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."