What does Apple's new mobile iAd format mean for news publishers?

Is Apple’s new iAd system a game-changer for the business of mobile application development?

With Steve Jobs’ announcement at yesterday’s press preview of the new iPhone OS 4.0, Apple’s now in the ad network business. Like Google before it, Apple is opening the advertising market to a new group that didn’t have easy, direct access to it before – in this case, mobile application developers.

Sure, many current apps are ad-supported: Just cruise through the iPhone app store and look at how many apps come in two versions – a paid one and an ad-supported “free” or “lite” version. But by integrating an ad service system with the iPhone’s operating system, which will now support multi-tasking, Apple’s new iAds have the potential for offering a far superior user experience than current “click-away” ads.

We’ll have to see iAds in a live environment before the publishing industry will learn if the iAd’s improved functionality leads to better click-through rates among iPhone application users. Thanks to a generation of lousy ads for lousy products, many consumers have been conditioned to hate ads, and either to ignore them or ignore applications or publications that place them too obtrusively within their content.

Functionality is nice. The ability to stay within the application while viewing an expanded ad is helpful both to readers and to publishers. But, ultimately, that functionality doesn’t matter to someone who never clicks or selects an ad.

Apple will need to find a way, working with its app developer partners, to improve click-through rates on ad-supported apps, if app publishers are to see any significant increase in revenue from iAds.

Publishers currently making significant income from app sales will want to keep an eye on how popular iAds become, too. If the public accepts the iAd format, expect to see a rush of publishers abandon “pay” applications in favor of offering iAd-supported free ones, ultimately pressuring other publications to drop (or eliminate) their application prices, as well.

One of the great utilities that Google has provided its AdSense publishers is access to Google’s eye-tracking research showing the “hot spots” within various common webpage designs, to guide page designers on the most effective place to position banner ads. Apple will need to have similar research in hand, and be willing to share it with developers, to maximize click-through potential for the iAd.

Similarly, Apple will need to develop a sub-community within its developer community, devoted to analyzing ad design. As a news publisher who’s been tracking the click-through performance of hundreds of ads run on my sites over the past few years, I’ve learned some valuable lessons about which elements within ads elicit clicks from my users. That’s information that advertisers and publishers will need to learn from the iAd environment. Apple’s in the best position to facilitate the conversations that will lead to such learning. If it fails to do so, the learning process will take much longer for all involved, damaging the iAd’s potential for success.

Ultimately, though, the iAd will succeed or fail on its content. Is what is being advertised in an iAd something of interest to a particular app’s users, or not?

Google’s brilliance was not in selling text (and, later, banner) ads on publishers’ websites, it was how it did that. Google created an automated process by which “long-tail” advertisers could bid on previously unsold space on “long-tail” publishers’ websites – sites that often did not have well-paying ads before AdSense, due to those publishers’ inability (or lack of knowledge how) to sell ads.

Google extended the advertising market, by matching smaller advertisers with smaller publishers in a way that nevertheless resulted in highly targeted ads. Eventually, bigger players got involved, and now you can find slick, Flash ads from Fortune 100 companies running on one-person blogs, as well as text ads from mom-and-pop stores on the webpages of major traditional news publications.

Apple’s not yet provided the details on how it will sell iAds. Nor has it said if it will enable publishers to sell into the iAd space, as Google’s AdSense partners can do (and very easily, using Google’s AdManager system). Apple bought mobile advertising company Quattro Wireless earlier this year, giving it a strong head start in luring large advertisers and publishers to the iAd.

But the big money online is not in servicing a few large accounts. It’s in servicing millions of smaller ones. If all iAds do is to provide a slightly better functioning advertising tool for businesses already engaged in mobile advertising, it might provide a nicely improved revenue stream to those companies. But if Apple can find a way to expand the market for mobile advertising the way that Google did on the Web with its text ads, then Apple will transform mobile application publishing, creating a powerful economic incentive for millions of people to start developing their own apps.

The need for a 'digital media pyramid'

[Editor's note: A reminder: Friday, Feb. 19, 2010 is the deadline to apply for the 2010 News Entrepreneur Boot Camp. Please consider applying if you're looking for better training on how to make your online news publishing efforts an income-producing business.]

The advent of the Internet and digital age of communications has brought forth the expected decline of newspapers at a faster pace than many business journalism experts predicted. A major part of the decline results from publishers not adjusting their products and news gathering techniques fast enough to changing technologies. Publishers competed in a digitally dominated world using analog-based technologies, business models and journalism techniques.

One news gathering technique still being taught to practicing and aspiring journalists is the more than a century-old use of the Inverted Pyramid, which guides the construction of writing predominately print news stories. The Inverted Pyramid is analog. A new paradigm known as the “Digital Media Pyramid” has found a place among some young writers and journalists.

The basic premise of the Inverted Pyramid remains sound, but the device desperately needs to be adjusted for the fast-moving digital world. The Inverted Pyramid has had its detractors throughout the years, many of whom assumed that it would be forgotten as a once-vital part of news gathering. But what the Inverted Pyramid provided that was hard to replace in the deadline world of news was the ability to quickly present facts, first to the editor and then to the consuming public.

The Inverted Pyramid is presented to journalists as an up-side down triangle with the top representing the most important facts to be presented, since this is what editors demanded and the consuming public needed for competitive reasons. Next, the Inverted Pyramid presents secondary information that would be connected to additional details supporting the reported facts. In essence, the most important facts are presented first, then repeated and supported by detailed information.

This presentation of news facts worked quite well during the latter part of the 19th century and most of the 20th century, especially since during that time many news reports were first sent via telegraph, and then eventually by other analog transmitters like broadcast television, radio and satellite.

Journalism historian Chip Scanlan believes the Inverted Pyramid may have never come into existence were it not for the telegraph. In the opinion of Scanlan and many other journalism scholars the telegraph was just as revolutionary during its time as the Internet is today. Unlike the Internet though, in real dollars, the telegraph was much more expensive. Therefore, a briefer, smarter presentation was needed to communicate initial facts. In its early days the telegraph cost as much as one penny per character to transmit. That’s a price even Twitter would love today!

During the civil war that one penny per character was a financial strain on newspapers trying to cover a conflict spread along many miles. The price of words dictated brevity, clarity and a concise writing style that permeates much of today’s news writing. In total, newspapers were spending hundreds of thousands of dollars paying for wire service transmissions and at the time, just as today saving money was paramount. The resulting writing style was drastically different from the flowery prose typical of the static media of previous generations. So teaching an Inverted Pyramid approach to writing news was convenient and it matched the revolutionary technology of its time.

With the advent of the Internet, brevity was just as important, but equally important were the many layers of digital information that could be distributed quickly and cheaply. With the Internet the analog-based presentation of the Inverted Pyramid suddenly becomes overwhelmed by an ocean of zeros and ones.

DIGITAL MEDIA PYRAMID

The “Digital Media Pyramid” addresses the demands of today’s journalists who could be writing a television, radio or print story and nearly simultaneously be required to re-purpose their work for a digital Internet audience.

The “Digital Media Pyramid” does not replace the analog-based Inverted Pyramid. It simply enhances it by bringing it into a 21st century digitally dominated information universe. The “Digital Media Pyramid” also commands an immediate understanding by young journalists and students who are already digitally minded. It provides for the traditional brief introduction of facts (the five W’s) which are boldly separated from all supporting details. Yet, the “Digital Media Pyramid” also addresses the need to surf the Internet for additional supporting information by permitting and explaining cut-and-pasting rules. The “Digital Media Pyramid” impresses on the need to respect copyrighted material and original works by teaching proper attribution and giving credit when needed.

The Digital Media Pyramid

The “Digital Media Pyramid” explains the journalistic use of photographs, video, interactivity and all elements that are not simply text. It respects the importance of such elements as being part of any news story in this new era of information.

Just as important and revolutionary the “Digital Media Pyramid” calls on journalists to be cognizant of advertisements in an age when software can dictate the appearance of a sales ad next to a story which can easily be bias by the appearance of inappropriate ads. This new pyramid teaches the writer to be aware of any ads automatically placed near or inside a written story, so the writer can inspect a story’s presentation and seek to maintain objectivity.

Finally, the “Digital Media Pyramid” encourages the self-education of “users” or readers, enabling them to quickly seek out balanced information on a news story through the use of embedded links, social networks and other resources.

Journalism students who have been taught the “Digital Media Pyramid” for the past seven years at Rutgers University have enthusiastically welcomed the change in how they are to prepare and present their news stories. Most comment that they immediately understand the “Digital Media Pyramid” just by viewing the diagram. That cannot always be said of the Inverted Pyramid. Typically, students have voiced a sense of recognition. The words “oh-yeah” precede a fuller explanation of the “Digital Media Pyramid” when it is presented to young users. Digital is already part of their environment.

It seems that the “Digital Media Pyramid” should find a place in the newsrooms and journalism classrooms around the globe, so reporters and editors are more prepared to address the needs of their craft and the demands of sophisticated audiences. After all, even the most hard-bitten journalists would agree that a writing device conceived during the Civil War could probably be updated to cope with the demands of the fast-moving digital world surrounding today’s journalists.

Finding the right balance between the needs of the journalists and the ever-pressing expansion of technology can be overwhelming. It appears that today’s digital universe makes this the right time to for adjustments and changes to an analog model that is more than a century old.

Is anyone on staff actually reading the mobile version of your news website?

I’ve long complained about online news publications that automatically redirect all requests from mobile devices to their mobile home page. The practice kills deep-linking online, which is especially frustrating when the deep link comes from the news organization’s own Twitter feed.

But today, I’d like to highlight another frustrating practice by some news organizations – publishing incomplete articles to the mobile version of their websites or smartphone apps.

I’m illustrating two examples here today, but I’ve encountered so many on my iPhone over the past several weeks that I often wonder if many news organizations employ anyone to actually read their mobile publications, or if they merely entrusted their mobile versions and apps to automated processes.

With mobile news attracting a growing audience, news publishers simply can’t afford to take the Ron Popeil approach to their mobile publications – “set it and forget it.” They must devote some eyeballs toward a backread of all that they produce.

Unwatched content online inevitably becomes broken content – whether it be an automatically generated mobile app, a reader-driven forum or columnist’s comments page. Watch your content, and it might still break, but at least someone will catch the problem, allowing for a swift fix.

Earlier this week, I tried to read a story on USA Today’s otherwise delightful iPhone app about a survey questioning Americans about President Obama and his performance to date.

USA Today iPhone

That’s where the story on the iPhone app ended. You couldn’t scroll down to take that “closer look.” The story abruptly ended right there.

Now, here’s how the story looked in a laptop Web browser:

USA Today Web

You can see that USA Today had built a table-driven display, featuring an individual representing each of the several categories of respondents that USA Today had identified in its poll.

Now, here was the front page of the travel section on MSNBC’s mobile version last night:

MSNBC Travel

Hey, I love Hawaii! Let’s click and take a look at some of those tips for a cheap trip to Oahu:

MSNBC Travel Mobile Article

Uh…. huh? Yep, that’s it: a head, a deck and a shirttail. No article.

Let’s now fire up the laptop and see how the piece looks in the “normal” version of Safari:

MSNBC Web Article

Oh, it’s a photo gallery. It appears that MSNBC hasn’t yet devised a way to transfer content from online photo galleries into mobile pages. Indeed, MSNBC frequently uses this technique for travel articles, especially with tips and “best of” lists, and none of them ever comes up fully on its mobile site.

Neither of these were isolated examples, buried deep within their mobile versions. The USA Today article was on the “top stories” tab of its iPhone app, and the Oahu “non-article” was the lead piece on its Travel section.

Clearly, these omissions represent significant usability failures for these publishers, as well as any others guilty of the same errors. If you can’t port an article over to your mobile version in a useable format, better not to attempt to publish there at all.

But, better yet, news publishers should take the advice that many online journalists have been offering from years – quit encasing your content in a single, specific format. Store it XML, or some other format, that can easily adapt to multiple publishing formats for multiple devices. Then assign someone to look at the product, before or after publication, to ensure that it’s come through properly. If it hasn’t, hold that article until you can fix it. It’s time to show mobile readers some love, and not hope that they’ll remain content with whatever feed your tech crew wrote.

News organization’s desire to create impressive Web graphics and presentations becomes counter-productive when those presentations are not available to mobile users. It doesn’t matter how pretty your design team makes something if the fastest growing segment of your market can never see it.