News can no longer be defined in the traditional way of media companies. Instead a much wider definition is needed, including not only the classical “news stories” of the mass media, but also users’ personal micronews.
I reconnected with my old friend Maria the other day. We used to study journalism together at Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Washington some 25 years ago. Since then we have had no contact. But all of a sudden I received a request from her to connect as friends on Facebook.
Now Maria’s moods and daily updates are part are part of my news feed on Facebook. I get small items on what she is doing and thinking.
Do I care? Of course. It may be small stuff, but to me it is highly interesting news. It gives me insight into what is going on in the life of a person I have many fond memories together with.
But what does this have to do with a discussion of media companies’ definition of news?
A lot, according to Editor & Publisher columnist Steve Outing. In a recent “Stop the presses” column he argues that current news offerings on most newspaper web sites are outdated.
He offers a radical proposal: Media companies should start adding the micro-personal to their news menu. Users should not only find the editorial content of the news company, but all “news” that are relevant to them, including the content of their various social community news feeds.
Writes Outing:
Newspapers can — and should, in my view — aim to serve the complete news needs of consumers, all the way from the big-picture events of the day down to what kind of car your high school friend just bought and how she just broke up with her boyfriend. Yes, the latter IS “news” when it comes from within your social circle or social network.
It really is a refreshing perspective on the news business – far away from the thinking of most newspaper editors.
This is not to say that social communities will be the “newspaper of the future”. But newspapers should leverage the power of the powerful social media to their own advantage, argues Steve Outing.
Neil Budde, former Yahoo News general manager, takes a different perspective in his posting “Are we ready for the future news consumer?“:
He refers to The Pew Research Center’s analysis of audience segments in a changing news environment, and recommends news sites to not only focus on the web-savy “Net-Newsers”, who get most of their news online. Instead they should focus as much on the “Integrators”, those getting their news from both traditional and new media. His point is that the latter group will increase in size as the media move from print to online.
We need to find ways to make online news appealing to both Net-Newsers and Integrators – perhaps even to Traditionalists, who may soon find the Christian Science Monitor isn’t the only defunct newspaper, he writes.
So how should we redefine news then? That’s really still up for discusssion – and a topic we will get back to later. In the meantime: Please leave your own thoughts on this topic in the comment field.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=beb4e1c2-3ed4-4579-97e1-ffa176be45fb)
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
John: Thanks for noticing my E&P column on this topic. That came out in late September, and I’ve been disappointed that it didn’t generate more discussion or notice. I think this is a really important conversation to be having. But to most traditional news editors, I think it sounds like I’m writing from Mars. Yet I’m convinced that they desperately need to start thinking outside their old boxes in order for their newspapers and traditional news outlets to survive. Young people are voting with their keyboards and phone keypads/screens, consuming the “news” about their friends from social networks. Once again, the audience moves on and gets its needs met, but editors and publishers don’t think to adjust to continuing serving them.
More from author
Hi John. Congratulations on your new blog. Interesting stuff!
When I have given talks and held courses on new media for Norwegian journalists and editors over the last year I have presented to them the following statement:
Facebook is a news agency for you and your firends.
You get updates on what’s going on with you and your friends, and what they are paying attention to, just like both you and Steve point out. Many news outlets tap into this through “share on facebook” and such functions.
That’s about how far many are willing to go, if the sentiment of those I have proposed this to is anything to go by. Many journalists lables Facebook and such services as personal or private and thus by extension trivial.
I think media outlets need to get past such attitudes and find better ways to tap into the social networks. Especially in Norway where 1.3 million of a population of 4.7 are registered on Facebook. 1 million of those are under 30. And in the age bracket 16 to 19 as many as 89 % are registered.
Not many news site can match those numbers. The personal is important.
More from author
{ 3 trackbacks }