Recently CNN.com debuted a new design for their website. For quite some time it was in beta. (A very smart decision on their part). I’ve had some time to use the site now both in beta and since it’s launch. Here are my thoughts on the site:
Good:
- Most popular news: This is something that sites struggle with. We know that folks want the stories that are off the wall and more fluff than news, but we fear (or should fear) putting them in top news. After all it’s not top news. This puts it in t prominent spot with out compromising the top news.
- Graphics: I really like the big “web 2.0″ style buttons for blogs, podcast, rss, email ect. Not at the top of the page but still prominent. This is something that most would have stuck in a vertical navigation.
- Vertical Navigation: It doesn’t have one. This creates a much cleaner site yet everything I need is still on the front page. Great design.
- Story pages: clean and simple. Lots or links on the side. Enjoy the Ajax use of the most popular (video, stories, and topics). I really like that the photo and video tabs keep you on the page. Very easy to use very little load time.
- Photos: Wow…when you are on a story page the photos are displayed in in a box and you can click through (with nice presentation) and not have to leave the page. And the built in slide show on the photo page is one of the better slide show setups that I’ve seen on any site.
- Story highlights: quick bullet points of the article. Better than a quick read. Took me a while to realize it was there. In my head i thought it was more links to other stories. Guess I should actually read things.
Needs improvement:
- Hot Topics: Great concept. They have put the “hot topics” as their own links on the top of the site. When you click on it it takes you to a story gallery of past stories on the topic. This gets very close to a concept I have talked to some folks about, but I’ll save that for another post. I just think there is tons of potential here.
The Bad:
- Video: a couple things here. I like the player but they are not embeded on the story level. It seems that CNN is treating video as something that is not meant to compliment the print article but rather an ‘either you read the story or watch the video.’ This may not be a bad idea because most of the video they do are full pkgs from TV. The player also doesn’t have a feature that allows you to take the code and embed it in your blog. This is quite simple and allows your video to go viral a lot easier.
- Still a TV station website: OK I’ll admit I probably won’t every be satisfied on this one, but something that bothers me is that there are things on CNN.com that are still centered around the the TV station. For example on all the section pages page there is a mini TV lineup with Anderson Cooper, Larry King and the Situation Room. If it’s an ad fine, but If I’m looking for news don’t waste the space to promote shows that have only a little to do with the topic. I’m OK with a promo that is promoting a special program, but not just the TV lineup.
Overall I am very impressed with the site. It would be interesting to know how the design was created. Usually sites suffer from going through too many committees and focus groups. This one doesn’t appear to have the problem.
Danny’s Journalism Cartoons
Danny Sanchez a UF alum who I now have the privilege of working with at the Sentinel is producing journalism cartoons at Journalistopia. Be sure to check out the one about MU alum Adrian Holovaty.
Anyone wondering what it’s like to be a VJ. Here’s a story of one VJ covering another. From KGTV a station that is transitioning their reporters and phtogs to VJs. You can learn more about that at http://rosenblumtv.wordpress.com/.
It never ceases to amaze me how local media outlets cover national breaking news in their backyard. We saw the Times Picayune continue to publish despite their offices being flooded by Katrina, the Collegiate Times, a student run paper, not only kept students informed about the Virginia Tech shootings but also became a source of information for people across the globe including major media outlets, and the Christian Science Monitor carefully covered the kidnapping of one of their own. In each of these cases the media outlet had the ability to draw on their vast resources they use to cover te daily stories and focus them all on the breaking news.
There are however some newspapers that don’t have a large staff, a fancy website or even access to the AP. The Kiowa County Signal learned quickly how to adapt this week.
The Kiowa County Signal is the local newspaper for Greensburg, KS, the town that a tornado destroyed this week. Howard Owens is the Director of Digital Publishing at Gate House media, the company that owns the Signal. He’s blogged twice now about how the paper has had to react.
The Kowia County Signal has since launched a new site full of information. They received permission for the AP to use AP stories. Their staff is now posting stories despite their newsroom being destroyed and Gate House Media sent reporters and an editor some who will shoot video for the website.
The site also allows citizens to submit photos. Although as Howard pointed out “given the fact that the town is devastated and residents might find it hard to participate in photo sharing, we may not get anything, but I think it is very important we make this tool available — important journalistically.”
I would assume that they are not putting out a paper right now but they still keep their commitment to keep the public informed. For that they should be applauded.
UPDATE: As Howard pointed out in the comments, they are a weekly (printing on Wednesdays) but have a special edition coming out today (Monday). Also, Gate House also owns the neighboring daily in Pratt and that is where the staff is working out of. Thanks Howard for the updates.
First off I am not sure that this rumor is anything more than a couple of excited folks on Wall Street who know some equally excited bloggers. With that said, the big question is why would a company that has made their money in aggregating content want to suddenly buy a content provider? There are many reasons:
1. Google thinks that news content providers are going to sue them for using their content or that legislation will soon bar them from using their content. I doubt this will happen and I doubt that Google wouldn’t be able to fight it. Let’s not forget the recent words of the Tribune company’s new owner Sam Zell.”If all of the newspapers in America did not allow Google to steal their content, how profitable would Google be? Not very.” Then again I could alter his quote to “If all of the newspapers in America did not allow Google to steal their content, how profitable would the newspapers be? Not very.” It works just as well.
2. Google is looking to expand upon the way that consumers get their news. Currently almost all news organizations on the web display and produce content in the same format that newspapers did. A new news story every time something happens. Sure we link to “related stories” and we allow comments, but that’s it. Google could be working on a way to enhance this in a number of ways. For example, if every story was given a topic or number of topics. You could go to a topic page that would automatically display a time line, key players, statistics and changes in the story. In order for Google to do this they would need stories to be coded in a way that would allow them to add and aggregate this enhanced content. It’s only a matter of time before someone does something like this, so why not Google.
With that said, it seems we can make everyone happy. Had the networks just put the video online, they can fulfill their obligation and not offend or disturb those who do not wish to see the video over and over again. Was this ever a thought? If so what are the reasons for not doing this?
(First off, don’t you love the use of the Cavuto mark?) I’m not sure how I missed this in February, but a study by Borrell Associates found that newspapers are making more money off online video than TV stations.
From a MarketWatch blog:
The media research firm found that newspapers are making more money from online video advertising than local TV stations, $81 million to $32 million – almost 3 to 1. In each of three markets, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York, local advertisers spent more than $5 million for streaming video commercials.
This reminds me of a recent conversation on LostRemote.com where TV folks were upset that the blog was featuring more and more innovating things that newspapers are doing versus TV stations. The problem is most TV stations aren’t doing innovative things online. My best guess as to why is because most TV stations want all their online video to have the same production value as the video that goes on the broadcast show. Compare that to newspapers that are realizing the long tail and are working to get as much video up as possible. Or maybe newspapers are better at sending out press releases. OK fine I’ll admit, I’m now biased.
As some of you know I tried out to be the student graduation speaker…didn’t make it. So I figured I subject everyone to my corny speech here. Let me know what you think. (Speech follows after the break.) Read the rest of this entry »
Just two days after the tragedy at Virginia Tech a shooting near MU’s campus caused area media to falsley report the details of todays shooting. Both KOMU and the Missourian were posting information as it came in. Initial reports put the shooting at Reactor Field, which is on MU’s campus. However, we now know that the individual was pulled over on the street adjecent to Reactor Field and that the shooting took place well of campus. Stations like KSDK, the NBC affiliate in St. Louis, said “The Columbia Missourian newspaper is reporting that at least two people have been shot at the University of Missouri – Columbia”. That story quickly circulated around and possibly made it on the wires. The story circulated enough that TV stations as far as Florida were reporting Wednesday evening that “two MU students were shot on campus.”
While the Missourian and KSDK have since corrected the online version of their story, other stations and media outlets are still using the old version as of this evening.
