Slate’s Trailhead column notes:
You know it’s 2007 when a candidate, in this case Mike Huckabee, holds a bifurcated conference call, first with reporters, then with bloggers. I listened in on both calls to see what the differences were. The reporters’ questions were much more concise and polished. But the bloggers’ questions were more substantive by a long shot.
The only thing wrong with this picture is the bifurcation. Put them all on the same call, candidates.
One of the most amazing episodes in modern American journalism has emerged from a flagrantly inaccurate and misguided Time magazine column by Joe Klein. He’s a political writer whose work in this case may become Exhibit A for what’s wrong with the craft today.
Klein’s column attacked congressional Democrats’ effort to pass electronic surveillance legislation that would restrain the Bush administration’s wish for essentially no restraints or oversight whatever. In his piece, Klein got some vital facts dead wrong, giving a totally misleading message to his readers.
Needless to say, bloggers and others who care about truth and the Constitution jumped on this outrageous stuff. No one did a better job than Salon’s Glenn Greenwald, who pointed out the misstatements in great detail.
Klein, obviously responding to Greenwald (though never saying so), defended himself without actually dealing with the actual facts — and even more amazingly asserted that telecom companies should do whatever the government orders them to do, even if it’s completely illegal. Bloggers continued to attack both the original piece and his absurd justifications.
Then Klein sort of, kind of admitted error in a follow-up — though he made obvious something even more amazing: He hasn’t read the legislation he attacks. Meanwhile, neither Klein nor Time has put corrections into the original, flagrantly inaccurate column, which also ran in the print edition.
What makes all this so bad is Time’s reach and influence. Millions of people probably read the original. Very, very few will know, even now, that fundamental premises were false.
Why Time employs Klein is a mystery to me, though I suppose it shouldn’t be. He’s a member of the Washington journalistic establishment, where forgetting reality is all too common. As Wired News’ Ryan Singel noted, Klein’s record includes publicly lying about his anonymous authorship of the novel Primary Colors (one of the best books of fiction about politics in recent memory, incidentally). Singel then adds, and I agree:
But Time ought to stop Klein from writing about any substantive topic, especially FISA.
Because when it comes to these topics, Klein is well beyond stupid. He’s dangerous.
(Corrected: I got Ryan Singel’s affiliation wrong the first time; apologies.)
(This is the seventh in a series of postings about citizen media business issues. See the introduction here. All of these entries are considered to be in “beta” and will be revised and refined as they find a home on a more permanent area of the Center for Citizen Media web site. To that end, your comments, additional examples, and criticisms are welcome and will be invaluable contributions to this process.)
Call it a “tip jar” or whatever you like, but citizen journalists should not rule out getting donations as part of a business model. This generally involves a form on the main page (or every page) of your web site that allows readers to donate however much they think your journalistic efforts are worth.
Other than requesting that readers send checks through the mail, use of PayPal’s “donate now” buttons is perhaps the easiest way to allow users to give. For example, Ed Cone uses this by way of a subtle “help a brother out” donation button on his blog’s sidebar. Because of its simplicity and ubiquity on the internet, readers may be more inclined to donate if you make it easy for them with a PayPal form. Money you receive from donations accrues in your online PayPal account, from which you can request a check or have it transferred to your bank account. For the service, PayPal charges a transaction fee of $0.30 plus 2.9% of the amount received.
On his blog Among the Trees, Environmentalist Eric Baerren uses not just a PayPal donation button but also a banner from Blog Patron. Blog Patron is similar to PayPal in that it’s a money transferring service, but instead of the range of services PayPal offers, Blog Patron’s primary feature is the “recurring donation.” The site manages people’s donating, allowing for contributors to set up a repeating schedule of donations. For those who give to one or more organizations on a regular basis, this is a useful organizational tool. More importantly, by providing people with the option to repeatedly donate, it has the potential to bring in a steadier revenue stream using the same logic as a subscription system (for more information on subscriptions, see this earlier post). Blog Patron charges a fee schedule that tends to be a little higher than PayPal’s: $0.25 per transaction plus a flat 4.5% transaction fee. Also, Blog Patron only accepts credit cards (no bank transfers or transfer of funds already in your Blog Patron account).
For those with a specific monetary goal in mind (or an arbitrary estimate of how much you’d like to raise), ChipIn provides a free widget that displays the cliché fundraising thermometer along with information about where the money goes, number of contributors, percentage to goal, and the contribution deadline, if applicable. It also allows you to enable supporters of your cause to display your widget and raise money for you. Sam Mayfield and the Center for Media and Democracy have a blog that covers their trip to Ghana to help the area’s first and only community access television station. They display the ChipIn widget prominently to raise money for travel and equipment costs. ChipIn doesn’t actually collect the money, but rather redirects users to PayPal for payment (standard PayPal transaction fees still apply).
Earning revenue through donations can be difficult, especially if you fail to consider carefully the presentation of the solicitation. On one hand, aggressive or sloppy solicitations can look unprofessional or greedy. On the other, if the link is too subtle, people might not notice it or think it important. Remember that your number one priority is to gain and keep readers. If you provide a quality service, you may be rewarded. But if you pester, panhandle, or ask for donations while at the same time bombarding users with advertisements, you may turn many people off.
Creativity in your presentation goes a long way. Michael Fortin has a tip jar in his blog’s right sidebar with the text “Enjoy this blog? Buy me a coffee or a drink. May I suggest a venti Starbucks dark roast coffee for $3? Or choose any amount you wish to tip” and a link to donate via PayPal. This friendly, no-pressure approach to soliciting donations may prove valuable to many.
One of the most successful and unique applications of the donation system can be seen at OhMyNews, a South Korean news site with the motto “Every Citizen is a Reporter” (note: the link is to the English version). With the vast majority of its content coming from citizen journalists, OhMyNews reimburses writers of articles that meet certain standards. On top of this reimbursement, contributors are able to receive tips from appreciative readers. According to Don Lee of the LA Times (courtesy of Global Tech Forum), “Kim Young-oak, a Harvard-trained classics scholar, holds the record: More than $30,000 poured in after he wrote an article questioning the logic and wisdom of moving the nation’s capital outside Seoul.” To keep the site going, OhMyNews keeps a portion of the donations. In a recent talk at UC Berkeley (as covered by The Tyee), founder Oh Yeon-ho mentions that content-related income accounts for 20% of the company’s revenue.
Another possible approach is to ask for donations instead of displaying ads and make it clear that donations are what makes it possible for the website to run ad-free. Whether you use this method or not, describing exactly why you ask people to give and explaining where the money goes—in other words, transparency—is key for building trust, which is necessary in matters of money.
Suggestions
(Ryan McGrady is a new media graduate student at Emerson College where he is studying knowledge, identity, and ideas in the information age.)
As an old friend once said of humanity on this best of all American holidays:
We need more pilgrims and fewer turkeys.
In the past several weeks, with a brief timeout, I’ve been thinking hard about the new Knight Center for Digital Media Entrepreneurship that I’ll be starting at Arizona State University next year. To say that I’m excited about this is an understatement; I can’t wait to get started.
As I finish up some other work, ponder transitions of ongoing work and deal with the horrible chores of moving residences, etc., I’ve managed to have some conversations with several friends in the media and startup arenas. Nothing is set in stone yet, but I do have some initial thoughts.
The most important thing is simple: This is a time of incredible opportunity in media, and entrepreneurial thinking is absolutely key to the future of journalism.
Much of the worry in the traditional organizations is well warranted, given the implosion of their business models, but even there I’m seeing plenty of creativity spawned by the realization that what worked, business-wise, in the past is at best unlikely to work in the future due to the end of the monopoly and oligopoly eras of news.
Meanwhile, activists and entrepreneurs are seizing the chance to make a difference when it counts. Everywhere I go, I talk with people of all ages who have great-sounding ideas about media projects. The major question remains, how do we make these things sustainable?
As noted elsewhere (and principally in this case by Clay Shirky, whose work has given me several light-bulb moments over the years), one of the most important shifts in the digital landscape has been the declining cost of experimentation. Anyone who has an idea about media can try it out for a relatively low cost, perhaps merely the investment of some time.
That is made to order for the university environment in an obvious way. At the same time, semesters have start times and end times, and that students have other work to do besides our course and independent study projects. Entrepreneurship is about many things, and focus is one.
I’ve already met, spoken with or emailed with several ASU students who are looking at the new center as a possible fit for their own work. And next Monday and Tuesday, I’ll be on the campus, where I hope to meet with many more.
More thoughts soon…
Was a bit under the weather this week, but back to normal… Thanks to folks who inquired about the absence of blog posts.
Jay Rosen’s new experiment: These Beat Reporters Will Try the Social Network Way.
Thirteen sites want to see if it works: from the Houston Chronicle to the Patriot-News in Harrisburg, PA, plus ESPN.com, MTV, the Seattle Times… Some of the beats: Child welfare, Dallas public schools, “green” tech, Big Pharma, digital music, Procter & Gamble.
This is going to be an important test of new media. Can’t wait to see how it works.
(This is the sixth in a series of postings about citizen media business issues. See the introduction here. All of these entries are considered to be in “beta” and will be revised and refined as they find a home on a more permanent area of the Center for Citizen Media web site. To that end, your comments, additional examples, and criticisms are welcome and will be invaluable contributions to this process.)
Once you have a decent readership or a clever idea, you may want to start merchandising. When successful, selling merchandise on your site not only brings in revenue, but also can be valuable marketing for the site.
One simple way is to take your logo or design idea to a local shop that makes t-shirts. You can make a batch of 20 or so, take a picture, and display the picture alongside a PayPal button on your web site. Once a reader sends payment through PayPal, you package and ship the shirt to them. Creative Commons, for example, raises some funds via a store on its site that displays available t-shirts, stickers, and buttons. Interested supporters are taken to a form to enter their shipping/contact information, then directed to PayPal for payment.
Beyond PayPal, you can create an eBay, Amazon, or Yahoo store, making your merchandise searchable and opening it up to a much larger audience. While PayPal charges a fee per transaction (link to fee schedule), a “Basic” eBay store starts at $15.95/month (plus traditional eBay transaction fees), Amazon WebStores are $59.99/month, and a “Starter” Yahoo store goes for $39.95/month. While they provide many features that may be great for those looking to jump into e-commerce (for example, the ability to set sales tax rates by area [owners are still responsible for paying their own taxes, if applicable…more on this in a later post]), these store-hosting services are probably more than any citizen journalist would need. Nevertheless, you can read some pretty decent reviews and comparisons of these services here, here, and here.
While making and shipping products oneself is theoretically simple, it can be time-consuming in practice and requires at least a small up-front investment. For many site operators, an online branding service may be more attractive. Sites such as CafePress, Zazzle, Spreadshirt, and PrintFection allow you to put the graphic or text of your choice on any one of hundreds of different products like t-shirts, posters, hats, mugs, and key chains. As everything produced by these companies is made-to-order, there are no overhead or set-up costs unless you choose one of their premium services, which usually isn’t necessary. They will also take care of credit card processing, shipping, and customer service. CyberJournalist, a blog about how technology is changing media, has a CafePress store that’s a good example of the variety enabled by this sort of production.
All of these mass customization sites are pretty easy to set up: upload your designs, type in your text, select the products you want to sell, tweak the look of your presentation, and integrate it with your site. The biggest technical challenge for you will be the formatting of your graphics to look how you want them to look on the product (dark-colored clothing, for example, present some challenges). It’s easier to do these things now than it was in the past; most, if not all, of these sites offer some good tutorials and templates.
CafePress is the ten-ton gorilla of custom merchandising. It offers one of the wider assortments of products, but in the free “basic shop” only one version of each product is allowed. An example of a basic shop is the one set up by phpthrowdown, celebrating a recent events by selling a commemorative “Yeah, I got what it takes” t-shirt. For $6.95/month you can sign up for a “premium shop,” allowing you unlimited product designs and better shop customization/organization. While other sites offer somewhat similar services without charging, CafePress does have an advantage in traffic. All of these sites have a marketplace in which people search for designs. If your product could stand alone—if it’s not just a logo that people who don’t frequent your site won’t recognize or care about—it could very well bring in revenue (and perhaps readers) via people’s search results in the CafePress marketplace. A good example of a citizen media site using CafePress is iBrattleboro. The local Brattleboro, Vermont, journalism site runs a shop offering a wide range of products with clever little descriptions like that from a logoed infant creeper: “Babies love Brattleboro, too. Crawl around in style!”
Zazzle has no monthly fee for any of its services, but it’s somewhat more difficult to integrate with your site and you have no way to remove its giant corporate header from your presence on its site. Instead of stores, it hosts “galleries” and provides you with a “Flash Panel” for placement on your page. The Flash Panel is a bright, sometimes gaudy, scrolling display of your products that links readers to your gallery. One of the best features of Zazzle is its product API, which allows your readers to do some of the customization. Perhaps best illustrated by the Zazzle-supplied example, License Plate Shirts, the API allows you to create a template with placeholders for dynamic text or images. Zazzle also boasts the friendliest return policy (the “Zazzle promise”). While this doesn’t appear to directly affect you, the seller, remember that experiences your readers have with your products (and the companies that you have service them) can hurt you.
Spreadshirt, founded in Germany but with a growing US service, looks like a solid option for those with a European presence. Its services and product offerings function very similarly to CafePress, offering good integration with your web site and a tiered account system. As an example, the online windsurfers’ community iWindsurf has a store just offering a couple t-shirts. Merchandising may be particularly successful for community sites like this since members are likely to associate the site with their identity and thus more likely to want to brand themselves as such. For $10/month, a premium membership allows for removal of all Spreadshirt ads, better branding, and special sales tools like “limited time offers.” One of the major drawbacks is in the Spreadshirt payment system, which mails checks only on a quarterly basis, much less frequently than the rest.
PrintFection is the youngest of these four custom merchandisers, but it offers a lot. For starters, it’s selling a basic white t-shirt with a custom design for $2. The company also has advanced integration and design customization features, the ability to remove PrintFection ads, no limit on product offerings, and no account status that requires payment for an upgrade. When thinking about how the products could reflect back on you, the issue of quality probably comes to mind. A frequent suggestion in merchandising forums and comparisons is to buy a comparable t-shirt or other product from each company and judge for yourself. If not for the fact that it offers a lot of features at no cost, PrintFection may be a good place to start simply because they’ll sell you your first shirt for $2.
The major drawback to using one of these custom merchandisers versus the traditional route of producing and selling products yourself is the payout. These services all use a base price per product that you can then mark up as much as you want. A basic white t-shirt will generally have a base price of about $13. If you sell such a t-shirt on your blog for $15, you will be paid $2.
On top of revenue from sales, almost all of these sites offer some kind of affiliate program through which you can earn an additional percentage, often even when referring people to your own store (for more information on affiliate programs, see this earlier post).
For a more varied comparison of these sites, the T-Shirt Forums is a pretty active message board dedicated to such topics.
The world of mass customization is broader than just clothing and doodads. Some authors are turning to sites like Lulu.com for publishing books and other media. Lulu makes it easy to create not just a book, but handouts, brochures, DVDs, and CDs. This opens the possibility to make paper copies of a series of news stories you’ve written, CDs for your podcasts, DVDs for your videocasts or event footage, or a booklet made up of words taken from your blog archive. These services work much the same way as the merchandisers above in that you determine your profit margin above a base price and have several options for customization. Mia Garlick of Creative Commons conducted an interview with Stephen Fraser of Lulu in 2006, which covers much of how the site works as well as licensing options.
Another merchandising service that may come in handy for journalists who use photography in their work is DigiBug, a company that allows you to sell prints through your site. Using DigiBug API, sites like the Pan-Massachusetts Challenge are able to sell photos in various print options and even create separate price lists for different events or categories.
While doing all of the production, marketing, packaging, and shipping may yield a better profit margin, sites like CafePress give you an easy way to make some extra revenue. Even when the branding service takes a large portion of the profits, $2-$6 is not such a bad return on something that is pure promotion for your site.
(Ryan McGrady is a new media graduate student at Emerson College where he is studying knowledge, identity, and ideas in the information age.)
Clark Hoyt, the paper’s public editor, notes the NY Times’ continuing publication of pieces by Henry Blodget, one of the Internet bubble’s most notorious characters. In “Taint by Association” Hoyt asks two key questions:
One is whether The Times properly identifies Blodget when he writes for the paper. I don’t think so. His name was big in financial news at one time, but many readers do not know him.
The bigger question is whether The Times should be publishing him at all. Like Nocera, I believe in second chances, and Blodget seems to be doing fine establishing a new career. But why would The Times give a former analyst who lied to investors a platform to write about financial markets? If he wanted to write about how investors can spot phony reports by analysts, that would be one thing. But each time the newspaper uses Blodget as it has, it is conferring greater expert status on him.
These deals work two ways. The Times’s luster may help Blodget. But some of his taint rubs off on The Times.
Hoyt has it exactly right here. The newspaper is sullying its own name by lending Blodget its columns.
(Note: I own a small amount of stock in the company.)
UPDATED
If you’ve sent me email at my citmedia.org address in the past 36 hours or so, I haven’t seen it due to a server malfunction. We’re working on it. (I don’t think I’ve lost any mail…fingers crossed.)
UPDATE: Mail is back up. Let me know if you sent me something in the past day and I didn’t reply.