A sampling of opinions

I was browsing today and, for some unknown reason, I kept bumping into pieces about the print newspaper posture.  Most were straightforward news items, laced with plenty of facts and forecasts of potential outcomes.  There were a few others that caught my eye for various reasons and I was prompted to throw together this eclectic sampling.

A blunt and somewhat jaded blog post by Ron Kaye, formerly of the LA Daily News, that also presents an interesting take on being an “activist” now instead of a journalist:  http://ronkayela.com/2008/12/the-press-the-final-solution.html

Quite a number of the masses speak up (some not so eloquently) when Ann Coulter declares she greets “every newspaper going bankrupt with joy”:  http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/12/ann_coulter_i_great_every_news.html?f=most-commented-24h-10
Here is the YouTube video of her taking the question and responding.

Okay, this is strange.  It is on a motorcycle adventure riding forum and one member started a thread about why the government should bail out the newspaper industry!  http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=413710.  I certainly would not have expected that discussion on a motorcycle forum.  His helmet might be one size too small.

Finally, my favorite of the samples.  A potential subscriber’s reaction to the Chicago Tribune’s bankruptcy:  http://2ohreally.com/2008/12/who-would-subscribe-to-a-bankrupt-newspaper/

Well, it is almost a new year.  Sorry, no resolution to run a marathon (done that twice, don’t want to do it a third time) or learn a foreign language (I might learn one or two programming languages this year…does that count?)  How about a prediction?  2009 will be the year the Seattle Times Company goes down the tubes, but I don’t think it will be through bankruptcy as most suspect.  That’s all I will say on that one.

Roadies?

   I guess an explanation is needed.  My assumption was that the connection was fairly straightforward…apparently not, based on some verbal questions. So…

   First, roadie is a derivative of the “road crew” phrase used in the entertainment industry.  Your average person hearing “road crew” would think of a highway project, so roadie is better.  I thought this definition might be interesting to parse and explain the parallels:

The road crew (or roadies) are the < technicians > who travel with < a band on tour >, usually in sleeper buses, and < handle every part of the concert productions  except actually performing > the music with the musicians.

I added delimiting pairs of brackets.  Technicians – well that shouldn’t be a giant mental leap for anyone.  A band on tour.  An information provider must be agile in its mobility.  While the brick-mortar portion of the operation isn’t moving, the content gathering and content packaging will be tremendously mobile.  Band on tour.  Hand every part of the concert productions except actually performing.  Here’s where the strongest parallel exists.  What decent technology operation succeeds without knowing their customer.  You have to understand the endeavor, the goals, the processes, the tools, the players, etc.  Its Successful IT 101 stuff.  Roadies don’t do lights, sounds and FX on their own agenda.  It all has direct linkage to the musicians and the show.  Show me an established crew of roadies and there is at least one person who knows guitars like the back of their hand, can restring a Gibson SG under 60 seconds and knows every stomp box combo used in the business (sorry, closet guitar freak…it comes out once in awhile).  That doesn’t mean that person can carry a tune to save their life, though.  They are a roadie and they make it happen.  They also exist in a world of shadows and wear black, because nobody is forking over money to see a roadie caught with a dumb look on their face in the spotlight.  Wizard of Oz – pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

   I hope that might partially explain the title.  If not, that’s okay.  Call us what you want…just don’t call us out on stage!

Merging two generations

My new role provides a great opportunity to meld together what appears to be two generational thought patterns for enabling technology in the information provider world. 

The continued near-term viability of print editions requires a portion of the standard IT landscape to remain.  These are core competencies that, in our case, have stood the test to time to the tune of 125 years.  Highly vendor-specific systems, proprietary databases, closed/complex API’s…yes, those systems.  One of key near-term concerns I will be watching is the balance between the maintenance costs of those systems and the print edition revenue stream.  The fiscally weighty nature of those systems might actually be one of the first internal tipping points when it comes to decisions about continued production of print editions.  Definitely something to ponder and watch.

The new generation is, well, basically evolving every single day and is, in my mind, everything that isn’t dedicated to print editions.  Web sites?  Yes, to some degree.  Mobile sites?  A stronger yes.  Alerts via SMS and email?  Sure.  Blogs, wikis, Facebook, aggregators, etc.?  NOW WE ARE TALKING!  If you are interested or involved in the industry and you haven’t started doinking around with these capabilities, you are missing some tremendous experiences.  These represent a quantum leap on a number of levels: technology, social behavior, content gathering, content consumption, etc.  Dwindling are the days of waiting until the evening news or the morning paper to find out about the commotion down the street, complete with fire trucks and some guy in an FBI jacket.  Now, not tonight.  Now, not tomorrow morning.  Oh, I want to comment and ask questions, too.  I try talking to my television a great deal (I am a Cubs fan) and it has yet to pay me any attention, much be truly interactive.  The systems that enable this type of behavior is not monolithic.  They are not incredibly unique and certainly not under the proprietary thumb of yesterday’s print edition vendors (thankfully).  I’ve already blogged about the process paradigm shift for journalism, so I’ll take a pass on that. 

Somewhere in the middle of all this, these two generations of technology meet.  The dividing line is better determined by organizational processes than solely by technology.  Only with clear roles, responsibilities and processes can we start layering on the necessary technology.  These technology generations will and must meet at some point in the process and the technology landscape.  It is the human that will be the control point to bridge content to the print edition.  Surprised at that?  C’mon, do you really think the old-school print edition system vendors will open their systems to that degree?

Not quite separation of church and state…but it sure seems like it!

How about some impressions on a cultural challenge the industry will face?  No, this post isn’t going to be poli-theological diatribe.  That territory is beyond my scope and I frankly don’t have the constitutional law background to wade too deeply into that discussion.  This is about the separation of content gathering/creation and content packaging.  As a reminder, I am not, nor have I ever been, a journalist.  I am simply a career IT guy who happens to have the exciting opportunity to contribute to a metamorphosis of the information provider world.  Moving on…

Journalists take pride in their work and that’s a tremendously admirable quality.  They take pride in being timely, accurate, concise and engaging with their product.  Product is the key word in the change equation right now, in my estimation.  Journalists today know they are targeting a content delivery platform today as they develop their stories.  It may be a newspaper, a television station or a web site.  Where the industry makes its quantum leap is when the journalist becomes a content gatherer/creator instead of a packager.  This is where a clear cultural shift in the profession will be made and it will rock the foundational pride of these professionals in their product, because their work will become purely about content and OTHERS will make decisions on how best to package all, some or none of their content.  It is very likely a content packaging role would include the synthesis of work from multiple content creators.  Uh, oh.  Who gets the by-line (think that’s the right term)?  This could be contentious.  The long and proud tradition of journalism is lined with outstanding feats of determination, creative research and, of course, exemplary composition.  This forthcoming paradigm shift holds a near guarantee that many packages of content will not be attributable in such distinct ways to a single journalist.  The pragmatics of this new industry model (sort of akin to the “state”) will impact the pride and artistry of the journalist (the “religion”).  The reality is that this “religion” is slowly becoming an artifact, a fading shadow cast by an industry being overtaken by a new sun.

How’s that for an IT dweeb’s perspective?  My interest in this paradigm shift is huge.  This separation will be reflected in how the industry is retooled to handle the new roles of content gather, content moderation, content packaging, etc.  The current tethering of some journalists (the content creators) to package-specific systems will be cut (that’s for the content packages).  The content creators will instead be utilizing a suite of tools ranging from wireless assets (smart phones, laptops, etc.) to general use assets like blogs, RSS readers and database query reports to build content that will then be dropped on to an information bus for use, in whole or in part, as seen fit by others (the content packagers).  While my extremely minimal experience in the industry is undeniable, my IT experience is more than enough to have seen multiple process-based and role-based changes over the years in a number of specialized endeavors.  Simply put, there are those who will make the transformation and those that will cling to religion so fiercely they must be kicked to the curb.  It’s an evolution and somebody invariably and voluntarily plays the part of the dinosaur.

The evolved metrics for journalistic pride in this new paradigm are not all that different.  It will require being timely, accurate, concise and engaging.  Hey, those are the same things I mentioned above about the current state of journalism.  How odd.

Distributed info gathering…serious mental wandering

One of the primary questions is how to enable an information provider’s information/content gatherers and also allow for unanticipated submissions (non-predictive, unforseen sources, etc.).  Staff personnel is relatively easy.  Outfit them with laptops, tablets, smart phones, PDAs, blackberries…we all know the current and growing list of mobile suspects.  Pick a standard blogging platform, establish blogs, throw down some free software at the content level like iGoogle or (better yet in my opinion) Freereader and you have now connected every reporter into one electronic console in the newsroom.  What about those unanticipated sources like the average citizen, the bystander, the witness, etc.  If it’s not true now, it is just a matter of time, but the average person has some form of communication device with them, albeit sometimes as simple as a cell phone.  Voice, SMS, email, blogs, etc. are all potential inroads to capitalizing on the community of citizen journalists.     Okay, so this didn’t go far.  Keep in mind that what I am imagining is a vastly different model from the current flow of almost exclusively reporter initiated content.  Think on that for awhile.

Revamping journalism?

   Here’s some potential heresy for anyone with a long-standing grounding in print journalism and a general disdain for us IT dweebs.

   Journalism should no longer be about the end product: print news.  I know the market will continue to exist for years and decades, but we all know it is declining and I challenge anyone to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that it will be reversed.  Go ahead and work on that…the rest of can focus on the real future.  The synthesis of pieces of data, coupled with context is the real basis of journalism.  No, I have never written a news article in my life and, no, I won’t pretend to think the processes and dedication are easy.  It’s a completely legitimate endeavor.

   The real change to the journalism profession is the audience.  I don’t think that surprises anyone, but the approach, the processes, the basic philosophy of the journalist has to make a subtle shift to fit that demand.  The information consumer is no longer patient enough to wait for print deadlines and for the carrier to make the rounds through the neighborhood.  They also don’t want the same packaged news that’s being delivered to their next door neighbor, nor do they want it in the same delivery format.  The future journalist is a gatherer and organizer of content.  Certainly some of that content will find it’s way to a print paper, but focusing the journalist on the content vice the final presentation will enable greater transportability of the information to other media, electronic and otherwise.

   I do view with some skepticism the ocassional abandonment of grammar and spelling rigor to the benefit of pumping out a larger and more diverse body of information.  Call it an old school devotion to properly expressing oneself, but paying some proper attention to spelling and grammar ain’t just waisting thyme. 

Information Bus: “getting it”

I’ve been trying out numerous metaphors on people to socialize the concepts of a rationalized information bus that makes data visible, accessible, and understandable.  My ramblings have lead me to a deceptively simple example (yes, I gave up on metaphors – too many were missing the mental leap for it to be of value).

The example begins with HR systems.  Employees need to be represented by a variety of data such last name, first name, middle initial, pay information, etc.  We all know that, so big deal.  What if that employee also has a subscription to the newspaper?  I guarantee you that a separate data stovepipe exists in which that subscriber is captured.  One more step: imagine that employee subscriber also runs a home business making fishing lures and wants to advertise in the paper.  Yep, they exist again in some other data stovepipe because of advertising.  Hypothetical?  Sure.  Unrealistic example?  Absolutely not – I am 2 of those 3 and might be apt to start a home business and advertise in the paper just prove anyone wrong who says it could never happen.  It could, but that’s not the point I am going after.  Even representing the same person more than once is, in my opinion, a failure to have full realized the potential of a true information bus.  Why?  Here’s a pragmatic reason: my subscription cost is taken out of my pay (by my own choosing, I should note).  Imagine the elegance of the circulation department not having to re-create me as a customer since I am already an employee.  Granted, that example is not indicative of many people in the area, but it is provided only as an internally-engaging thought for the company (most of whom are subscribers).  In short, the example is them and makes them “getting it” much easier.

A little deeper into “information provider”

Newspaper/website/TV station or Information provider?  Interesting semantics or fundamental shift in a paradigm?  Why should IT even care which it is?  All I can give you are my answers and my convictions.

   Yes, Gazette Communications includes a print paper, a website and a TV station and, yes, they have evolved over time in roughly separate silos of expertise.  The past, however, doesn’t necessarily dictate what our future will be or should be.  Information provider might even be a bit too confining a phrase to fully capture the essence of the culture shift being pursued.  Your standard media outlet of old (simply based on my experience as a lay person who reads and watches plenty of news) had to balance the need for audience relevancy (keep circulation numbers up or see a drop in advertising) with culling through the myriad of potential stories to put together the right collection of stories for the day.  Let me stop you right here.  Where is that story you were hoping to read?  Maybe you knew some organization had some big shindig going on, but it never showed up.  Why?  I don’t know and that’s not the point!  What I do know is that the information provider paradigm does not exclude the self-submission of such information.  WHOA!  Imagine that – me, an IT dink, submitting information that might end up in print in the paper or on the web or on someone’s RSS reader on their PDA?  I sometimes fancy myself a reporter with a spiffy hat and a little “Press” tag in it (not really), but self-submission sounds like utter chaos.  It requires an investment in moderator resources.  Rather than picking and chosing from amongst the internally developed stories, imagine the potential breadth and depth of coverage available when an entire community is engaged in exposing, discussing, and determining the content.  Okay, it might be a wee bit of a mess at first, but the possibilities are staggering.

   As an IT guy, why should I care less or more about all this?  Geez, wake up – gone is the mindset that the organization can wall itself off with neatly closed systems, protected data stores and conveniently predictable metrics for lifecycles issues, storage growth, load balancing, tape backups, bandwidth, etc.  Gone.  This new Complete Community Connection requires a tremendously agile infrastructure and a highly rationalize data model.  Data models?  Yuk – more nerd stuff.  Uh, not exactly, particularly if you want the ability to mine your data, put it into context (makes it information) and deliver as needed/requested by the customer (putting it into personal context and possibly making it insight or even wisdom for them).  You cannot do any of that if your data is helter skelter and you have no ability to organize it.  How would you mine it?  How would moderators, content creators and other make any sense of stuff haphazardly blasted across multiple systems?  It would fail.  Yes, I do care as an IT type about all this.

   So, there are my answers and my convictions.  Maybe I am wrong, maybe I am right.  Only time and the emergence of results will tell.