Student journalist/entrepreneurs look at mobile tablet strategies for newspapers

Editor’s note: In the Annenberg-Marshall-Viterbi News Entrepreneur Fellowship Program students from three USC colleges collaborated to invent the future of news. Last month, three teams (each including students from USC Annenberg School of Journalism, USC Marshall School of Business, and USC Viterbi School of Engineering) devised and pitched economically viable mobile news ideas to executives from Los Angeles-area news organizations.

This week and next, the teams will present a summary of their recommendations here on OJR.

USC Annenberg journalism student Rebecca Lett was part of a team of AMVmobile fellowship students tasked with devising mobile tablet strategies for the Orange County Register. Other students on this team: Kevin Lu (USC Annenberg), Drew Prickett (USC Marshall school of business), and Saravanan Rangaraju (USC Viterbi school of engineering).

The Orange County Register hadn’t foreseen the downfall of print journalism with the rise of the Internet. Ian Hamilton, the Register’s technology reporter, Sonya Smith, social and mobile leader, and Claus Enevoldsen, director of interactive marketing, had anxiously explained the Register’s position as a print news organization in hopes that we, two Annenberg students, one Marshall student and one Viterbi student, could develop a new strategy that potentially could save their business.

We put ourselves in their shoes. Print journalism, the path they had passionately chosen for themselves years ago, would never be the primary source of news again. Online publications, being free with cheap advertising, could not become a substantial source of revenue as they are.

After a decade of canceled print subscriptions in favor of reading more up to date content for free on the Internet, would people be willing to pay for online content? And more specifically, would people pay for mobile news applications on their phones and tablets (e.g. the iPad)?

In our presentation, we reconfirmed what the Register had been silently telling themselves all along – mobile is here to stay. We encouraged the Register to be early adopters and to incorporate advanced tablet strategy into their working mobile strategy.

According to our research, the tablet will be very popular in Orange County as early as next year, which means the hefty investment is likely to be worth it in the long run.

As a team, we first decided that the Register had four main sources of providing news content: print, online, mobile and tablet (in order from oldest to newest). We then determined the audience affected by these different sources to be readers, advertisers and the Register itself.

We researched, debated and consulted readers, advertisers and experts to confidently assert that journalism was moving from print towards the tablet.

From the Register’s perspective, the tablet holds the most potential for generating the most revenue. Readers are willing to pay for subscriptions because tablets deliver the most current and personalized content. Advertisements can be different sizes, different media, extremely high quality, QR coded and geo-location based, which will enable the Register to charge substantially more than they do online.

From the advertisers’ perspective, the tablet has the ability to direct ads to specific audiences, to receive and track responses to ads and to display high-quality, instantly effective ads. In other words, tablet advertising will be worth the price.

And from the readers’ perspective, the tablet will become the most convenient multimedia tool in the future. A reader can e-mail, watch TV shows and movies, listen to music, read and interact through social media in one place. It’s the improved webpage that people will pay for because it provides the intimacy of a traditional newspaper, modern sleekness, and the ability to interact with content and to share content through e-mail and social media.

The fact that there is proven future for news organizations in the tablet is a hard for print monopolies to digest, however it is a fact that must be accepted in order for news organizations to stay up to pace with technology.

I know I am speaking for my whole team when I say this experience was as eye opening to us as it was for the news organizations. And personally, my hesitations about the declining field of journalism were transformed into anticipation for the rise of an exciting, mobilized journalism.

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.

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.