Something Is Not Right With Me

I've had it.

I’m angry.

I am thoroughly pissed off.

Q: What could possibly have me so riled up? A: The subjects of David Carr’s article from Sunday, “Journalists, Provocateurs, Maybe Both” and Brian Stelter’s “When Race is the Issue, Misleading Coverage Sets Off an Uproar.”

I try as best as I can to avoid cable news, partisan media and bloggers who push an agenda. It’s not my cup of tea and, generally, I’m not missing out on any actual news by refusing to engage with these outlets. However, the agendas, inaccuracies, hate and stupidity peddled by these people and organizations have crept so far into my daily news digest that they can no longer be ignored, and that is infuriating.

Jon Stewart did a nice takedown last night on the knee-jerk reactions of politicians and reporters in regards to the Shirley Sherrod story. He summarized Robert Gibbs’ statement as: “This administration is so sorry that you people suck so bad.”

Here is what makes me angry: The job of reporters is to provide facts. It is NOT the job of reporters to publicize whatever videos or opinions come their way. To air an edited video is wrong. To air an edited video from a person who openly pushes an agenda is inexcusable.

In Carr’s piece, he writes in regards to “tradition-bound journalists,” “Why, after all, would someone spend their professional life enmeshed in the civic conversation unless they had a stake in it somewhere? But what is emerging is more of a permanent crusade, where information is not only power, but a means to a specific end.”

Everyone has a stake in the civic conversation. Civic issues include everything from educating children to taxation to caring for the ill to trimming the trees. Civic issues keep this great country going, and a reporter who covers politics or government is chronicling events because it is his job.

As for the people who have the time and attention to edit videos and destroy lives, careers and organizations as a “means to a specific end,” here is a list of 10 things they could do that would actually help their country and community, which they claim to have such concern and regard for:

1. Donate blood
2. Tutor a child
3. Serve the homeless at a soup kitchen
4. Pick up trash on the sidewalk, beach or along the highway
5. Donate school supplies and Christmas gifts to a children’s charity
6. Coach Little League (or lead the Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts)
7. Join a civic group
8. Go outside and run 5 miles
9. Plant a garden
10. Read a book

Any one of those things would help a heck of a lot more than getting the Georgia State Director of Rural Development fired. How on earth does that help the American people?

Journalists have a duty to move the conversation away from this crap. I said it – this is all a bunch of crap that keeps us from discussing anything of substance. OK, an example of how we can move away from the swamp of crap that fills cable news and the Internet:

Before she was confirmed as a Supreme Court justice, Sonia Sotomayor would often say in her speeches:

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”

This makes her a racist, right? She must hate white people. That quickly became the narrative of the story until she clarified her remarks and promised to take the phrase out of her speeches. (I know the greater issue was whether a judge’s personal experiences do or should influence her interpretation of the law.)

An incredible opportunity was missed here by reporters, who could have used the occasion to actually look at the experiences young Latinas have in this country. I had recently ended a 16 month-tutoring relationship with a young Latina when Sotomayor was nominated. My student’s home life was unstable, chaotic and violent. Her family had no expectations for her. Her first day of school was interrupted by a gun scare. Her living room was a revolving door of drug dealers and gang members. Yet, she would beg her mother to drive her to the downtown library (the one without the fistfights and yelling). She spent hours sketching. Her face lit up the first time I brought her brochures on art school and community college.

You cannot tell me that those experiences won’t give her a completely different world view than you or me. Let’s talk about that, as journalists. Let’s tell those stories.

In the future, when reporters find themselves getting all hot and bothered over a crap-filled issue that will unnecessarily rile up viewers, may I suggest they take a cue from survival guides: Sit down. Have a smoke. Take a deep breath.

Oh California Oh

This weekend I watched the Joan Rivers documentary, “A Piece of Work.” In the film, Rivers’ agent talks about one of the first times he met with Richard Pryor. The agent sat down with the comedian and laid out a master plan for his career, explaining projects that were six and 12 months down the road. Pryor looked at the agent and said, “That’s all great but what the f--- are we gonna do Monday?”

That’s how I feel. It’s great to have big visions and ideas, to think about how I’ll achieve something and plan it all to death. But, you still have to get up in the morning and make it happen.

With that in mind, I have a whirlwind trip to Los Angeles on deck for Aug. 10^th to the 13^th. I had been thinking for some time that it would be useful to go out to L.A. as part of my independent study then, all of the sudden, I looked at the calendar and realized that the quarter is quickly coming to an end. So, off to Los Angeles I go.

The purpose of the trip is to talk to journalists, professors and political types about political and governmental reporting in the city. What gaps do they see in coverage? What types of stories are poorly or inconsistently reported? My adviser pointed out to me that if I’m going after an audience that already reads the Los Angeles Times, then I have to find the stories The Times doesn’t have. I have 10 interviews lined up so far, with another three in the works. I’m sure it will be exhausting.

The trip is added motivation to get this project done. The various elements I have written up for the business plan – a positioning statement, a market and competitive analysis, the financials – are being compiled into one final document. My sketches for the website are getting photoshopped and coded. The Twitter and Facebook pages will, I expect, be public in another week or two.

In between my interviews, I want to photograph iconic images of Los Angeles that can be used on the Project Goldfish website. “Iconic” images being a little bit of what tourists would expect to see – the Hollywood sign, City Hall, the LAX sign – and a lot of what Angelenos would expect to see. I want to capture what makes Los Angeles home to more than 3 million people. [Update: As I was writing this, Kevin Roderick posted a link to news photographer Bryan Frank’s photographs of the city: http://coolshots.blogspot.com/.]

I also added The City at Stake to my reading list. Raphael Sonenshein’s book on Los Angeles’ charter reform is one that should probably be in my library of L.A. books regardless, but I expect it will be particularly helpful as I navigate the political-governmental divide of stories.

Spending a few days in California will make this project feel “real,” as will finding investors. Last week I contacted the L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce, which pointed me toward the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. The group’s very helpful website includes a section on financing and within that, there is an even better list of Southern California venture capitalist firms. I spent time Friday researching every firm on the list. I found four that specialize in financing media and online start-ups.

I briefly thought about just knocking on the firms’ doors and asking for a suitcase full of cash. I have a winning personality and that’s all it takes, right? Hmm … well, maybe it takes an actual proposal. With that in mind, I’ve reached out to venture capitalists I know here in Chicago to ask them how I approach investors and what they will expect to see from me in a start-up proposal.

The greatest challenge in the next two weeks is finding an answer to the question everyone asks me: How are you going to make money? Sigh. I’m meeting with another professor on Wednesday for help on estimating impressions and contracting with an ad network. Another small step toward the greater vision.

Notable Quotable

"I just don't believe the economics of a paywall are going to work, unless your content is unique, highly differentiated, difficult to duplicate. As good as I believe our content is, if there are reasonable substitutes available for free it's tough to get people to pay."

-- Randy Michaels, CEO of Tribune Co. (WSJ, 7/26/10)

Design Star

In Googled, Ken Auletta goes into great detail about Google’s hiring process. After describing the lengthy and tedious interview process, Auletta writes that the new hires became “employee number 26” or “employee number 84.” I want my employee number 2 to be the tech guy.

I find the task of creating the Project Goldfish website to be very daunting. It isn’t so much the how of making the site, because I seem to have that down, but it’s the how do I make this good? “Good” meaning both in aesthetics and function. I do not want the site to look like a traditional newspaper website, nor do I want it to look like a blog. Aesthetically, I think the site should be fresh, clean, modern and authoritative. I was going to add “youthful” to that listing, in place of modern, but it seems in conflict with having an authoritative voice.

The functionality of the site is something I struggle with because I keep asking myself this question: What is the best way to tell a story? For the time being, Project Goldfish will be dominated by words, not pictures or videos. So, what can I do with those words? First, I think reports, letters and ordinances that are referenced in stories should also be linked to those stories. The Los Angeles Times does this to an extent but I think it should be the Project Goldfish standard. Why not give the audience the same materials we have as reporters? If my reporters and I do our jobs, our stories will give readers context, history and perspective that go beyond the words in a committee report. This would also allow Project Goldfish to become a resource for readers who want to pull files in a pinch.

I also want to revolutionize how readers comment on stories and interact with reporters. I have written before about my disdain for comments that appear at the bottom of news stories. With that in mind, how can I utilize web design to create an intelligent, engaged community of readers? One thing I want employee number 2 to do is program software that would apply something like Microsoft Word’s tracked changes to a story. For example, let’s say you are reading this story about the Department of Water and Power. As you’re reading, you may have questions. With the system I want to design, you could highlight a portion of the article and write in your question, instead of leaving an angry or confused comment at the bottom of the story.

The comment would be sent to the reporter as an email. At a given time every day, the top 10 questions on a story would appear in a sidebar next to the story, along with answers from the reporter. This would provide greater depth to the story and show readers that their questions or concerns are heard and respected by the reporter.

I also plan for Project Goldfish to have a community page that is entirely separate from the news pages. Over at “The Watercooler,” I envision having video sessions with reporters talking about their latest stories. I would also like to have video interviews with newsmakers. I could see every Thursday evening being a web version of Andy Cohen’s “Watch What Happens Live!” Council members, union reps or members of neighborhood councils could come on to talk about the stories of the week, what they’re working on, and give their perspectives on what is happening at City Hall. Also, as you can see from the mockup below, there is a section called “Letter to the Editor.” Every day, my staff and I would pick one letter that is thoughtful and intelligent enough to be highlighted. And yes, the writer is identified through Facebook Connect. A newspaper wouldn’t publish a letter without verifying the writer’s identity; why would I?

I have plenty of ideas on what to create. Building those ideas, now that’s why I need employee number 2.

Money, Money, Money

I am at the point in my independent study where I am calculating what it would cost to start up and run Project Goldfish. I want to see if this is something that is feasible, economically. I have spent about two, three weeks now putting together a budget for the site, estimating rent, insurance and newspaper subscriptions. The cost to start Project Goldfish is roughly the same as a new Honda Accord. If I cut down on attorney’s fees, we’re basically looking at a Ford Focus.

As far as the cost to operate Project Goldfish, the greatest expense is my own salary. For the purposes of the budget, I’m choosing to pay myself more than I ever made as a reporter but, considering that I used to work for compliments and ulcers, that is not saying very much.

Still, I am combing through these numbers trying to find anything that can be cut. I am used to working for a lean operation. In my last job, all supply orders for the bureau had to be pre-approved. I understand. For all they knew, I was stockpiling reporters’ notebooks and selling them out of the trunk of my car for 25 cents a pop. Printer and fax cartridges? That’s big money. Then, there was the fateful day I accidently dumped an entire cup of coffee on my computer keyboard. For me, this was just another day, as I routinely spill coffee on myself, skirts, coats, desks, tote bags and the floor. The coffee short-circuited the keyboard. I figured this was a pretty essential piece of equipment for a breaking news organization, but the response from the home office was, can’t you just make due? Oh, sure. How about I make due by picking up the $14 tab for a new keyboard?

The point, though, is that I know how little it takes to produce good copy and get it out to an audience. I’ve already taken on the cost of domain registration and hosting services. I am designing the site myself, and hitting up friends and family for help when needed. With that in mind, I start playing the game of "Do I really need this?":

• Office furniture: A new desk and chair are needed if I hire a reporter and that person works out of the office. Do I expect my reporter to be sitting in my office or out in the field, conducting interviews and attending meetings? I’d be perfectly happy if my reporter made her office on the bar of The Redwood or tucked away in an anonymous Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf.

• An office for that furniture: There’s no reason why a home office wouldn’t work for Project Goldfish. I’m budgeting for the second bedroom of a two-bedroom apartment or bungalow. Ohh, how about a beach bungalow? As for a mailing address, there is the neighborhood UPS store where I can get a mailbox with a street address.

• Insurance: Honestly, this is where I could use some professional guidance because I have questions like this:

-- What is the extent of insurance coverage I need for a home office?

-- How much general liability insurance do I need if I have one or two employees?

-- Do I need to change my auto insurance if I use Lola for work purposes?

-- Do I need to provide some sort of auto insurance if I have an employee use her own car for work purposes? (Also, I think I’m required to reimburse for gas. Yes?)

The next step is calculating how I make money at this thing. I assume, at the moment, that the site will partially be ad-supported. What I am struggling with is whether to make part of the website subscription-based. I have been playing with the idea of creating a “pro subscription.” For example, maybe articles are free but copies of reports and ordinances, video footage and interactive elements are behind a paywall. As I’ve previously mentioned, I do think readers should have some skin in the game. However, I received an email from a survey participant who identified a problem with a paywall for such materials:

"I would not be willing to pay for exclusive online topics because you then have a poorer populace who remain uneducated on the behind-the-scenes activities in the headlines."

I completely agree. The point of Project Goldfish is to inform the public. Why would I create something that falls short of that mission?

Evolution

If you haven't done so already, check out AliceMWalton.com.

It's just like the blog, but better.

Let's Be Social

Work on Project Goldfish is moving forward. This week I spent a considerable amount of time setting up social media accounts for the website. A Twitter account, Facebook page and YouTube channel now exist for Project Goldfish. Well, exist for the project under the project’s real name (so sneaky!).

One idea I had when thinking about the function of the Twitter account was to take a cue from The Chicago Tribune and the Col. Tribune avatar. Two years ago, a four-person team at The Tribune came up with the idea of creating this character to represent the newspaper’s social media presence. The name, Col. Tribune, was a nod to Col. Robert McCormick, the newspaper’s legendary owner who died in 1955. (He is also the namesake and financier of my scholarship so, thank you Col. McCormick.)

Bill Adee, editor of digital media at The Trib, describes this character in Nieman Reports:

“Meet 'The Colonel.' He’s a pretty dapper guy. In his early 50’s, he has worked for the Chicago Tribune and lived in the city his whole life—well, except for that stint in the Army Reserves. That’s how he earned his nickname. He started out as a copy boy in the newsroom, worked his way up, and now he’s Web ambassador for chicagotribune.com.”

Adee goes on to describe the Colonel’s favorite place to get a steak, his morning reading habits and even where he lives. Today, Col. Tribune has more than 857,000 followers on Twitter.

With that in mind, I am in the process of creating a character who will tweet for the Project Goldfish site. She is a reporter and a workaholic. She is tech-savvy but clings to old school journalistic values. Beyond that … it’s difficult for me to get creative and make up this person. At first I thought she would be a plain Jane, with a fat cat at home and half a turkey sandwich in her purse. On the weekends she and her boyfriend, an L.A. city firefighter, would go hiking through the canyons. I lived with that version for a while but ultimately decided that was too boring.

This character’s life is still in the process of being created, but her face and likeness are becoming a reality. An artist friend has put together sketches of what she will look like. The sketches are coming out great and it is exciting seeing my ideas become something tangible. Of course, characters and pictures are just one small part of social media. The heavy lifting is building an audience and leveraging that audience to improve content. This was the subject of a class I took last quarter, Building Networked Audiences.

Building Networked Audiences was the class that took an academic eye to social media. For example, Facebook is an undirected graph whereas Twitter is directed. Fascinating, right? We studied search engine optimization, link strategy and ways to determine the "influence" of Twitter and Digg.

Content is important, too. I think it is about being timely and relevant. I follow a certain number of news organizations on Twitter and I’m sure I will add a lot more when I return to reporting in another two or three months. However, the accounts that tweet "news" hours after the event are going to be eliminated. If I’ve already read a story on the Los Angeles Times’ website, what is the point in tweeting about it hours later? It’s not as if it’s breaking news at that point. NBC4 gave me a perfect example of this today. As I'm writing this, it’s about 3 p.m. The ESPY Awards took place last night. This is not timely:

So what is to become of the Project Goldfish avatar? What should she be like, and how will that help set the tone and culture of Project Goldfish?

Pants. Mustard.

Is Project Goldfish pants? Or mustard?

I'm sorry, what was that you said? Those two sentences don't make any sense? OK, let me start at the beginning. One of the many things I loved about Los Angeles was Indie 103.1 FM. The independent radio station (now R.I.P.) was an oasis in the sea of obnoxious DJs and bad music. My morning drive down Sunset Boulevard was usually accompanied by Joe Escalante, Vandals bassist turned attorney. He hosted The Last of the Famous International Morning Show, where director David Lynch was the weatherman and actor Timothy Olyphant did sports. It was all very charming.

That charm continued into the afternoon with Jonesy’s Jukebox. Steve Jones from the Sex Pistols hosted a funky, meandering and highly-entertaining program where he’d mumble about whatever, play music, interview guests and sometimes go ahead and answer his cell phone. Jonesy liked to play new singles for his guests in the studio, and then he would ask them if the song was pants or mustard.

Mustard meant good.

Pants meant bad.

As I’m working on this project, I constantly ask myself if this will be any good. What does "good" mean? What is the definition of success?

Yesterday, I sorted through survey results. The findings were interesting, but not groundbreaking. One of the questions on the survey asked:

Would you be willing to pay for articles on Los Angeles politics if they had information or exclusive interviews you could not find in another publication?

The result: 60 percent of respondents said NO.

Hmm. Philosophically, I think consumers should pay for news. It is not that good journalism is costly, but the idea that it's free has never sat well with me. After reading through survey results, however, it looks like counting subscriptions would not be a good benchmark of success. Nowadays, “free” is (always was?) a business model. Chris Anderson explores the concept in Free, a book that I highly recommend. Anderson explains the psychology of free in this way:

“Why do people think ‘free’ means diminished quality in one instance, and not in another? It turns out that our feelings about ‘free’ are relative, not absolute. If something used to cost money and now doesn’t, we tend to correlate that with a decline in quality. But if something never cost money, we don’t feel the same way. A free bagel is probably stale, but free ketchup in a restaurant is fine. Nobody thinks that Google is an inferior search engine because it doesn’t charge.”

I am one who has long considered price and quality to be intertwined. A news product with a subscription was probably mustard; free news was pants.

But let’s assume that Project Goldfish is quality journalism and it is free. From there I think there are two measures of success: 1) How many unique visitors stop by the website every month? 2) Do Project Goldfish stories motivate anyone to take action?

Unique visitors are the number of people who visit a site during a given period of time. This is in contrast to visits. The same user may return to your site every day – one unique visitor, many visits. Through the survey, participants told me they regularly visit LAist and CityWatchLA. I know most people in that sphere also visit Kevin Roderick's LAObserved, and Ron Kaye is working to build traffic on his website, which is typically commentary about ongoing political issues. To get a sense of their traffic, I plugged the sites into Compete. (Disclaimer: I am sure each site would say/does say these are low estimates. Compete estimates traffic but internal metrics almost always show greater numbers of visitors. Also, I used Compete here instead of Quantcast because some of the traffic was too low for Quantcast to even estimate.)

There’s obviously a range of traffic.

Traffic is one measure of influence. I think what happens after a story is published is also a good measure. If Project Goldfish has the traffic of CityWatchLA but produces stories that help capture a serial killer, expose dangers at hospitals or become Monday morning must-reads, I would absolutely consider the site to be a success. Mustard.

iPad: Journalism’s White Knight?

For months, I have read predictions on the wonder that is the iPad and what it will mean for journalism. Some media critics hypothesized that newspaper apps would draw readers back to traditional media outlets. The Online Journalism Review ran a story in January questioning if the iPad would “save” journalism. Robert Niles explored the issue but ultimately concluded that better content, regardless of platform or payment, would keep the industry going. A surveyreleased in May found 50 percent of iPad users read a newspaper on the device, which is about three times more than consumers of other e-readers.

This week I had the good fortune to become an iPad owner and explore my own thoughts on the device. As a preface to this post, I am not a tech person, nor am I an Apple user, aside from an iPod. I do not get excited about gadgets or devices. I couldn’t figure out how to set up TiVo in my last apartment. The ball on my Blackberry has been broken for months, and I don’t particularly care. I have plenty of ways to check email and the Web; why would I need one more device?

It was a gift, intended so I could witness the journalism revolution firsthand. After six days, my feeling toward the iPad is … I love it. I love it so much and I can’t figure out why. She’s pretty, and she’ll be even prettier when I get her a fancy carrying case. I’ve named her (the way you’d name a car or a gnome). The apps I've downloaded so far are:

NPR

iBooks

The New York Times

The Wall Street Journal

Netflix

Facebook

Lastfm

Epicurious

Twitterific

SeaGlass (a game)

Aside from the addictive nature of SeaGlass, there isn’t anything I do on the iPad that I don’t already do on my laptop. But, there’s something about being able to hold it in my hands. It feels like a more personal interaction. Also, I know it will be great for traveling. I plan to download my first book to it for an upcoming road trip.

As for journalism and the iPad, my thought right now is that it is not going to “save” journalism. The New York Times app is useful in pairing down the mass of material on the Web, but the stories are the same and the layout and accompanying photos and graphics are fundamentally the same. The Wall Street Journal app is very frustrating to use. By the time the material has finished downloading I’ve moved on to 10 other things. Again, the content is the same as what shows up at my door every morning.

As I sat down to write this post, a study popped up on Romenesko: “Study: iPad Threatens Dedicated e-Reader Market.” A survey by Resolve Market Research, and written up on Mashable, found users view the iPad as a toy, a luxury item, and something that is more likely to put e-readers and gaming devices out of business before it causes the extinction of the laptop. Interesting. As far as e-readers, I think it depends on what you want out of the experience. My Mom thinks the iPad is pretty cool but as far as reading a book, I’m sure she’d stick with her Kindle. The screen is easier on the eyes and the device stays true to the experience of reading. It’s simple; it doesn’t need bells or whistles. As for a gaming device, the iPad is significantly more expensive than a Nintendo DS and other handheld devices, and the Resolve study found people prefer to play on traditional gaming systems. I think another drawback to the iPad, in a gaming context, is that two people can’t enjoy the device at the same time.

And that's OK with me. Zoila and I are doing just fine racking up points on SeaGlass and browsing through cupcake recipes on Epicurious.

Notable Quotable

"Communication tools don't get socially interesting until they get technologically boring. The invention of a tool doesn't create change; it has to have been around long enough that most of society is using it. It's when a technology becomes normal, then ubiquitous, and finally so pervasive as to be invisible, that the really profound changes happen, and for young people today, our new social tools have passed normal and are heading to ubiquitous, and invisible is coming,"

-- Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody

Shirky wrote this in regards to the Web, broadcast television, radio and the telephone. Is the iPad going to join that list someday?

Building a Mystery

The process of turning what is now just a vision in my mind into a real product that attracts customers and generates revenue is taxing, to say the least. Project Goldfish has been swimming around in my mind for some time. I’ve lived with it, fallen asleep with it and discussed it with my family ad nauseum. This is what I wrote to Medill in May, 2009 when I was asked about my professional goals:

“Through my studies at Medill, I want to learn how to create and manage an online publication that uses the written word, pictures, audio and video from professional journalists – not eyewitnesses or “citizen journalists” – to tell the news of a very specific place or area of interest … Local politics is really the heart of any city because it encompasses crime, education, traffic, development and quality of life issues such as collecting trash and trimming the trees. I think it is key to create a product that becomes integral to the lives of readers. It must be a publication that provides quality information that is not already available through traditional newspapers and broadcast outlines.”

This summer is go-time. My energy is now spent on being as specific and realistic as possible. My “grandiose” plan for an office, a dozen reporters and high-end camera equipment created its own barrier to entry. A home office and two reporters? Much more manageable and much more realistic to start. I’m halfway through putting together the financial projections on what it would cost to start and maintain such a business. I have spent hours on the Web, researching local and state permits and taxes.

Domain name? Registered.

An attorney? The search is on.

My adviser for this independent study has provided a lot of useful and supportive advice. In the area of content, there are two things he has said that I find particularly helpful in making this project feasible, making it something others can envision along with me.

1. Distinguish between political reporting and governmental reporting.

I find the political coverage in Los Angeles to be highly entertaining. This business about Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and whether he failed to report tens of thousands of dollars worth of tickets (Lakers, Dodgers, Academy Awards, concerts) as gifts? Yes, it’s a legitimate news story – both the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office and state Fair Political Practices Commission are investigating. But it’s also …. Just watch this video from FOX 11 and reporter John Schwada. The part where the reporters run up the stairs after the mayor? Unnecessary, silly and entertaining:

While every news outlet in Los Angeles covered the Villaraigosa story, these governmental stories happened:

· The head of the city Planning Department resigned

· The City Council changed water restrictions for residents

· DWP’s general manager declined to testify to allegations the utility tried to extort the city into approving a rate increase

· City council members approved a boycott of Arizona contractors, then approved an exemption for a company that operates red-light cameras in Los Angeles

Obviously some news outlets covered those stories (that’s how I know about the resignation, snub and votes) but the amount of ink spilled on Villaraigosa’s shenanigans compared to the actual business of the city? Unbalanced. Governmental reporting is a space Project Goldfish could dominate.

2. My adviser recommended I find news pieces that look like what Project Goldfish aspires to produce. This Los Angeles Times story – “L.A.’s Phantom Parking is a Jam for Incoming Bakery” – is a good starting point for what I would want my site to do.

Basically the piece looks at the challenge facing Magnolia Bakery, which is set to open on Third Street. The owner, a New Yorker, is used to foot-traffic coming to his store, but this is Los Angeles and things are done differently. (As an aside, can I just point out that this is about the worst location for Magnolia? I know they want to be somewhere hip and close to other restaurants and boutiques, but anyone who lives in L.A. knows how overcrowded and congested this entire area is. It’s a huge pain. Didn’t Abrams consult anyone before picking this location? Also, what is the Big Orange? Did SoCal get a new nickname?) The point of the story is that the city of Los Angeles requires restaurant owners to have a certain number of parking spots available to customers, and this is basically impossible at this location because it is already overpopulated with businesses and homes.

It’s a nice piece however, if it were a Project Goldfish story, the narrative would have taken a turn to this: If the mayor and Los Angeles City Council want Los Angeles to be transit-oriented and are going to continue to push Angelenos to take the bus, light rail, bicycle or – OMG! – walk, then why is there a requirement that businesses provide parking spaces? Doesn’t that just encourage people to continue driving?

I always say the best things in life are equal parts awesome and terrifying. Project Goldfish is fitting that to a T.

Network(ed) News

Some time ago, a friend of mine told me he had developed a theory that search engines would go the way of news organizations. Decimated? Bankrupt? No. He predicts Google, Bing and Yahoo will become bias. Let's take a step back. News organizations have a fundamental duty to report stories in an objective, contextualized way that treats the audience like the intelligent, thoughtful group it can be. However, it’s no surprise that there is a different school of thought that panders to the lowest common denominator. This can be see on the Web. It can be seen on cable news.

Consumers can easily find news that fits with their pre-existing view of the world. My friend thinks the same could be true of search engines. He cited a study that found an Internet search on genetic testing resulted in positive links on Google while other search engines had a greater variety of links on the subject. I suspect this is the result of Google’s algorithm and the weight it gives to authoritative sources. It could also be because Sergey Brin’s wife owns 23 and Me, a genomics and biotechnology company. Who can say?

So, the idea of search engines going the way of news organizations: Something of the future? Nope, apparently something of right now. The New York Times ran this headline yesterday: “At Yahoo, Using Searches to Steer News Coverage.” Today, the search engine’s The Upshot blog will go live (it has been in beta version for a couple of months). According to The NYT, Yahoo tracks the most popular words and phrases in its network, and then uses that data to create articles.

Let’s take a cue from the sorority house and do a little PRO-CON-CON-PRO here. The vice president of Yahoo Media tells the paper that during the 2008 Olympics, search technology showed that users were asking why divers shower after they get out of the water. Sports writers looked into the question and wrote a story, “The Mystery of the Showering Divers.” I can see that being an enjoyable little piece so I will give it a PRO.

CON: Consumers are like children and if you only give them what they want, they’ll load up on the cotton candy of news and never make it to protein or vegetables. Take a look at Google and Bing's top search terms today in Chicago:

Dave Chappelle, because he went looney tunes on a private jet. Paris Hilton, because she was detained for pot possession in South Africa. Eric Johnson, because he is dating Jessica Simpson. Jake and Vienna, because America loves to watch self-absorbed actors pretend to fall in love and then rip each other to shreds.

I get that Chicagoans are looking up these search terms today but that does not make them news stories. One could argue that Chappelle and Hilton are newsworthy, but both stories happened days ago and are no longer timely. I do not see politics, crime, education or anything of significance on these search lists. As a news editor, I’m not going to care what audience members search for on Google.

Ken Doctor, author of "Newsonomics," points out that,

“Essentially those in charge of analytics-driven content say, ‘These journalists, they only got it half right. Why produce all this stuff that doesn’t make money. Just produce the stuff that sells’.”

This is another major CON. A lot of important work is not cost effective. Watergate didn't pull in the big bucks for The Washington Post, and the King-Drew series wasn't a cash cow for the Los Angeles Times. Investigative and long-term stories would never happen if we only produced “the stuff that sells.” It is incredibly short-sighted to produce crap that people want while ignoring the greater stories people don’t even know exist.

I said I would end on a PRO so here goes: what if analytics actually work to drive traffic to the site, ultimately generating more unique visitors, more links and more advertising dollars? This is what Brent D. Payne, search engine optimizer for the Tribune Company, does. Brent made a presentation to my Building Networked Audiences class last quarter and flat out said: I don’t care about journalism. I care about making money. Payne uses search terms, HTML tags, images and social media to increase traffic to Tribune sites. He is the one who had the Los Angeles Times change “King of Pop” headlines to “Michael Jackson” when the singer died last year. This was his reasoning:

Ultimately, if analytics are used to gain more traction on headlines and social media, I can’t argue with it. Any attempts, though, to use data to dictate news coverage is a step too far. Editors and news directors still have a role to play when it comes to determining what is "news."

Making Randy Newman Proud

I was sitting at my desk in the attic of Medill yesterday when I got into a discussion with a business student who is up here working on his own start-up. He was asking me who I think my target audience is with Project Goldfish and why these people would add another site to their daily digest of media. I started with my bit on covering the stories other news organizations ignore because of time or personnel restraints, shining a light on campaign donations and votes, and so on. My classmate looked at me with a puzzled look and said, “I think you should just write the stories people want.”

OK. I appreciate the concept of providing consumers with stories they want – thus, the customer surveys that were sent out this week – but that is just one part of the journalism equation. Reporters have a duty to hold politicians accountable, to tell the stories of Angelenos who lack access, to listen to the committee meetings and read the reports that no reasonable person would waste his time on. Limiting my newsgathering to just the stories readers want would be a disservice to the organization.

It would also be a disservice to Los Angeles and its residents. Here’s the thing – about a year ago, my friend and I were hiking through Griffith Park. It was nearing sunset as we rounded the Observatory. I was going on about all the things I was going to miss about Los Angeles. I probably brought up ‘SC football games, my friends, the hydrangeas outside my apartment and breakfast burritos from Tacos Delta. And then I got myself all worked up, going on and on about the things that frustrate me about the city. The cracked sidewalks and overflowing garbage cans at Hollywood Boulevard and Vermont. The fact that gunfire is the soundtrack to South Los Angeles. The city ordinances that no one can enforce. Why do we accept failure in this amazing city? Why don’t we push L.A. to be as great as it is in songs and movies and teenagers’ imaginations? When I finally took a breath, my friend looked at me, smiled and said, “You’re describing love. You love L.A., that’s why it drives you crazy to see it fall short.”

It’s true.

Ever since I moved back to Chicago, I have had people tell me they can’t stand L.A.; they don’t understand why anyone would live there. I’ve had people literally laugh in my face when I tell them I covered politics in Southern California. I defend the city the way I would defend family but ultimately, I know that the people complaining about the smell in Venice or the price of a mediocre house or oh, the traffic! just don’t know the real Los Angeles.

This is a place where you can hike to the Hollywood sign (saved twice by Chicagoan Hugh Hefner) or visit the Batcave. Where else do you have mountains in the middle of a sprawling urban center? It’s a city where the best tacos come from trucks (and usually at 2 a.m.). I love that it’s the place where the DMV gave me the driver’s test in Spanish. (In fairness, I was rockin’ a killer tan from spring break at the time.) From L.A., you can get to snowcapped mountains in one direction and rolling vineyards in another. It’s a place where people are offended by youth gun violence and Angelenos sleeping in doorways; no one says, "That's just the way it is."

This is all to say that the content Project Goldfish will produce is intended to celebrate the city. It is an opportunity to see what makes this city great, and what can be done to move it forward. “Celebrate” does not mean positive fluff, either. I’m not a cheerleader and I’m not a glass-half-full kinda gal. Sometimes the truth is going to hurt, but transparency and honesty will light the way.

Dance Break:

Notable Quotable

"It boils down to something simple: readers (or viewers or listeners) collectively know more than media professionals do. This is true by definition: they are many, and we are often just one. We need to recognize and, in the best sense of the word, use their knowledge. If we don't, our former audience will bolt when they realize they don't have to settle for half-baked coverage; they can come into the kitchen themselves."

-- Dan Gillmor, We the Media

Hmm ... not sure I completely agree with this idea but I see where he's going with it.

Supply and Demand

I took a media management class at Kellogg last winter. It was an opportunity for journalism students to learn something about business and for business students to have an understanding of media. It was always very frustrating to hear my classmates argue that managing a newspaper or magazine is no different than managing a widget-producing factory. Media is different. The value of the product is tied up in the knowledge and relationships possessed by writers. Reporters have different styles, strengths and weaknesses. It is not possible to swap out one beat writer for another and expect to have an identical product. And that’s to say nothing of the fact that media is a public good.

However, there was one “business-minded” attitude that I did agree with. Entrepreneurs must be willing to change their vision in order to make it viable. There is a danger in becoming married to an idea, and ultimately inflexible to market demand. I have to frequently remind myself of this truth as I work on Project Goldfish. I am trying to find the balance between the essence of my vision – objectivity, truth, transparency – and the needs or wants of consumers.

For that reason, this week I started to prepare for my market analysis by sending out surveys to people with professional and personal ties to City Hall. I seriously underestimated how long it would take to send 150 emails but I know I need to cast a wide net if I want good feedback. And the 150 may just be a start … there are more businesses to contact, more reporters, more community activists.

I’m curious and anxious to see the results of the survey. I asked participants to complete the questionnaire by next Friday. At that point, Survey Monkey gets to do the heavy lifting and tell me what to do next. Right? Isn’t that how it works?

Part of this project is also to determine who the consumer is, and I don’t just mean demographic or psychographic statistics. Take a look at what Hulu says in their mission statement:

“Hulu's mission is to help people find and enjoy the world's premium video content when, where and how they want it. As we pursue this mission, we aspire to create a service that users, advertisers, and content owners unabashedly love.”

Hulu’s consumers are the users who watch television programs and movies on the site, the networks that provide the content, and the advertisers who market their products on Hulu.com. This is a very different attitude than those of newspaper managers, who would surely say their customer is the person who reads the paper; advertisers are “merely” the ones who pay to keep the company afloat. Project Goldfish’s customer will be the person who reads the site and utilizes the community aspects but I could foresee advertisers also being considered consumers, if the site is ad-supported.

Medill teaches us to be customer-centric. Listen to the audience. Engage with the audience. Give them what they want, to a point. The Chicago News Cooperative is an exciting project in Chicago that is experiencing the downside of being too customer-centric. CNC caught a break when it hooked up with The New York Times to provide local coverage that would appear in the Midwest edition of the paper. The problem is that, with The Times writing the checks, they also get to call the shots on what stories they want. It has changed the nature of what the news coop covers and how it allocates its resources.

Week Four is market analysis. I’ll be reviewing the results of the survey, in addition to looking at the media landscape in Los Angeles. Most importantly, I’ll be figuring out how Project Goldfish can be the disruptive innovation to take over the scene.