Message From Michael -- September 10,2007

9/11

THE SILVER BULLET

BROADCAST JOURNALISM IN A MULTIMEDIA WORLD

WORD OF MOUTH FOLLOW-UP

WEBLISH VS. LEETSPEAK



9/11: Two numbers that speak volumes. Mark the day. Recognize it. Yes, I know it’s ‘only’ the 6th anniversary. But the fact is that the growing controversy over the Iraq war, the fact that General Petraeus is supposed to release his report on Iraq, the fact that Osama bin Laden has released another tape only adds to the occasion. Even so, that’s not the point. The point is that it is a defining moment in America. Marketers – produce :04 second ID’s, :10 and :15 second spots memorializing the day, saluting the military men and women. Newsies – there should be stories in every newscast (local and national) and your anchor team should acknowledge the event. Let your audience know that you remember… and you care. That’s a powerful message to send viewers.

PS: For those General Managers who do editorials, this is a perfect topic. Hint. Hint.

THE SILVER BULLET: Increase efficiency. Improve morale. Reduce turnover. Raise the ratings. How, you ask? One word – communication. Yes, I know that sounds like a trite answer, but a professor at the University of Miami has done a survey that ‘proves’ just that. Terry Adams at the University’s School of Communication surveyed producers and directors in various markets around the country. Part of what he found out, anybody who has been in a television newsroom knows. Most directors are older males who have been at the same station for a long time while most producers are young females who have only been at the station for a couple of years. Interestingly, although not surprisingly, the producers had a generally positive view of the directors with nearly all of the producers (97%) saying the director helped the process and nearly as many (88%) saying the director provided the information necessary and four-fifths (80%) rating the director as “competent.” It wasn’t quite the opposite with directors, but it was substantially different, with less than half (48%) of the directors agreeing that the producer helped in the process, and only slightly more (54%) saying the producer provided all the information necessary and nearly half (46%) of the directors rating the producer as “incompetent.”

Even more interesting and the key take-away from the survey (at least, to me) was Adams’ finding that there was a “significant relationship” between whether producers and directors held a show meeting and how they assessed each other’s competence. Those who held show meetings were more likely to consider their counterpart either the best they had worked with or at least competent. And it gets even more interesting. Adams found that the “quality of information” the producers and/or directors received from their counterpart was “significantly correlated” to their overall job satisfaction. That, in turn, also showed a relationship to job turnover which Adams rightly noted is a major problem with producers. And both defined the “perfect” producer or director in terms of communication. Finally, the piece de resistance, the stations with the highest reported levels of communication also had the highest ratings. In Academic speak, Adams says, “correlation analysis shows ratings to be significantly related to the amount of information relayed.” To his credit, he also put in plain English: “simply put, companies can make money out of good communication.”

YET… yet… (do you detect a note of frustration?), three quarters of the producers (75.9%) and directors (73%) did not have regular daily show meetings. And most (68%) work in different parts of the building so any ad hoc communication is impossible. Directors are less likely to take part in meetings in the news department than the other way around. Adams says the key finding is that not only do producers and directors not communicate well, they don’t even communicate minimally although, as he rightfully notes, “one cannot succeed without the other’s participation and involvement.”

And that note of frustration? That’s the consultant in me. I have recommended at EVERY station I have either worked at or consulted that the director be part of the editorial meeting. And there’s always excuses why the director can’t do it. As a final footnote, I contacted Adams who turns out to be a former director with ten years in the business.

BROADCAST JOURNALISM IN A MULTIMEDIA WORLD: That’s the title of a new book which argues that “multiplatform journalism is simply a fact of life for any up-and-coming journalist.” The book, designed as a text, looks at the specific strengths and advantages of the different platforms and how students can go beyond re-purposing to actually advancing their stories to the next level for any medium, according to the blurb on publisher CQPress’s website. It was written by MfM friend Deborah Potter, former CBS and CNN correspondent and now NewsLab executive director, and Deborah Wenger, former executive producer and now associate professor media convergence and new media at Virginia Commonwealth University. Okay, I admit this is plugola, and candidly I can’t endorse the book because I have only read the summary, but the fact is that it addresses an issue that seasoned and student journalists have to wrestle with now.

WORD OF MOUTH FOLLOW-UP: My previous MfM talked about the power of Word of Mouth in marketing, advertising and news. Further confirmation of the power of WOM comes from a New York Times article about music producer Rick Rubin and Columbia Records. As part of their marketing effort, they surveyed the 20 college student interns they had brought in who told them that: “a) no one listens to the radio anymore, b) they mostly steal music but they don’t consider it stealing, and c) they get most of their music from iTunes on their iPod. They told us that MySpace is over, it’s just not cool anymore; that Facebook is still cool, but that might not last much longer; and the biggest thing in their life is word of mouth. That’s how they hear about music, bands, everything.” (Thanks to Tim Livingston of WNWO/ Toledo and David Toma of WECT/ Wilmington for pointing this article out to me.)

Another study, this one by MTV and Nickelodeon found that four out of five (83%) of ‘tech-savvy’ teenagers visited a website based on the recommendation of a friend and half of all teenagers (55%) found out about a viral video through word of mouth. The study also found that 14 to 24 year olds have an average of 53 friends, both online and ‘off-line.’

WIDGETS FOLLOW-UP: I’ll keep this brief. USA Today has become the first major newspapers to develop widgets that can be used on people’s personal websites and that use Flash technology. (Readers will remember me talking about widgets several editions back.)

LEETSPEAK VS WEBLISH: Have you heard of either? Well, “weblish” is, as the name implies, a combination of English and Web-centric words. The latest addition to the so-called “weblish” dictionary – Bacn, which is a variation on spam and spim, and is defined as email consumers may want (such as my newsletter, niche product announcements, social network updates) but which still clog up your e-mail box. Now, there is a version, tentatively nicknamed “leetspeak” in which the shorthand vocabulary is used in regular communication including a spoken version. For example, LOL (Laugh Out Loud) is pronounced ‘lawl’ and PWN (which is gamer talk for annihilating an opponent) is pronounced ‘pone.’ An article in The Wall Street Journal says the changes are already underway and if you don’t believe it, the harbinger of bad taste, South Park, had a recent episode in which one of the characters shouted out, “looks like you’re about to get poned.”