Who was there?
\nMeghann Farnsworth, host
\nBruce Powell
\nBill Densmore
\nCylvia Hayes
\nTracy Loeffelholz Dunn
\nJo Ellen Gree Kaiser
\nTalia Stroud
\nTood Milbourn
\nDan Archer
\nNathan Stevens
\nSusan Gleason
\nRachel Damgen
\nTom Stites<\/p>\n
Some takeaways and themes:
\nWhat are we selling or monetizing?
\nIt\u2019s not just or always stories. In fact, maybe it shouldn\u2019t be stories at all.
\nIt\u2019s also not the usual model: eyeballs delivered to advertisers
\nOther things media organizations provide that are sellable:
\npoint of view
\ncuration of the broader information ecosystem
\ninsight
\nknowledge (taking info and making into knowledge by adding your expertise)
\npersonalize to individual users (something legacy media hasn\u2019t been able to do)
\ninspiration
\nopportunity for engagement (comments, discussion, etc.): being heard and also participating
\nsocial capital
\nhave a question or something to add to an article
\nnewsroom \u2014 being able to come into the space? third space services (you live at home, you work at work but your intellectual, social, community, emotional fulfillment occurs in a third space [a bar, starbucks, what we\u2019re doing here is a third space for us]
\nshould media buy spaces (coffee shops, bars, restaurants, etc.) (Guardian\u2019s coffee shop) resonate with identity of brand
\nidentity
\nbrand \u2014 they still have cachet even if people aren\u2019t buying your journalism
\nresearch
\nplatform\/storytelling for the newsmaker \u2014 confers status on a person<\/p>\n
What are models already in place?
\nMedia Consortium: An association of nonprofit journalism organizations that get money from engaged individual members. The key piece is the email newsletter \u2014 the direct mail of the modern age. Anywhere from 1 to 5 percent of your email newsletter signups will give you money.
\nBanyan: Tapping into the co-op model. 100s of members of community pay $36 to buy-in. If you\u2019re a member, you have equity in the publishing company. You have a vote in the annual meeting. You have a voice. You are included in material that people who read the news on the site don\u2019t get. What we\u2019re monetizing is \u201ca sense of civic potency.\u201d
\nTexas Tribune is an example of \u201cadd ons\u201d being the core product \u2014 their events are about bringing experts in speak to the community directly instead of through text. Directly related to stories you\u2019re producing. There\u2019s a lot of $ and staff time to be lost when people think about engagement tools as separate from news gathering\/organization.
\nBitter Southerner and This Land: They have created a \u201cbrand\u201d that resonates with people, and then created products centered on that brand that people\/members buy\/get that then put their brand into new spaces.
\nPublic Media model: Membership that has benefits or something in it. <\/p>\n
Five things media organizations can do or consider to would elevate people to pay for them?
\n Sell services, not news. Be bolder. We are not just news providers.
\nProtect your relationship with your audience
\nDevelop an identity that resonates with a particular audience; have a strong brand identity that makes you unique in the space; distinguish your identity
\nConsider the power and potential of tech spaces\/platforms as ways to outreach\/consider your brand. How do you want to engage with those spaces?
\nBe clear about your value and impact. Make sure you know why people should give you money.
\nInvest in marketing.<\/p>\n
A (rough) transcription of the whole conversation if you’re just super interested:
\nWhat is missing so that people might want to pay for it?<\/p>\n
Jo Ellen: Media Consortium \u2014 association of nonprofit. journo orgs that get money from engaged individual members
\n\u2014 standard growing to turn engaged people into capital
\n\u2014 key piece is email newsletter \u2014 the direct mail of the modern age. if you can get someone on your email newsletter, a portion of them will become donors (anyone from 1 to 5 percent will give you money)
\nthe act of giving their name indicates they want to be involved with you
\n\u2014 people have tried a lot of things.
\nhard to get donations via Facebook, twitter, etc.
\nmore effective to crowd fund around a particular topic or real content
\nnot infrastructure or \u201ci need a better website\u201d but a story people would be interested in
\n\u2014 ask people to become sustaining members \u2014 not a one time donation \u2014 and then give them a benefit, which is often intangible (conversation with your editor, for example) <\/p>\n
There are ways that people are already monetizing engagement, but it\u2019s not a 100 percent thing. <\/p>\n
Bruce:
\nWhy do people consume news
\n\u2014 to be entertained
\n\u2014 to be informed
\nSo what are some practical things we could put into a paper that would help people in real life, in real time? \u201cNews to use\u201d<\/p>\n
Jo Ellen:
\n\u2014 Connection to a community through their news
\nthat\u2019s where you get a connection to a brand; not necessarily for info
\nabout expressing my identity and not about what I\u2019m getting<\/p>\n
Cylvia \u2014 Solutions-based journalism \u2014 that\u2019s my movement; (Yes! Magazine = better quality, in depth, etc.) I support them because it\u2019s walking my talk, my values, etc. We need that deeper coverage. They take more time with significant issues.<\/p>\n
Susan: If what people value in a certain media environment is conversation in the comments, the events The Atlantic puts on, etc.? <\/p>\n
Meghann: Is there a difference between traditional engagement online vs. member adds of events, etc.
\nIs that something that people would be more interested in, rather than funding the product of journalism?
\nIt\u2019s an added burden on newsrooms to do that. <\/p>\n
Jo Ellen: It\u2019s really important that add-ons should be the core product. Texas Tribune is an example \u2014 their events are about bringing experts in speak to the community directly instead of through text. Directly related to stories you\u2019re producing.
\nThere\u2019s a lot of $ and staff time to be lost when people think about engagement tools as separate from news gathering\/organization.<\/p>\n
Talia \u2014 a lot of it depends on the actual outlet
\nTalking about funding in terms of $ donations, but I think we could also think about bartering \u2014 people staff an event, coding, etc. <\/p>\n
Bill \u2014 is membership subscription? Subscription = getting something you couldn\u2019t get otherwise. Membership might not mean that. <\/p>\n
Jo Ellen \u2014 most of us need to choose between membership and subscription. Subscription is transaction. Membership is engagement, member of your team.
\nYou can\u2019t have a database that is members and subscribers. Membership is fluid, time based, about how people are connected to you in different ways. Membership model gives you access to donors; subscription doesn\u2019t.
\nDonors under $100 don\u2019t care if tax deductible. <\/p>\n
Bill \u2014 With a lot of pub. radio, a membership benefit can be a subscription to their monthly magazine. <\/p>\n
Subscription can be under membership, but not usually the other way around. <\/p>\n
It\u2019s a lower bar to just subscribe to something. You don\u2019t have to identify with it. It\u2019s an easier ask.<\/p>\n
Susan \u2014 Tricycle Magazine with a membership model that gave you a giant list of things you can get \u2014 one is a subscription and a lot isn\u2019t.<\/p>\n
Todd: Think about who your audience is. That drives it. A lot of it has to do with audience. <\/p>\n
But then is your audience limited when you go after a specific niche?<\/p>\n
Yes! Magazine goes after progressives (lots there). Can\u2019t just talk to the choir, you\u2019ve got to expand. Mission is to inspire social change. To do that we need to go beyond people who are already thinking how we think. \u201cToe dippers\u201d \u2014 people who are interested but not activists. <\/p>\n
Cylvia \u2014 examples of where the new economy is working is what has her hooked. That lights my people up. I think that\u2019s a powerful tool that you have. It\u2019s countering apocalypse fatigue.<\/p>\n
Tom \u2014 Cooperative model of ownership. Banyan biz plan foundation is ownership of a community\u2019s publisher by 100s of members of community the way shoppers own a food co-op. If you\u2019re a member, you have equity in the publishing company. You have a vote in the annual meeting. You have a voice. You are included in material that people who read the news on the site don\u2019t get. What we\u2019re monetizing is \u201ca sense of civic potency.\u201d In any population there are some people who really care about the quality of life in the community. There\u2019s a lot to be said for that.
\nThis is the illusive new revenue stream. Your first payment when you join goes into equity. Your subsequent annual payments go to operation fund.<\/p>\n
Bill \u2014 members get access to some material and services?
\nTom \u2014 everyone gets to read the news for free. But you if you want to take part in conversation, you have to be a member.
\nMinimum is $36\/year ($0.10 a day)
\nRest is from advertising.<\/p>\n
Bill \u2014 most people who have a mission-driven way of thinking don\u2019t want to be blocked by subscription. How can you create a biz model with significant revenue coming from user but product is open to anyone. <\/p>\n
Free-to-play games \u2014 change the way the game is paid if you pay more money (better weapons, etc.). Multi-player games dynamic is that people who pay have the advantage.<\/p>\n
Rather than selling the story as the product, we need to be thinking about selling a service for which the journalism is just part of the service.<\/p>\n
Meghann \u2014 Aggregators have changed the game. Even if you have to pay for it, it\u2019s free somewhere else. Are we thinking too big in terms of money? Is there a lower bar of entry \u2014 a penny to read an article. iTunes = don\u2019t even think about it. It\u2019s not worth it for me to do that with journalism?<\/p>\n
Bruce \u2014 But options. Even if you feel inclined to pay for something, you have five million other options. <\/p>\n
The product is disposable.<\/p>\n
Dan \u2014 but does it have to be financial. Tweet this and you can read it? <\/p>\n
Bill \u2014 the value might be something other than paying the organization. <\/p>\n
Meghann \u2014 You could get the most eyeballs in the world, but you\u2019ll still go under without money. <\/p>\n
Todd \u2014 the point of view of a news organization. Niche vs. mass appeal. It\u2019s much easier to build a biz model around something people are truly passionate about. A more mainstream publication without a point of view \u2014 local\/national.
\nProPublica \u2014 broad mission\/point of view. Doesn\u2019t have to be political, but identity that sets you apart from just being journalism. <\/p>\n
Resonates with someone\u2019s identity in one way or another. That can be a broad, scalable identity. <\/p>\n
It\u2019s harder to do on the local scale. <\/p>\n
Why doesn\u2019t it translate? If i care about state\/city, etc, why not pay?<\/p>\n
Cylvia \u2014 quality of journalism matters as well <\/p>\n
chicken\/egg<\/p>\n
Bill \u2014 people who do journalism as a mission or biz have something to sell:
\npoint of view
\ncuration of the broader information ecosystem
\ninsight
\nknowledge (taking info and making into knowledge by adding your expertise)
\npersonalize to individual users (something legacy media hasn\u2019t been able to do)
\ninspiration
\nopportunity for engagement (comments, discussion, etc.): being heard and also participating
\nsocial capital
\nhave a question or something to add to an article
\nnewsroom \u2014 being able to come into the space? third space services (you live at home, you work at work but your intellectual, social, community, emotional fulfillment occurs in a third space [a bar, starbucks, what we\u2019re doing here is a third space for us]
\nshould media buy spaces (coffee shops, bars, restaurants, etc.) (Guardian\u2019s coffee shop) resonate with identity of brand
\nidentity
\nbrand \u2014 they still have cachet even if people aren\u2019t buying your journalism
\nresearch
\nplatform\/storytelling for the newsmaker \u2014 confers status on a person<\/p>\n
Even if you don\u2019t think you can sell your stories, there are a tremendous number of things we have for sale. We have to have the self-confidence to ask people to pay for these things.<\/p>\n
Experiment \u2014 Nader and (??) moderated comments \u2014 access to people<\/p>\n
Todd: Bumper sticker effect. What are media orgs that people are willing to put on a bumper sticker.<\/p>\n
Redesigning newspapers \u2014 meet focus groups \u2014 you\u2019ll never meet more different people. They go to their newspaper for entire different reasons. Beyond the brand, they want the newspaper for completely different reasons.<\/p>\n
Bill: How to put that list into a bottle and make it exclusive? Don\u2019t stop putting hard news, investigative stories on site for free, but put a wall around all the other value adds. <\/p>\n
Nathan: We know we have this to sell. People who read don\u2019t know all that. What is knowledge? What is inspiration? How do we get the confidence to say these are things you need? What if no one knows it\u2019s there? We have to convince people.<\/p>\n
Bruce \u2014 fantasy football players \u2014 what would you have to talk about if you didn\u2019t have this? news is the same way \u2014 find yourself in a conversation lull, donald trump comes up. <\/p>\n
news is a way to make yourself more interesting.<\/p>\n
Tom \u2014 bigger frame has to do with what you monetize. almost every print news product for 150 years has monetized: eyeballs sold to advertisers, bundles news and people pay to have it delivered to their house.
\nnow the news comes to you
\nAlmost all of us struggling to figure out how to monetize advertising, ancillary sales to keep selves afloat. And it\u2019s getting worse and worse all the time and no suggestion that ever get better.
\nWhat are you going to monetize?
\nBanyan = monetizing civic engagement<\/p>\n
What can we monetize? It\u2019s hard to know which tactics to apply without knowing what you\u2019re going to monetize.<\/p>\n
Role of tech companies in supporting media \u2014 Apple and Facebook
\nApple News takes RSS feeds and puts them on Apple platform. Like an aggregator. Things show up in one stream, but when click, it\u2019s on Apple.
\nFacebook Instant Articles \u2014 split ad dollars.
\nBut what news orgs use is clicks to their site, connection to their curated experience. <\/p>\n
Apple has a news team to create a better mobile experience. It is curated, but not sure how. <\/p>\n
Bill \u2014 in real world if you make a product and only purchaser is Walmart you\u2019re screwed if Walmart says can\u2019t sell unless you make it cheaper. this is suicidal if this is the only way.<\/p>\n
Tom \u2014 then you\u2019re a supplier, you\u2019re not an entity. that\u2019s dangerous.<\/p>\n
Cylvia \u2014 nervous. it just further concentrates the corportacracy. <\/p>\n
Flip the page back and look at the list of things you might monetize. Find another stream. Change your model.<\/p>\n
Phil Napoli \u2014 Walled Gardens. more transparency about how they work, then maybe. there\u2019s too much that\u2019s opaque about how process works.<\/p>\n
Ed Madison \u2014 looking at engagement as level of trust and relationship you\u2019ve built with an audience. mainstream journalism hasn\u2019t done that. apple has \u2014 i care about their product. when they do bad things i take it personally. journalism institutions need to engage with public in a manner that people care and take ownership of what they are doing. <\/p>\n
Todd \u2014 What is biz model? Breadth and eyeballs? Or casting a narrower net, looking for deeper engagement for stories. <\/p>\n
Talia \u2014 from a consumer perspective, it\u2019s a great thing. it\u2019s easy. i think underestimating good side of it to audience. <\/p>\n
ed \u2014 but what algorithim is doing is pushing stories to you already aligned to interests. public not finding things that push them to question what they already think?<\/p>\n
sense of discovery<\/p>\n
take the best of what apple is doing \u2014 value add to what you guys do. <\/p>\n
Bruce \u2014 journalism moving the way of the music industry \u2014 go independent to make money, use platforms to advertise and get self out there and money make on \u201ctours\u201d or \u201cmerchandise\u201d <\/p>\n
Tom \u2014 reader\u2019s digest model \u2014 magazine not a cent; made money on direct marketing of books and records to list of people who getting magazine<\/p>\n
todd \u2014 this land press, in tulsa, Okla. progressive sensibility in a red state. cool logo, monetize their brand and identity in a bunch of ways
\nbitter southerner <\/p>\n
what if local news organizations thought about verticals within their platform that would tap into those identities? do mainstream media need to be thinking about those niches and pushing into them? <\/p>\n
susan \u2014 new economy movement coverage. we heart co-ops event that yes threw. we could build on that. there\u2019s so much co-op love. <\/p>\n
ed \u2014 when you erase the route (apple and Facebook) you lose the relationship\/identity <\/p>\n
infotrust.org \u2014 disrupt aggregation platforms nonprofit to create a standard platform \u2014 maintain user base put a face on it on your own and take part <\/p>\n
Five things media organizations can do or consider to would elevate people to pay for them?
\nSell services, not news. Be bolder. We are not just news providers.
\nProtect your relationship with your audience
\nDevelop an identity that resonates with a particular audience; have a strong brand identity that makes you unique in the space; distinguish your identity
\nConsider the power and potential of tech spaces\/platforms as ways to outreach\/consider your brand. How do you want to engage with those spaces?
\nBe clear about your value and impact. Make sure you know why people should give you money.
\nInvest in marketing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Who was there? Meghann Farnsworth, host Bruce Powell Bill Densmore Cylvia Hayes Tracy Loeffelholz Dunn Jo Ellen Gree Kaiser Talia Stroud Tood Milbourn Dan Archer Nathan Stevens Susan Gleason Rachel Damgen Tom Stites Some takeaways and themes: What are we … Continue reading