Star-Bulletin on the Web

[lurkah]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

808Golfer...

Before you start calling ZZType an idiot, you'd better be aware of his background.

Guess who created Starbulletin.com and ran it single-handedly without a day of vacation for the first two years?

If anyone has real-world knowledge about news media content on the web, he does.

*--Word--*

[buzz1941]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

ZZ is indeed the Web genius who got starbulletin.com off the ground. Those were heady days.

Alas, although readers can access starbulletin.com for free, it isn't free to put together and stock with content.

Also, although the pop-ups are annoying, they pay good money, and they also get results for the clients.

Not much choice there. Unless some of the free readers volunteer to cover the costs of the site.

Starbulletin.com is a work in progress, and nothing is forever.

[IslandBeef]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

I still don't think that the ads are necessary unless their paying to keep the entire paper running. How much could they possibly be paying for the pain and loss of readership? And as readership dips, the volume to the site dips and the amount the client is willing to pay will dip.

In my opinion, if you give on something like a take-over ad then the clients will ask for more and more at the expense of the readership. Then all is lost.

[scrivener]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

I know I've said this before, but just in case someone over there is listening: I would happily pay for the SB online if I could have (a) customizable content to include those topics, sections, and columnists I like in the order I want to read them (b) some of the offline content, such as crossword puzzles and comics, and (c) no ads. A good (d) would be to be able to also, on the same page, have some national content from other places, also customizable by subject and/or writer, but I'd consider that gravy.

Meanwhile, I'm okay with just the print edition, which I buy at the convenience store several times per week.

[Composite 2992]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

When providing a service or product, a major rule is: Don't piss of the customer.

In a climate where businesses are hanging on by thin margins, and newspapers are certainly in that predicament, it pays to do whatever it takes to maintain the customer base.

Steamships replaced sails. And jet airliners replaced steam ships. In the same way, the internet is replacing print. The Star-Bulletin needs to figure out what it is going to be to its readers in the 21st Century. The traditional newspaper industry is quickly collapsing. A greater number of people are getting their news from other sources, and they're getting it quicker because of the internet. Craigslist is killing off classifieds.

How many want to get yesterday's news tomorrow? That's what happens when today's events get reported in the afternoon paper the following day.

What's the advantage of getting old news on a printed page? Who would want to see just a single photo when the internet version could provide a half-dozen? Or when television provides two or three minutes of video coverage? Why would readers prefer to wait 24 hours to read a story when they can get live TV coverage within the hour?

The internet can be a newspaper's salvation, but the people who run the show need to re-think their business. Make the web edition the primary delivery system. Provide breaking news coverage as soon as it happens, rather than holding it overnight. Base revenues on a model that has been used for 50 years in TV and radio: the programming is free to viewers and listeners, but the ad clients pay for the broad public exposure.

Start to replace photography with video. The New York Times had a story about a new prosthetic arm. If you tead the story you get a rough idea about what it is. A photo provides an idea about how it looks. But the video clip provides a real sense of how well it functions. Photographers won't like the idea of moving into video, but then lot of them didn't like the idea of abandoning film and moving toward an all-digital workflow, either. Times are changing and that's the way it is. Adapt or die.

Teach reporters how to properly produce online stories. One that ran yesterday about taxi drivers's concerns over safety was terrible: The reporter's voiceover was so rushed and poorly read that it was hard to understand. The shots of people in the meeting were way too dark. And interviews had too much background noise. All of these problems are easily solved. But only if top management recognizes the need, and has the will to do it.

If the Star-Bulletin is going to do online videos, by all means get the people trained and properly equipped to do a professional job. Readers aren't going to tolerate low-quality online videos because those things aren't a novelty anymore. No one is going to say, "Gee whiz, it's a moving picture in a newspaper website!" Instead, it's going to be compared to every other news organization online including the local TV stations and CNN. And if it's not up to par, it brings down the perception of the rest of the product. And readers will go elsewhere.

I would very much like to see the Star-Bulletin succeed and thrive. It'll take a great deal of imagination and a lot of guts to make some needed changes. What worked from the turn of the 20th Century through the 1960s was starting to weaken by the end of the 1970s. And the Bulletin was nearly killed off in the 1990s. Now, in the 21st Century, the venerable but aging business model can spell the newspaper's doom. If things don't change, the presses will eventually have to print the Star-Bulletin's own obituary.

[dick]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

These pop-up ads sure have people in a froth.

As has been mentioned earlier, the news isn't free.

The weepers and moaners would be grousing if the site were to go pay-for-password protected.

"We deserve to get news for free," they would say.

These people aren't willing to pay actual dollars for content that isn't free to produce (we in the newsroom don't work for free, by the way. Do you?).

How about looking at it this way, since you don't pay for the content with a subscription, look at those ads as your "fee." You're just paying by the "inconvenience" of moving your cursor over the "close ad" box on the ad.

Seems like a deal to me.

[IslandBeef]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

Ah, but there are alternatives... and a lot of them. Whether it's the Advertiser, the TV websites, Google, etc. Why drive away the readership?

I'll preface that again with unless they're paying gobs of cash, but I seriously doubt it. We'll see what happens with the readership volume if this continues. It isn't a bad thing if the numbers stay up.

[Media Guy]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

I understand the need to generate revenue. That is after all why newspapers were created in the first place. Contrary to common belief, the news content in the original circulars was added as an afterthought.
Even though I hate those annoying pop ups, I'm sure they generate more advertising revenue than the public realizes though pay-per-click, data base linking, google ads, etc.
It's the new format that I have more of a problem with. I go to the website usually on my Blackberry to read local news. That's what I want to see first. I also read the Advertiser and Pacific Business News online as well, and I have no problem paying for added features. What's a few dollars to see what I want? So, no I don't expect free content. That will soon be a thing of the past anyway.
There seems (as usual) to be a lot of territorial intolerance on this thread towards any type of criticism. Hey it's fine to take pride in what you do and where you work, but remember the public and their reading habits and trends are what keep you employed.
Listening to the customer should apply more than ever in these uncertain economic times. But if the current and former Star Bulletin employees on this thread don't agree I guess only time and David Black's wallet will tell.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

I want to know when the newspapers are going to figure out that the advertising businessmen have run their legitimate, honest news products into the ground. I want to know when it's time for the journalists to have a chance at running a newspaper.

We may yet get our chance - at least in Seattle.

The weepers and moaners would be grousing if the site were to go pay-for-password protected.

Yet have any papers been willing to prove it, to take the risk on this model, to sink-or-swim on making their online content available ONLY via subscription? Certainly not, as people will go elsewhere for their news, no matter how loyal they claim to be. That's a sad reality of an outdated business model that worked for a century in the newspaper biz, but is relevant no longer. Sad, and I (a lifelong print-journalism fan) have no brilliant ideas for saving the industry that I am sorry to see crumbling so quickly.

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

and (c) no ads.

That may be asking a bit much.

When providing a service or product, a major rule is: Don't piss of the customer.

Ah, but who is the customer? The reader to pays a pittance for a paper subscription or the advertisers? I think the answer is "both". The real funding of the paper comes from the advertisers, but without content to attract readers, there's nothing to sell.

How about looking at it this way, since you don't pay for the content with a subscription, look at those ads as your "fee." You're just paying by the "inconvenience" of moving your cursor over the "close ad" box on the ad.

How about looking at this this way. When I get a paper, I don't have to peal off a $#!%$ ad just to see what's above the line. I fully expect ads. And in the case of the treeware edition, I actually want the ads to see what's for sale. But the Internet site is killing the golden goose. There has to be a balance between the two "customers".

I think the newspapers need to find a more effective way of presenting the ads. Give me the stuff I'm interested in. Right now when I got to the SB site, it's all "tourist" stuff. No wonder I don't click on anything.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

How about looking at this this way. When I get a paper, I don't have to peal off a $#!%$ ad just to see what's above the line.

Be careful what you say. For about a year now, the Seattle papers have regularly used sticky-note ads on the front page of the print editions...and you have to peel 'em off to see the headlines that are above the masthead.

[buzz1941]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

The news staff doesn't like pop-up ads any more than anyone else. But they're helping keep the product alive. That is -- literally -- the bottom line.

[GeckoGeek]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

Be careful what you say. For about a year now, the Seattle papers have regularly used sticky-note ads on the front page of the print editions...and you have to peel 'em off to see the headlines that are above the masthead.

And I know the HA has some on the front as well. But so far you don't need to peel them off to read the main stories.

[TuNnL]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

I think the newspapers need to find a more effective way of presenting the ads. Give me the stuff I'm interested in. Right now when I got to the SB site, it's all "tourist" stuff. No wonder I don't click on anything.

You hit the nail right on the head, GeckoGeek! The New York Times has required a login to view most content on their website for at least four or five years now. The point of this process is to track the viewer’s reading habits, and thus customize ads to the specific viewer.

Apparently, SB isn’t sophisticated enough to understand (or too cheap to afford) the value of this type of marketing. They just want to slam you with the foolish notion that a pop-up ad will both make a quick buck AND preserve their readership base.

Now I don’t have a degree in marketing, but it’s funny that the people who respond to this thread (both industry professionals and consumers) are the ones who least understand the situation. How about getting one of the salespeople (someone who deals with ads for a living) give their take?

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Star-Bulletin on the Web

The New York Times has required a login to view most content on their website for at least four or five years now. The point of this process is to track the viewer’s reading habits, and thus customize ads to the specific viewer.

I think they have since dropped that requirement. You should be able to access most of their content now without giving them any personal data, or using any kind of login.