Audience engagement and newsroom attitudes

Several years ago, when the words ‘content is king’ was everywhere, I remember Joanna Geary observing  ‘collaboration is queen’. I loved that.
I’ve been thinking about Jo’s twist on King Content because the phrase ‘audience engagement’ is so prevalent right now, and I think that if collaboration is queen bee then being part of the conversation swarm is a vital part of it.
‘Content is king’ became a cliche thanks to a combination of overuse, misuse, and buzzword bingo; essentially, it holds truths, but it’s hard not to groan when you hear it.
Today we’re all about ‘audience engagement’; everyone (mainstream media, brands, marketers or social media players) is looking to, y’know, #engage the #audience with #content that is #shareable and possible even #viral. It’s in danger of becoming disengaging; a phrase on the precipice of becoming a placeholder in strategy documents for the future of journalism.

I think about audience engagement a lot because it’s the cornerstone of my employer’s strategy – Trinity Mirror doesn’t do paywalls, it does audiences – in a nutshell we want to increase audiences, keep them coming back, and know them well enough so that advertisers find the right customers. This isn’t a blog post about TM, it’s about my personal view of how audience engagement should be considered in (many) newsrooms and  what the phrase means to me.  It means this: Creating a newsroom where the process, culture, planning, and output takes the reader/audience/customer/end user – whatever you want to call it – into consideration, and produces stories that begin a second phase of development post-publishing.

I heard Alan Rusbridger speak last week (funnily enough, I had already written most of this post, and so I’m not plagiarising him, I promise) and he spoke of his admiration for Glen Greenwald. Greenwald, he said, was a journalist who thought the real and exciting part of his job started after he’d published his story, and people started talking to him about it on social media. How brilliant (and fearless) is that?

When we hold our news conferences, we’re deciding what the parameters of what is a good story, how it is presented, what platforms we are going to market it on and how, and what time people can read it.
Once a story is in the world, and going great guns on social or on the live analytics board, the most important thing to ask is not “what else are we doing on this?” but “what are people saying about this?”
How are they reacting? Do they see the story as we do, or have a different view point? What aspects chime with them? When they share it, what editorialising of their own are they doing?
If they’re not saying anything, are we
* looking for any conversations in the right places
* inviting people to talk about it
* listening and making ourselves available to discuss further

Getting audience engagement right isn’t a complicated equation (it doesn’t take a vast cognitive leap to know a news story about heavy overnight snow will leave the morning audience wanting to know if the roads and schools are open).
It doesn’t begin and end with the idea of simply making content people want to view/interact/share either – it’s far more sophisticated, and it is also understanding your audience well enough to know how to tell the stories that probably don’t trigger an automatic urge to click.

I was in a news conference recently where a mildly-important-but-dull story about business rates came up. As regional and local reporters, it’s not enough to cover the story that and then expect people to work hard to get the sense of it – if you think it’s boring, ask yourself why would readers care, unless they were directly impacted (and even then, why would they chose your content over a rival publisher’s? Or a social media update from a councillor? Or – more likely- a business owner directly impacted by the change? Competition for attention is brutal and the audience is a promiscuous beast. Similarly, if/when Twitter adds the option to bust 140 characters, user options for storytelling become far more open. So the business owner can write a considered 200-word piece on how rates affect them instead of a short view, or a jumbled rant over several posts. The context available to Twitter audiences will grow – and that is an area where, for the moment, news media have been able to claim an advantage simply by being able to link to a story on a website.

Audience engagement is a newsroom where the reader is considered at the start of the story process. It’s thinking about the people we’re telling stories to, beyond the timings of audience spikes and social uploads. I think it’s about bringing a blogger mindset to our journalism – that live construction of a story that happens, and is refined with reader input to show how it’s developed. People might leave a comment on this post, for example, about what audience engagement means to them, or they might tell me on Twitter (and I could embed a collection of tweets if there were enough).
They might write their own blog post and link to this, so my post will track back to theirs and anyone reading this can find it.

For newsrooms it’s about starting the day looking for and asking what people are talking about, what they want to know more about, what stories they’re reading, sharing and responding to – and what they are ignoring, and why.
It’s about holding regular open sessions with readers (and this can be an exposing and difficult thing to do) such as an editor committing to hold regular, scheduled hangouts to discuss ideas or decisions with readers, reporters doing live debates on Periscope or in Facebook Q&As on their work, news conferences being held in public (and if you think that’s impractical, the Liverpool Echo once held theirs on on a bed in an art gallery).
And it’s about sustaining the practices you put in place not because they are the flavour of the month, but because they bring you as a journalist, or your newsroom as an exec, closer to readers.

That’s the other thing about audience engagement, you can’t be half-hearted or engage a little bit; all you do that way is confuse people (including your newsroom, if you are an editor who blows hot and cold on the subject), or end up sticking with safe trivia that allows a bit of easy bantz but isn’t meaningful.  It’s a commitment but the outcome more than repays the investment made.

 

 

Advertisements

About Alison Gow

I'm a journalist, particularly interested in story-telling, networks and digital innovation.
This entry was posted in audience, collaboration, engagement, Journalism, newsroom culture and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Audience engagement and newsroom attitudes

  1. Ron Wain. says:

    Brilliant, as always. Alison has nailed it. The irony is, as former news journalists (and I had the privilege of working with Alison on the newsdesk at the Southern Daily Echo in Hampshire in the early 2000s), we are already doing this kind of engagement content for our business clients and their own customer audiences. Hopefully some of the editors who don’t understand the digital fug will read Alison’s article and grasp the nettle. Understand the content your audiences (with the emphasis on the plural) want – and how, where and when they want it delivered – and the revenues are more likely to be healthier than if the old ways were adhered to. Yes, we are all learning, all adapting, but the information evolution is unstoppable. Ron Wain, MD, Deep South Media, the multi-media content provider staffed by 12 former news journalists and a picture editor.

    Like

    • Alison Gow says:

      Thanks Ron, for your very kind input – I know you’re in a section of the media industry where customer focus is paramount so you get to see the same view from a different hill, so to speak. I have such fond memories of the Echo and the news desk – huge laughs and some absolute scenes. x

      Like

  2. craigmcgill says:

    Cracking post. I think that one of the issues is that many journalists – despite being excellent people persons (so to speak) aren’t comfortable with the post-reporting engagement online or talking about (sometimes even justifying) their stories but in the long run, the sort of effort you talk about

    Like

    • craigmcgill says:

      Gah! Posted midway (sorry)… the sort of effort you talk about is very worthwhile as it builds relationships and trust while also perhaps encouraging the next generation of journalists who see what’s behind the scenes and go ‘I want to do that’.

      Like

      • Alison Gow says:

        Thanks Craig 🙂 totally agree with you re. effort. You basically have to embark on a process that doesn’t have an end point – it’s not like a newsroom can Implement Audience Engagement and, after a period of bedding in, consider the project complete. It means constant refinement, learning, adapting, stretching and loss-of-comfort-zone – which can be great and terrifying in equal measure.
        When journalists/newsrooms do embrace the idea (a Twitter user pointed out one of our TM football writers as a good example of ‘getting it right’ I think the resulting journalism can inspire others.

        Like

  3. Pingback: The true meaning of "audience engagement" - One Man & His Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s