Does your media organisation have a social media strategy. Does it reach out and connect with your audience? There are many ways media organisations respond to social media, but here are three.

Media Helping Media recommends the third and final attitude in this list, but first check which one fits your media organisation and then think through what are can do about it.

1: IGNORE = the broadcast or publish at model

Attitude

• Social networking is a distraction that has nothing to do with traditional media.
• It is a plaything for trivial exchanges and is not for journalism.
• Keep out. Our content is our content. We know best.

Policy

• We will refer to a social network trend in a story but only as an illustration and only if supplied in wires copy.
• It’s our job to provide information. We are the professionals.
• If there is a piece of user-generated video, an image or a comment on the wires, we may refer to it or include it, but, come on, we are journalists and they are just amateurs.
• We’ve been trained, and we have standards – they haven’t. Keep them in their place.

Guidelines

• Stick to the wires, press releases and getting our own reporters to cover diary events and our correspondents to cover their specialisms.
• Don’t be distracted by the social media noise out there.

Result

A we-know-best attitude that fails to acknowledge changing audience behaviour and sees the audience as consumers rather than part of the news process. While this is going on, an increasingly informed and influential middle media is taking over the role of informing the public debate with people-focused stories published on blogs and distributed via the social networks that reflect diversity of opinion and offer perspectives which are often lacking in heavily-controlled news environments.

Prognosis

This model is in its death throes or already dead.

2: EXPLOIT – the engage-with on our terms model

Attitude

We realise social networking is popular, we understand the benefits of viral marketing and distribution, and we see it as a way to disseminate our material to a wider audience. Our sales and marketing department is on the case. Every now and then we are happy to refer to social media in our bulletins and stories, and sometimes it might be part of a story, but only in terms of showing a trend or in cases where social media offers access to voices we would not normally reach.

Policy

• Keep social media elements in the “and finally” part of the bulletin.
• If presenting on camera and talking about social media, offer that smile, nod and wink to suggest it’s all a bit of fun and not to be taken too seriously.
• When reporting on radio, make sure there is a tone to your voice that indicates to the audience where the line exists between the facts we have uncovered and the information that has been found via social media.

Guidelines

• Our use of social networking must be on our terms only.
• When referring to social media be sure to attribute any information as unconfirmed and ensure there is an element of doubt until we can confirm with two independent sources.
• When inviting social networking participation on any story, whether in the form of comments or forum discussions etc, be sure to keep control of the agenda.
• Only invite user input on the stories we want covered and only publish the comments which fit in with our view of how the story should develop.

Result

Containment, with a firm grip on the amount and scope of social networking in output. Regular references to social media as a phenomenon and an increasing awareness of its use as a possible newsgathering tool, but the main thrust of output is still based on wires, diary events and reporter/correspondent input from newsroom meetings, their contacts and their specialist beats.

Prognosis

This “engage with on our terms” model will work well as a part of a transition from the “broadcast/publish at” model, but is not a recommended survival strategy.

3: EMBRACE – the let loose to hold tight model

Attitude

We see social networking as central to all we do. By tapping into this rich vein of stories, perspectives, and first-person witness and thought we are able to enhance our output. This enriches our news and current affairs and highlights real concerns. It adds genuine comment and ensures that our output is relevant and revealing.

Policy

• There must be a social networking element in all stories.
• If we don’t reflect what is going on in society we are limiting the scope of our coverage and reducing our relevance to our audience.
• We must view all bloggers and social networkers as potential stringers.
• We must monitor social media at all times and build a new network of trusted contacts who we can turn to and who can turn to us.
• We need to get to know the network of contacts belonging to those social networkers we turn to the most and build on that, too.
• Crowdsourcing is using information, or effort, contributed by the general public. We must harness this resource.
• Ideally, we must aim to move away from a wires-led and events-led news agenda and shift the focus over to the audience.
• All our content is there for our users to take away to their preferred social networking space where they can interact with their contacts and add their own context and analysis – and we must always look for ways to bring this back into our newsgathering and news production processes.

Guidelines

• No story is complete without a social networking element.
• In a breaking story situation, where we are feeding the social networks with updated information, we must be sure to be part of, visit and tap into those networks to monitor the discussion and reflect that in our output.
• We must not rely just on pushing our updates to Facebook and Twitter. We must be part of the social media conversation so that we can stimulate the debate, ask questions, find answers and uncover new information.
• All journalists must have social networking aggregation tools on their desktops and monitor updates at all times.
• As with all information, we can refer to it but confirm it only when we have two independent sources.

Result

• Fresh, relevant, user-focused news covering the issues that concern the target audience and wider audience.
• A rapid growth in viral news distribution (the audience sharing the content for us), brand influence and trust.
• Increased traffic back to the news website.
• Increase in fans on the media organisation’s Twitter page, Facebook page, YouTube site and all other social network sites – again with associated increases in traffic to all the brand’s online properties.
• Most importantly, a welcome to the social networking party – not as a gate-crasher, but as an informed source of information.

Prognosis

A healthy strategy, adapting to changing audience behaviour, letting loose of content to hold tight to the audience, while, at the same time, reflecting the priorities, concerns and thinking of that audience.

The post Social media test for mainstream media first appeared on Media Helping Media.

“Facts aren’t enough, I want rumour, too,” a quote from a blogger in Ukraine at the end of a workshop about how to use social networking for newsgathering.

The good news for mainstream media is that the social networking audience still wants facts, and this is where traditional journalism comes in.

However, those producing the facts need to take note of this changing audience behaviour and think differently about how they create and disseminate those facts.

News alerts or news reminders

When a big story breaks, the news is often out first on social networking platforms.

Having spent my career as a journalist and manager in print, radio, TV and online, the search for two independent sources to verify a story was a large part of my day.

Now, I am facing up to the fact that the many in the audience would rather have a sniff around the story much earlier in its development, rather than wait for the information to be checked, verified, packaged and presented via the traditional media route.

Sure, they still want to know what exactly happened, but in the meantime they want the drip drip drip of gossip and rumour.

When you think about it, this behaviour is not a lot different from the chat that goes on in the coffee shop, bus queue, laundrette and bar – in fact anywhere where people natter.

Most of the time they are dealing in rumour and gossip, but when they get home they switch on the radio or TV, log on or open the newspaper in their search for facts. They want to know what’s actually happened.

Getting in on the act

So this is not new behaviour, but because it’s been happening in the social networking space some media types have backed off and tried to distance themselves taking an us-and-them approach.

However, in some areas traditional media has woken up to this and is responding in a way that is accepting that changing audience behaviour could be an opportunity rather than a threat.

BBC News Online’s sports site and its daily football gossip pages (football in the English sense of the word with a round ball) are an example of how a broadcaster has adapted.

Each day a journalist at BBC News Online’s sports team sifts through the most popular websites and newspapers and copies the stories being put out by others.

There is no need to verify the information because all they are doing is reporting what others are saying. In this case the BBC providing a signpost in order to point the way to an interesting piece of information that they have not yet included in their output, probably because they haven’t checked it out.

Or they may have checked it out, found it is wrong and decided not to use it themselves but have realised that the rumour is capturing the imagination of the audience and stimulating debate and therefore should be included in the gossip section.

They add links to the sites making the claims, many of them tabloids read by the BBC audience. Neat solution; best of both worlds.

The result is an extremely popular list of rumours that may be totally rubbish, but make interesting pub and coffee shop conversations none-the-less, and the fans love it.

They are able to sense what is true and make believe, but they want to read both and make their own minds up.

And the same is true with Twitter, Facebook and other social networking platforms.

Clearly you are not expected to believe all you read, but it is there and, although social networking will be dealing in rumour and gossip, it will also be dealing in facts and smart journalists will see this as an early heads up on breaking or potential news stories.

It’s about realising the audience is not stupid and is able to make up its own mind. And an element of changing audience behaviour appears to be one of being happy to snack on rumour, but with an underlying need to feed on fact.

The challenge for traditional media

So, what does this mean for traditional, mainstream media? Does it need to change?

Well yes, it needs to be aware of the changing audience behaviour and the new and exciting ways of newsgathering via social networking, but, in terms of change, it’s important it keeps doing what it does best; dealing in sourced, verified, attributed facts that inform the public debate.

The platforms and conduits may have changed, but the need for solid, reliable, sourced and ethical journalism is still evident.

And that is where traditional media should focus. It should be doing what it should have always have been doing – unearthing facts that are verified, sourced, attributed and substantiated – and feeding those to the social networking space.

However, those facts may have to be presented differently.

Perhaps there will not always be the need for a heavily-produced and packaged piece of audio or video, or a complex web page or newspaper special section.

Perhaps the way to feed the social network debate is to cut up the content into facts sent out in tweet-sized sentences or in RSS feeds that can stimulate debate in the social network space and offer links so that debate can flow back to the host news organisation, be intercepted, and then considered for inclusion in order to broaden perspectives and inject a flavour of the audience into the output.

Most if not all traditional media organisations have Facebook pages. Most seed these pages with RSS feeds of the headline, summary and a thumbnail and allow the audience that prefers to consume its news in this space to interact.

Recently, on CNN’s Facebook page, there were 2,568 comments on one story. What’s interesting is that in order to inform that debate the users will have to click on the headline to return to CNN to get the facts they need for that discussion. Viral marketing, 360 audience engagement.

Dealing in unsubstantiated rumour is not new. Gossip magazines and tabloids have feasted at this table for years. The online, social networking environment has just extended this.

How traditional media responds to this is key. If it remains aloof and removed it will fail; if it dives in and gets involved it could benefit.

And, as my Ukrainian friend said as he browsed the latest tweets on his handheld, “I still return to BBC News Online several times a day to check what has really happened.”

He is snacking on rumour but feasting on fact. And as long as he and many others do, there is still an important role for traditional, mainstream media.

The platforms, conduits and opportunity may have changed, but the need for solid, reliable, sourced and ethical journalism is still evident.

The post Snacking on rumour, feeding on facts first appeared on Media Helping Media.

A converged newsroom operates like a content factory, responsible for all intake, production and output. It gathers and processes raw material, creates different products, and then ensures they are delivered to the target audience.

In this module we look at how it is done.

The superdesk

This module is about the workflows and roles and responsibilities that make a converged newsroom run smoothly.

Below is a graphic setting out what a typical superdesk might look like.

Both intake (everything that comes into the news operation), and output (everything that is delivered from the news operation to the audience on multiple devices) need to be close together.

Ideally, representatives of both will sit around the same desk. If space is an issue, and one desk can’t be set up, then they need to be sitting close together. They need to be able to communicate and collaborate at all times in order to respond swiftly to changes in news priorities.

People give this desk different names. Some call it the news hub, some the news cog; it doesn’t matter what it’s called, what matters is what it does. For this series of training modules we are calling this desk the superdesk.

The superdesk is the newsroom’s central command-and-control. It’s where all the main news decisions are made. It serves as a responsive, dynamic focal point for everything to do with the smooth running of the news organisation.

Who sits around the superdesk?

Those sitting around the super desk need to be breathing the same air, hearing the same news alerts, and be taking part in impromptu news meetings, called to deal with the unexpected.

Choosing who sits at the superdesk is up to you. That decision will depend on your overall strategy and who the main decision makers are in your news organisation.

It will also depend on where you need to prioritise effort, the most popular platforms/devices used by your target audience, and the resources available to you.

However, there are a number of important roles that should be represented on the superdesk.

These are roles, not necessarily individuals. For example, the intake editor role will probably need to be covered 24 hours a day for a large news organisation. In that case, the intake editor position on the superdesk should be a seat, populated by different people as working shifts change.

The exceptions might be the planning editor and the cross-promotions roles. They might be positions that need to be filled during the daytime only.

You will need an intake editor role. This is the person who is responsible for everything coming into the building.

You will need an output editor role. This is the person who provide the quality control for everything going out of the building and who liaises directly with production.

You will need someone from the interactive team. They need to ensure the website is publishing all breaking and developing news updates. They will also report to the superdesk regarding all developments on social media.

You will need someone to manage resources, and someone representing planning.

There are other roles you could add, but let’s start with the main ones.

The intake editor

The intake editor acts as the eyes and ears of your news business. They are responsible for all the material that comes into your news production process. This will include the news gathering efforts of your own team of journalists.

It will also involve responding to stories that are being fed by wires services, and monitoring the stories being covered by the competition.

The intake editor has the authority to call an instant, stand-up impromptu meeting when there is breaking news, in order to help the output team adjust to new developments.

They are, essentially, looking out of the building at all the elements that will inform and feed your news operation.

They are not responsible for output. This is an important point. That role falls to the output editor.

The output editor

The output editor looks after quality control. They are also responsible for ensuring deadlines are met. They are the defender of the news brand. Nothing gets past the output editor that could damage that brand.

They ensure the material is accurate, that it’s objective, impartial and fair. Their job is to focus on production values. They need to ensure all platforms are served.

They can’t afford to be distracted by watching the competition, keeping up to date with the wires services, and responding to input issues and logistics. That’s why those tasks are the responsibility of the intake editor.

However, the two work closely together, although doing different jobs. They are in constant communication. Between them the main news decisions for the whole news operation rest.

Planning editor

We discussed the strategic role of the planning editor in the module about forward planning. The planning editor is responsible for managing the news organisation’s unique editorial proposition of in-depth, well-planned, investigative journalism, which provides your market differential.

The planning editor will attend all the main news meetings held at the superdesk. They will offer at least one piece of original journalism a day, probably more than that.

They will listen to what is happening on the day and will ensure that all the major stories are followed up. The shared planning calendar will help.

The planning editors role will not only take the pressure off the journalists working on the daily output, but it will also guarantee that there is a continuous stream of unique content produced on all platforms.

Interactive editor

Having someone from the interactive team sitting on the superdesk means that the online and mobile coverage will be able to respond faster to breaking news developments.

It also means that the superdesk will be informed about how the audience is responding to developing news, and it will provide a different perspective on newsgathering and how news should be covered.

Similarly, having someone from the social media team, will alert the superdesk to developments on the various social media platforms used by the target audience.

This will ensure that the online and other digital versions of your output are not just an after thought, but are a central part of all you do.

And that will show through in your production values, which, in turn, might encourage the audience to engage with your content more.

This will also help with cross-promotion because your on air presenters can be briefed to drive audience traffic to the online and on mobile versions for any added value content.

Resource manager

This role is sometimes called the production manager. This is the person who is responsible for all the resources required to produce the journalism. This could be the camera crews, the vehicles, and the edit suites.

The resource manager needs to respond quickly once the intake editor has alerted the superdesk of a new story development, and the editorial team on the superdesk decides that information is so important that resources have to be shifted from a lesser story.

Cross-promotions producer

Some newsrooms have a cross-promotions producer. Their job is to ensure that all output areas are aware of what others are doing and that content is exploited for the maximum benefit of the news brand and the audience. They will work across TV, radio, print, online and mobile where appropriate.

In some cases they will design teasers, in other cases they will make sure the material is produced by others. Essentially, they will ensure there are no wasted opportunities.

Next we look at the workflow for a converged newsroom.

The converged newsroom workflow

The roles and responsibilities outlined above are just a guide. You will need to design your own version of a superdesk so that it makes business sense for your media organisation.

But do try to keep intake and output as separate roles. And do ensure that you have a planning function. Once you have reorganised, the workflow is fairly simple.

As has already been stated, the superdesk is your newsroom’s central command-and-control. All the main news decisions are made here. It is responsible for intake, planning and output.

As you will see from the graphic below, once those decision are made the instructions are sent to production – ideally via a representative attending the superdesk meetings.

The production teams then ensure that the appropriate platform-specific value is added to the story based on audience needs, device/platform capabilities, and strategic business logic.

That means that if they are working on the web or mobile versions they will add interactive timelines, infographics, photo galleries, video, and other digital assets, where appropriate.

If they are working on the TV version they will create TV packages that can cross-promote the digital assets being offered on the other platforms.

Production will no longer be carried out in isolation but as a part of a coherent and coordinated presentation on multiple devices.

The post Convergence, workflows, roles and responsibilities first appeared on Media Helping Media.

In a previous module we looked at the topic of proactive journalism, where journalists are encouraged to observe, learn, reflect, analyse, and add context when producing news stories. In this module we look at story development.

This module is about thinking of the related stories, angles, or missing pieces of the story that can be produced in order to help explain the main story and enhance the audience understanding of the issue being covered.

For this exercise we consider a recurring story in Vietnam – flooding – and we look at the various angles that could be followed up. First we have the main story.

1: The story

This is fairly straightforward. We just need to ask the basic journalistic questions of what, why, when, how, where and who. So, in creating the main story we need to ask:

• What has happened?
• Why did it happen?
• When did it happen?
• How did it happen?
• Where did it happen?
• Who does it affect?

Asking these question should give us the main story and headline.

But responsible reporting that aims to inform the public debate with robust investigative journalism needs to go further. Let’s look at what we have to work on from the main story.

2: The facts

Now we can start to expand the story using the story development model. We need to start to piece together the facts, or the evidence. And these so-called ‘facts’ need to be examined, tested and proven to be accurate by confirming with at least two independent sources.

• What do we know?
• Is our information accurate?
• What is the source?
• Why are they sharing?
• What facts could be missing?
• What don’t we know?
• Who should we talk to?
• Why are they important?
• What could be hidden?
• Who is doing the hiding?

By this stage we will have built up a story plan which, when we discuss with our news team, will produce several ideas for follow up angles (related stories).

What we are able to piece together at this point are the following:

• Flooding fact file – a list of bullet points.
• Flooding maps – where the flooding happened.
• Flooding profiles – background information on the area most affected.

Having gathered some facts we now need to look at the data used to support the evidence.

3: The data

• What is the source of the data?
• Is it reliable?
• Can you verify?
• Check with officials, NGOs, campaigners, academics.
• Seek out regional comparisons regarding flooding in other provinces, regions, neighbouring countries.
• Find out what is the history of flooding in the area?
• Check whether any projections were made in the past that could have reduced the impact?

At this stage something interesting is starting to happen. As we dig deeper, new story angles are emerging.

Let’s consider just a few that might be inspired by point three.

• The flooding: campaigners warn that it could happen again.
• The flooding: comparisons between regions – how others are coping.
• The flooding: officials say relief and aid will arrive in time.

Now we need to get first-hand experiences to illustrate the story.

Of course we will have some personal experiences in the main story, but once we establish what has happened, and understand the scale compared to previous floods, we can now ask more intelligent questions when talking to the victims.

4: Who is affected?

• What is their story?
• Before the incident, during the incident, after the incident.
• Who do they care for and who still needs help?
• Who can’t get help?
• What help is offered?

At this point we will have a series of personal accounts of the flooding.

• The flooding: the victims tell their stories.
• The flooding: the annual disaster that has become a way of life.
• The flooding: the communities still stranded and in need of help.

Having spoken to people affected by the flooding we can now look at who is responsible, and what was the cause.

5: Responsibility

• Who or what was responsible?
• What went wrong?
• Why did it go wrong?
• Were all possible preventative measures taken?
• What are the authorities doing?
• Will it happen again?
• If not, why not?
• If it will, what can be done?

This should produce some fairly straightforward angles for story follow up, including:

• The flooding: Who was to blame? Officials, NGOs and campaigners point the finger.
• The flooding: Authorities say preventative measures planned.
• The flooding: Did local communities ignore warnings?

Having attempted to establish responsibility, we can also look at promises made in the past.

6: The promises

• In the present and in the past.
• Preventative measures promised.
• Local authority plans.
• Aid and relief offered.
• Infrastructure changes suggested after the last floods.
• Tackling the causes, deforestation, dams etc.
• Compensation offered to those affected last time.
• What fact-finding was carried out and what was done with the information.

Suggested follow up angles from the above include:

• The flooding: learning from the lessons of the past.
• The flooding: why preventative measures failed.
• The flooding: did the aid get through to those in need?

This is the stage where our archive becomes valuable.

We will have material from previous coverage of the flooding. We need to include this in order to provide context. Please refer to the other training module in this series about “Proactive journalism”.

All the above helps us assess the scale of the problem and try to establish an accurate view of the impact.

7: The impact

• Now and in the future.
• On crops and the general economy.
• The environment and whether it can recover.
• Health issues related to contaminated water, lack of medicine etc.
• Infrastructure, roads, railways, communications.
• Communities cut off.
• Families separated, unable to contact one another.
• Individuals missing, injured, bereaved.

Some story ideas resulting from the above considerations could include:

• The flooding: the economic impact on the environment.
• The flooding: the cost of repairing the infrastructure.
• The flooding: the impact on remote rural communities.

As the picture builds we are in a better position to view the consequences.

8: The consequences

• A complete solution, part solution, or no solution.
• Aid gets though, part aid gets through, or no aid gets through.
• Changes in lifestyle for some and what happens to those who can’t change.
• The economic future for all.

Such considerations could mean related stories being produced about:

• The flooding: prevention plans for future years.
• The flooding: the true cost of getting aid to those in need.
• The flooding: lifestyle changes required to cope with annual disaster.

As we continue to develop angles, dig deep and explore the topic we will start to develop some ideas of who might be accountable.

9: Accountability

• Who knew?
• What action was taken?
• Was it too early or late?
• Who is to blame?
• What local authority action was taken?
• Were there warnings given?
• Did the warnings reach those in danger?
• Were the warnings heeded?
• If not, why not?
• Is there any suspicion of any corruption?

The considerations above could lead to more related stories such as:

• The flooding: was enough done to prepare communities?
• The flooding: were warnings ignored and, if so, why?
• The flooding: the hidden factors that increased the likelihood of a disaster.

The question of corruption will come up as we start to assess accountability. We then need to look to the future.

10: The future

• What is the plan?
• What are the options?
• Who will it involve?
• What are the changes?
• Will they be phased?
• Is any adjustment needed?
• Is any training needed?
• What are the contingency plans?
• Is any education needed?
• What are the community plans?

This list provides us with several related story ideas, including:

• The flooding: future plans to prevent another disaster.
• The flooding: campaign to educate those living under the risk of floods.
• The flooding: community relocation plans to rehouse those at most risk.

Already we will probably have thought up 10 different angles on the flooding story with at least three related stories for each angle.

At this stage we should have at least 30 original story ideas that attempt to explain the complexity of the issue we are covering on behalf of our audience.

This is story development. This is in-depth, robust, responsible journalism aimed at fully informing the public debate. But all this material needs managing.

This task might be taken on by the planning editor. In an earlier module we discussed the role of the planning editor and his/her team. They will need to ensure the story is followed up.

11: The follow up

• Set a follow up date.
• Three or six months.
• List questions to ask.
• Note promises/targets.
• Check timetables.
• Keep archive.
• Revisit victims.
• Check with authorities.
• Interview experts.
• Arrange studio debates.

Of course the planning role will also produce new story opportunities, such as:

• The flooding: six months / a year on – what has changed?
• The flooding: from our archive – a special report on communities under water.
• The flooding: studio debate – the experts meet the public face-to-face.

And while all this is going on there will be a need to engage the audience in debate via the social media platforms used by victims, aid agencies, authorities, concerned relatives, and general public.

12: Engaging the audience

• Discuss on Facebook.
• Use other social media.
• Ask for experiences.
• Interview people.
• Stimulate debate.
• Ask questions.
• Offer answers.
• Publish fact files.
• Publish maps.
• Offer help and support.

And this part will also produce related stories, including:

• The flooding: How social media responded.
• The flooding: Your pictures of the disaster.
• The flooding: Interactive maps and timelines for you to share.

An example to apply to all big stories

The methods outlined above can’t be applied to every story; newsrooms don’t have the resources for that. However, such treatment should be considered for big, recurring stories or events where there is significant local impact, and where there is likely to be a growing archive of previously-prepared material.

To help us decide what stories deserve such detailed story development we can use two tools that are shared on this site. One is the “content value matrix”, and the other is the “story weighting system”.

Both are designed to help media managers and journalists focus resources on the stories that are of most value to the target audience.

The post Story development, ensuring all angles are covered first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Social media is an increasingly disruptive force on the media landscape. It challenges traditional, mainstream media to reconsider how they operate.

Social media often releases information about which mainstream media might not have been aware, and information that mainstream media might have tried to ignore.

It can offer a wider, more diverse perspective on life than that covered by traditional media.

It challenges mainstream media’s editorial standards, and makes editors think again about their values and ethics.

It offers mainstream media opportunities to tap into conversations, learn about social change, and connect with those who were previously out of reach.

It provides a direct link from a media organisation to a connected, empowered, and active audience, and, in doing so, totally changes that relationship.

And yet, surprisingly, some media organisations fail to take social media seriously, or, perhaps worse, totally misunderstand what it’s about and, therefore, respond inadequately.

An empowered audience

In an earlier module we looked at the importance of “Identifying the target audience and its information needs”, then we considered “Adapting to changing audience behaviour and monitoring the market”.

Those modules looked at who makes up the target audience, the issues that concern them most, the devices they use to consume and share news, and how they interact with news.

We then looked at how a media organisation should adapt to meet the challenges and opportunities presented by changing audience behaviour in our module entitled “Newsroom evolution from digital denial to digital first”.

Now we look at what a social media strategy could mean for a media organisation.

But first, let’s look at how we got to this stage in media’s development.

Media evolution

The media is in a constant state of change, or at least it should be.

Technological advances result in changing audience behaviour resulting in altered attitudes to how news is consumed and shared, which means that a media organisation can’t afford to stand still.

Innovation is needed, but only if it makes business sense.

There have been many stages of media evolution over the years, below we look at three. The “broadcast AT or publish AT” model, the “engage with on our terms” model, and the “participate in” model.

Broadcast AT and publish AT model

This is the model where the broadcasters and publishers thought they knew best.

They would broadcast and published programmes and information to a passive audience who consumed what they were given.

There was no interactivity, and the output reflected the choices made by the journalists, not the audience.

This resulted in a limited perspective of society, usually representing that of the owners of the media organisation, the state, or the editors and journalists who were producing the content.

That model is dead.

Engage with on our terms model

In this model, mainstream media offered limited interactivity. It could be in the form of studio debates, vox pops conducted in the street, or, in the case of print, letters to the editor.

Some media organisations had websites, and would run polls and invite comments, but these were usually heavily pre-moderated and monitored, and were about issues that the broadcasters and publishers wanted to discuss.

Audience participation was carefully controlled, with the audience selected based on a journalists assessment of the public’s value to the story.

That model is in its death throes. Now we are in the ‘participate in’ model.

Participate in model

The ‘participate in’ model is where audience engagement is part of the editorial proposition.

It’s where stories are built around the issues the audience is discussing in the street, in their homes and on social media.

Please refer to our modules entitled “Identifying the target audience and its information needs” and “Establishing a market differential with original, in-depth, issue-led journalism”.

It’s about having an active unit in the newsroom who use social media to monitor what the audience is saying, share stories from the newsroom, stimulate a debate, and then watch that debate develop while feeding those developments back into the news production process.

This strategy will not only bring a media organisation closer to its audience, but it is also likely to increase engagement around the content being produced, while, at the same time, winning audience trust.

It will mean that output will be enriched to reflect audience concerns.

What is required

A modern media organisation needs to have a social media editor, or at least a member of staff whose job it is to monitor social media. Ideally, they will be sitting at the central superdesk in a converged newsroom. Please refer to our training module entitled “Convergence, roles and responsibilities and workflows”.

The social media editor or producer has an important role to play. They will:

• attend all the main news meetings.
• be called on to contribute ideas based on what the target audience is discussing on social media.
• use desktop tools, such as Hootsuite or Tweetdeck to monitor audience groups and key words in order to track story developments.
• be expected to be offering news alerts when news breaks on social media.
• stimulate the conversation of the day based on the main news stories being produced by the converged newsroom.
• monitor that conversation and feed updates back into the news production process.
• ensure consistent cross-promotion between news and programmes via social media.
• monitor any UGC (user-generated content) in terms of images, video, sound and graphics submitted by the audience.
• suggest story treatment ideas based on the results of their social media monitoring.

Smart media managers will realise that for the news to truly reflect the concerns of the target audience they will need to exploit the opportunities and benefits of social media, and not see it as an unwelcome distraction.

And if you are thinking in terms of a wider reach via social media on new, continually-developing platforms/devices, you will be helping to ensure that your media organisation is always responsive to new revenue-generating opportunities.

The post Social media in news production and news dissemination first appeared on Media Helping Media.