Think about markets to understand the news business

Using economic theories with critical thinking is a trend that has become more popular in the last few years. Books like Freakonomics, where everyday situations are analyzed from an economic perspective, are teaching readers how to look at situations in a way that makes sense in economic world.

James Hamilton is a professor of Public Policy, Economics, and Political Science at Duke University. In his book, All the News That’s Fit to Sell: How the Market Transforms Information into News, he examines how economic forces affect the media. By taking this economic approach when analyzing the state of the media, Hamilton believes we can arrive to conclusions that will improve the industry. Hamilton spoke last week to journalism students at USC Annenberg.

When evaluating the continued decline in interest for hard news, Hamilton first takes a look at the industry under an economic lens – analyzing the possible theories of why the current market does not provide the adequate amount of coverage in this area.

Rational Ignorance
When people are seeking information, they usually fall under one of the following categories: consumer, worker, audience member and voter. As a worker and consumer, readers seek out information they either need to do their job, or information they need to achieve a particular goal. As an audience member, readers are looking for information that will entertain them, such as YouTube or TMZ. Voters are those who seek information simply for the sake of being informed, and usually the victims of rational ignorance –when people choose to remain uninformed due to the lack on the return on the time invested learning about a particular topic.

For example, if a person spends a significant amount of time researching a presidential candidate, his vote will most likely not have a direct influence in the election outcome. Therefore, many readers choose not to demand detailed political information, and instead let others do the work. This is also where the media falls short in balancing the information people want and the one they need. If the demand for hard news is not there, media outlets will tend to focus on other subjects.

Inadequate Investments, High Costs of Hard News Coverage, and Advertising Bias
As the demand for hard news coverage decreases, profit-driven broadcasters and news media will not want to invest their money in these types of stories. Network evening news are extremely market driven, and networks usually focus on attracting marginal viewers, which make up about 40 percent of the market. So even if the average loyal network news viewer enjoys having hard news coverage, networks are not focused in keeping them, but instead working diligently to capture those casual viewers.

As far as advertising goes, not all viewers have equal value. If a certain group of women in their 30s, who statistically make up the majority of the purchasing decisions, desire more specialized coverage, advertisers will favor this group.

Journalists as Celebrities
As media outlets fight for ratings and readership, they often attempt to make their anchors and reporters into familiar faces – therefore building a sense of comfort and loyalty with their audience. Often, time spent on turning a reporter into a celebrity has a tendency to neglect hard news coverage.

Content, Conduit and Conglomerate Ownership
If a cable company owns the news network as well, it is possible that they will prevent others in the news business to enter their market. It is important for audiences to analyze content and medium and recognize where there may be possible conflicts of interests.

Also, with more local newspapers transitioning to big corporations, the focus of the news often shifts from providing the public a service to maximizing profits.

So how do we fix this?

Hamilton believes that they key lies in changing the incentive of media outlets, and consequently, changing the incentive to seek information. He proposes the following:

  1. More media outlets should be operated by non-profit entities. By taking the profit out of the equation, companies can focus on the public interest.
  2. Subsidized information creation. Foundations should be able to subsidize information analyses, training for reporters covering hard news, and providing journalists with lowered costs when acquiring government information.
  3. Encourage family ownership of news outlets. Families may be willing to compromise a portion of the profits for the sake of providing the public with the information they need. The government should provide incentives so that families remain in the business of news and in turn, provide hard news coverage.
  4. Public policy should encourage more partisan information. Currently there are restrictions on how much money parties can spend on public information. If these were removed, information would reach more potential voters through advertising.
  5. Government subsidy for information creation and infrastructure. In addition to providing funding for political and government information, government should invest in improving the current way information is distributed.

When asked about possible influences and bias, which could happen with partisan coverage of news, Hamilton believes that as long as institutions are transparent with their goals and identity, the public can draw their own conclusions.

Overall, Hamilton’s economic view of the media industry can provide us with insight on how we can combat the challenges we encounter as journalists. By taking a macroeconomic approach and focusing the attention on the media outlets, we can hopefully achieve a balance in providing the public with the appropriate information.

Can OurTown crack the hyperlocal news market?

Plenty of start-ups have tried to stake claims to “hyperlocal” news markets across the United States. Some have failed (Backfence), while other endure (YourHub, Topix). Now comes OurTown. The site claims 70,000 hyperlocal websites across the country, seeded with content partnerships, and an interesting business model. Local editors, who oversee the content of their sites, keep almost all of their local ad revenue (which they will sell) and a 40 percent cut of the national haul. Will that “taste of the action” be able to lure professional journalists into local editing positions? Will the OurTown network be able to attract enough national and local advertisers to endure?

OurTown does have at least one former print journalist on board, and a prominent one, at that. George Blake is the former editor and 20-year veteran of the Cincinnati Enquirer. Now, he is working as chief news officer for OurTown. OJR interviewed Blake, and an edited transcript follows:

OJR: What is OurTown’s level of commitment to providing quality journalism? Do you feel your local audiences are looking for more of a social and entertainment site than a news portal?

George Blake: I would suggest that the best definition of “hard news” is the news most important to your readers. OurTown will provide the big national and international story – but we won’t be where readers go to get that news. We’ll be where they go to get the closest-to-home news he or she wants most.

So the question becomes this for the local editors: what do people want to read? If it’s local entertainment and activities, we’ll have community calendars that address this. If it’s school, church, kids sports or other news, we’ll have the links to their specific-interest site. We’ll have chat rooms that let them discuss the local issues that affect them most.

OJR: With all the different markets, is it difficult to remain consistent and build a brand throughout the local sites? If a particular site is not very good, do you feel it hurts your credibility and brand?

GB: We believe that the better a local editor’s site is, the more money he or she or they will make, so the incentive should be to make the site the best it can be.  Some sites will be better than others, though, and we will provide guidance to local editors who need improvement. As an example, we already are providing links to Roy Clark’s writing tips from Poynter.

We also have a first-class advisory board of top journalists.

We monitor the sites and can see what works in an area and what doesn’t and will give our editors updates on what is working and what is not and what can be done to make their sites better.  If a site is not updated regularly or contains content that is inappropriate, we retain the option to pull the editor’s license.

OJR: How do you recruit editors and do you have any specific requirements you’re looking for? What kind of incentives do you offer?

GB: Editors are recruited using contacts in the industry, family and friends and advertising on Craigslist, Poynter and similar sites.  We have had very good response to our ads.  We go through a screening process which each of the replies we receive to ensure that we have people who are interested in the process and competent to represent us well. 

We are offering a free one-year license to the first 1,000 people who qualify and sign up to be local editors.  We encourage them to tell their friends and we extend their license for one month for every local editor that they bring on.  We encourage people to sign up as a team.  One member of the team may be better at posting the news; while the other might be a salesman… husbands and wives, two neighbors, etc.

OJR: On your site you claim than an average local editor covering two zip codes can make between $45,000 and $60,000 a year. Is that still the case? Is your revenue model completely ad-supported?

GB: Our model is completely ad supported (including local classified ads) and we believe that a good local editor can make between $45,000 and $60,000 each year once they have built up a regular clientele in their area.  We will continue to sell the national ads, which we will split with the local editor, but the local editor retains all revenue generated by local ads after paying a monthly fee to the company for ad serving. 

We give local editors the tools they need for ad sales and ad placement. We bill the advertiser for them. Success is very achievable because the local advertisers want to build their close-to-home business and the OurTown websites offer a new opportunity for them. Unlike the daily newspaper that needs to sell the $100,000 ad contract, OurTown editors can sell $100-a-month contracts and create significant income.

OJR: Who keeps the editorial control in all the local sites? How do you handle a situation when something inappropriate or inadequate gets posted? How do you ensure the content keeps journalistic quality?

GB: The company retains editorial control.  While we do not want to interfere in the minutia of how a local editor runs his site, each local editor signs a document agreeing to adhere to company policy regarding content on the site. 

We are not censoring the sites, but if something inappropriate or something that violates our company standards appears on the site, the local editor will be asked to take it town immediately and should he or she continue to violate company and community standards, the local editor will lose his or her license.

OJR: How are you competing with bigger local sites like Yelp? What makes you different?

GB: What makes us different is our “feet on the street.”  We have local editors who are residents in and interested in their community. They know what’s going on.  This makes the information we display on OurTown very granular, very local and very interesting to the people in that community.  You want to know about the local festival 10 minutes from your home, not the one 50 miles away.  When you go to your OurTown website, you will read stories about places and people you recognize in your community.  You will be directed to businesses that you actually can use, not someone in the next city. 

OJR: How are you marketing your site and who is your target audience?

GB: Because we have a broad target audience – anyone interested in news from the area in which he or she lives – we will have our local editors gather the news from neighborhoods, schools, churches, athletic leagues, shopping centers and more. Much of our traffic will come from those news subjects asking others, “Did you see me on OurTown.com?”

As always, “word of mouth” will be our best ally. We also are marketing the site though Google, Yahoo, Craigslist and other websites.

OJR: And finally, where do you see OurTown.com going? Any plans to enter the social networking world?

GB: We see OurTown expanding to more than 70,000 communities in the next year.  Everyone will be able to go on their OurTown site to see what all those sirens were about last night, or if their neighbor’s kid threw the winning pitch in that little league game.  While we have no plans to enter the social networking world per se, OurTown will bring together people with common interests and common goals.  It would only be natural that these people begin to interact with one another through OurTown.