local news website and find every angle possible on a story or subject that peaks my interest. So in the case of filling my niche or narrow passion online, I am definitely not a depletable resource. As a consumer of news, my biggest pet peeve is when both local newspapers in Minneapolis take the same exact angle or cover the exact same Gopher sports story on the same day. Since it is easy for me to read both papers online with no added cost but time, I want as much original content on the my local sports team as possible. Right now, the best way for me to follow The Gophers is an online forum. The community members post what stories they find and everyone discusses them. That is the type of passion and depth online news sites have to tap into and provide to come out on top.

So What Does ‘Local’ Really Mean?

This may sound like a question with a very obvious answer. But what does “local” really mean online?

The temptation is to see local as simply geography. If I’m a news organization, then focusing on “local” usually just means aggregating local news and information and offering it unfiltered to my web site’s visitors.

The problem with that approach is that when you talk to your readers, they tend to see local as more of a mental location than a dot on the map. Yes, they do care about what’s happening in their town. But local is so much more for them.

To consumers , “local” means the things that are important to their lives. It might be local weather, the sports scores and traffic conditions. But they also may belong to a international soccer fan club and manage their daughter’s baseball team.  All of those things have equal importance in their eyes, and the challenge for news organizations is to aggregate and present all those mental “neighborhoods” in a way that works both for the users and for your advertisers.

One of the reasons that sites such as MySpace and Facebook have succeeded so spectacularly is that they enable their users to connect with their “local” interests. Sometimes its geographical (this is who I work with), and sometimes the proximity is less important (this is who I went to school with).

One of the things I want to explore in future posts is that real meaning on “local,” and how we can help redefine what that means for local media outlets.

Facebook Presents an Opportunity for Local News

abc-facebook.jpg
Facebook and ABC News have teamed to power a politics section on Facebook. This marks the first formal partnership between the burgeoning social network and a news organization. Like other companies, local media needs to find ways to tap into social media sites to extend their brands and reach out to new potential users. Now that Facebook has dipped its toe into the news business, local media sites should take a harder look at how they can participate.

One opportunity is for local news brands to create their own Facebook page. Much like “people pages,” a local news brand can create a page for themselves and add applications, send out messages, gather “fans,” get comments, post questions and more. Additionally, these pages allow news sites to post links/feeds with the latest news headlines and promotions — all linking back to their Web site — while providing community members with relevant local content.

(Via Lost Remote )

Local Media’s Old Paradigm May Be Crumbling

YahooGreg Sterling wrote today about the sudden awakening of newspapers in response to years of eroding subscribership and the loss of classified and regular advertising dollars. As a result, the newspapers have been aggressive in their pursuit of joining consortiums (e.g., Yahoo) and aligning strategically (e.g., Blogrunner, Zillow) which are both good tactical first steps. But why are the newspapers stopping there?  Why aren’t they pursuing cross-platform partnerships with equal zeal? Shouldn’t they also be thinking about partnering with the local TV stations, the local radio outlets and more? Singularly, probably none of these has enough clout to outright “own” a market, but combined, couldn’t they build the kind of engaged local audience that advertisers simply couldn’t dismiss?  From a small business perspective, just having a shared business profile might save me countless hours and I can continue to work with a trusted outlet. And better still, my ads are going to reach many, many more eyeballs than I am accustomed to. Sign me up!

Zillow
I think that the traditional media has for so long competed head-to-head against one another, that the notion of now working together must still be too frightening. Granted, it’d be a lot of work to coordinate such an endeavor, but cooperating and aggregating content sure seems to me to be a better way to remain viable in the consumer’s and avertiser’s eyes. It’s got to be tiring to have to fight for content ownership all the time, especially when the end result is you’ll only own a small piece of it.

Is Hyperlocal Advertising Really an Issue?

Read/WriteWebRead/WriteWeb has an interesting article on the rise of hyperlocal information. The article begs the question, how hard is it to reach hyperlocal audiences? Are local businesses having trouble doing this currently? Or just online?

The article cited two ways someone might want to monetize the hyperlocal audience.

  • Presidential parties could send direct advertising to zip codes that are known to be tipping points in swing states.
  • The other example was local advertising. Hyperlocal web sites would enable local businesses to deliver highly targeted and relevant advertising.

The suggested solution in the article was a hyperlocal online advertising platform. The article also suggested local businesses were currently using door to door sales to make things work.

Advertising by zipcode is not new. Companies like Valpak and Money Mailer have made millions of dollars helping local businesses deliver coupons to local consumer’s mailboxes. Also, if a party or politician needed to reach a swing state they are not going to be advertising by zipcode. They will attempt to reach the largest percentage of voters by using every local TV station and major local publication within that swing state.

I think there are plenty of solid online solutions right now for local advertisers. Facebook’s new advertising platforms and solutions, Google AdWords and AdSense, SuperPages, sites like CitySearch, and let’s not forget local news publications. The issue to me is creating a simple way for local businesses to efficiently advertise online to a large percentage of their local audience while being relevant at the same time. Many local businesses do not have the time and money to plan, organize, and keep up-o-date multiple online business profiles and advertising campaigns. They need solutions to help them efficiently reach new customers online.