Ahh, first executive decision already came up. How big and high is the editorial/advertising firewall going to be at PodTech?
Will we sell out?
The question came up this morning. Turns out a big company wants to pay us to do some content. Much like Microsoft paid me to do Channel 9.
But, we are developing a news and editorial network. And, audiences get turned off when they know that content isn’t actually coming from the heart but rather is coming from the deep wallets of a big company. If audiences don’t like PodTech, then there won’t be anything for advertisers to buy anyway. So, when it comes to pissing off audiences I’m gonna take a “zero tolerance” approach. Much like Google’s “don’t be evil” meme.
So, the decision. Can an advertiser pay their way onto, say, Geek Entertainment TV (one of our brands)? Not without being disclosed. Even with disclosure, there’s the possibility of pissing off audience members, but disclosure was up for discussing today.
But, then I thought, why shouldn’t every piece of content that we publish come with a “sell out meter?”
For instance, let’s say you go to a video that Irina does. It would have a little tile at the bottom of the page that says something like “sell out meter” that would disclose what kind of outside influence has been placed on the video she’s doing.
What kinds of things would we disclose?
1) Whether that content had some sort of corporate sponsorship involved. For instance, if you go to PodTech, you’ll see a “corporate” row. That content was paid for. That’s the advertorial side of the fence. You’ll see Nvidia’s logo up there. But, let’s say that Irina goes out and does a news story on Nvidia. Well, we should disclose that.
2) Was prior restraint demanded or offered? At Channel 9 every video could be edited by the person I was interviewing. So, if he or she said something stupid they could have it pulled out of the video before it was published. That’s prior restraint. That’s something that no journalist would offer, but many marketers and PR types want before they’ll give access to executives. That’s important for you to know cause it dramatically changes the story that’s possible.
3) Were questions submitted in advance. I’ve had marketers ask me for my questions in advance so that they could prepare and have all the answers ready to go. I hated that and only played that game with Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer’s PR team (I changed the questions halfway through the interview, though, just to demonstrate I wasn’t completely willing to play ball that way). But, that’s important for you to know if content was prepared that way. Why? That tells you a committee mentality is in force here. Whenever I see collusion between media and interviewees I think I’m being sold a bill of goods. I won’t do that to you. At least not without disclosing it.
4) Did an agreement get signed? An embargo? An NDA? Or some other legal agreement between PodTech and the company’s representatives? That’s important to disclose, I think, because that again indicates some sort of collusion and less-than-adversarial agreement.
5) Any gifts or bribes received? Even something simple like a dinner paid for by an interviewee or a small piece of swag? I like being religious about this. Not allowed and if it happens, must be disclosed.
Why does this matter? Well, Tejas Patel is already asking “why should I care about PodTech?” Well, are any of the other content companies going to make such a complete disclosure on each piece of their content they put out? If not, that’s one answer right there. PodTech should be the most transparent media company out there.
What would you like to see disclosed? Do you like the idea of a sell-out meter?
I give you a front-row seat on the future. Focusing most of my efforts now on next-generation augmented reality and artificial intelligence, AKA "mixed reality."
SUBSCRIBE TO MY NEWSLETTER: http://clevermoe.com/scobleizer-news/
BUY OUR NEW BOOK: https://www.amazon.com/Fourth-Transformation-Robert-Scoble/dp/1539894444 "The Fourth Transformation: How augmented reality and artificial intelligence will change everything."
WATCH MY LATEST SPEECHES:
State of VR with Philip Rosedale (done in VR itself, very cool): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zAA1EVGUZU
At GEOINT, June 2017: http://trajectorymagazine.com/glimpse-new-world/
Augmented World Expo, June 2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4xHILvLD8E
At Leade.rs, April 2017: https://youtu.be/52_0JshgjXI
+++++++++++
BIO:
Scoble gives you a front-row seat on the future.
Literally. He had the first ride in the first Tesla. Siri was launched in his house. He's been the first to share all sorts of technologies and companies with you, from Flipboard to Pandora to Instagram.
Today he's focusing on mixed reality, AKA "next-generation augmented reality" which will include a new user interface for EVERYTHING in your life (IoT, Smart Cities, driverless cars, robots, drones, etc).
That's based on his view thanks to his past experience as futurist at Rackspace.
Best place to find Scoble? On his Facebook profile at https://www.facebook.com/RobertScoble
He has been a technology blogger since 2000, was one of five people who built Microsoft's Channel 9 video blog/community, worked at Fast Company Magazine running its TV efforts, and has been part of technology media businesses since 1993.
++++++++
SPEAKER PITCH:
Apple and Facebook now have revealed their Augmented Reality strategies, which means your business needs one too. Rely on Robert Scoble, the world's top authority on AR, to bring to your conference what businesses should do next.
SPEECH ABSTRACT #1:
TITLE: The Fourth Transformation: What's next in mixed reality (AR and AI) and the future of technology?
Here's an example of this talk at Leade.rs in Paris in April, 2017: https://youtu.be/52_0JshgjXI
Why "the Fourth Transformation?"
Soon we will have phones and glasses that do full on augmented reality. Everything you look at will potentially be augmented. This world is coming in late 2017 with a new iPhone from Apple, amongst other products. Microsoft is betting everything on its HoloLens glasses that do mixed reality and the industry is spending many billions of dollars in R&D and funding new companies like Magic Leap.
This future will be the user interface for IoT, Smart Cities, autonomous cars, robots, drones, and your TV.
This is a big deal and Robert will take you through what mixed reality is and how it will change every business.
Learn more about Robert's speaking style and contact his agent at http://odemanagement.com/robert-scoble/Robert-Scoble.html
++++++++
SPEECH ABSTRACT #2:
"The Next Two Clicks of Moore's Law."
Over the next four years, or two clicks of Moore's Law, a ton about our technology world will change. Scoble will bring you the best from his travels visiting R&D labs, startups, and innovators around the world.
He views the world through his rose-colored-mixed-reality glasses, which will be the new user interface for self driving cars, Smart Cities, IoT, and many other things in our world.
He'll send you off with some lessons for companies both large and small.
++++++++
SPEECH ABSTRACT #3:
"Personalized Meaning: What is Augmented Reality For?"
As we enter a far more technological world where even cars drive themselves, I predict we'll see a blowback toward the analog, more authentic world.
What role does augmented reality play in both worlds?
Get Scoble's insight into where augmented reality is going, see tons of real-world demos, and understand what he means by 'personalized meaning.'
CONTACT:
If you are looking to contact me, email is best: scobleizer@gmail.com.
++++++++
ENDORSEMENTS:
IZEA Top 25 Tech Influencers: https://izea.com/2017/07/07/25-top-tech-influencers/
Time: One of the top 140 Twitterers!
FT: One of the five most influential Twitterers!
Inc. Top 5 on list of Tech Power Players You Need to Know: http://www.inc.com/john-rampton/30-power-players-in-tech-you-need-to-know.html
Next Reality: #4 on top 50 AR influencer list: https://next.reality.news/news/nr50-next-realitys-50-people-watch-augmented-mixed-reality-0177454/
View all posts by Robert Scoble
Published
58 thoughts on “The advertising firewall”
Mr. Scoble, you know those sections in the last trade rag you looked at that read “Advertisement” in small print at the top… They’re made to look like editorial but aren’t… I gloss right past those and don’t give a second thought to the rep of the pub carrying it.
Mr. Scoble, you know those sections in the last trade rag you looked at that read “Advertisement” in small print at the top… They’re made to look like editorial but aren’t… I gloss right past those and don’t give a second thought to the rep of the pub carrying it.
Gerald: I usually do the same but for a different reason: the content usually sucked and sounded like a committee designed and developed it. Which is probably how it was developed.
But commercial content that has some soul to it? I’d read that (or listen to it, watch it). Not if it looks like Nestle’s home page, though.
Gerald: I usually do the same but for a different reason: the content usually sucked and sounded like a committee designed and developed it. Which is probably how it was developed.
But commercial content that has some soul to it? I’d read that (or listen to it, watch it). Not if it looks like Nestle’s home page, though.
Unlike Gerald, I DO pay attention to what outside influences may be swaying any article, blog, podcast, TV show – whatever.
I do like the idea of a sell-out meter, but I am curious how it would be presented. Is it a scale of 0-100 (and if so, will you publish what causes the “contribution” to move along the scale? That sounds overly complex.
If you can devise an easy way to portray to users (and a similar way to portray the same info to listeners, who may never visit your website – just download the podcast, then that might be interesting.
I’m still of the opinion that these types of things are best left for the Social Networking community to decide. Put your “here’s how we sold out” text on each Podcast then have a community driven “slider” that allows listeners to set a level for how much THEY think you have sold out – based on your disclosure, and the correspoding content. People are generally going to get this kind of thing right.
Unlike Gerald, I DO pay attention to what outside influences may be swaying any article, blog, podcast, TV show – whatever.
I do like the idea of a sell-out meter, but I am curious how it would be presented. Is it a scale of 0-100 (and if so, will you publish what causes the “contribution” to move along the scale? That sounds overly complex.
If you can devise an easy way to portray to users (and a similar way to portray the same info to listeners, who may never visit your website – just download the podcast, then that might be interesting.
I’m still of the opinion that these types of things are best left for the Social Networking community to decide. Put your “here’s how we sold out” text on each Podcast then have a community driven “slider” that allows listeners to set a level for how much THEY think you have sold out – based on your disclosure, and the correspoding content. People are generally going to get this kind of thing right.
Maybe a green, yellow, red color system? If you’re totally pure, you get a green. If you are selling out just a little bit, like doing something for a sponsor but not with any other influence, you might be a yellow. Sell out totally and you get a red.
Each of these five things is binary. Either you’re in the clear or you aren’t.
I was even thinking of doing a “sell out aggregator” for each employee here. If Irina never sells out, wouldn’t that help her brand?
Maybe a green, yellow, red color system? If you’re totally pure, you get a green. If you are selling out just a little bit, like doing something for a sponsor but not with any other influence, you might be a yellow. Sell out totally and you get a red.
Each of these five things is binary. Either you’re in the clear or you aren’t.
I was even thinking of doing a “sell out aggregator” for each employee here. If Irina never sells out, wouldn’t that help her brand?
I think you do it either way. So much of the podcasting industry is going to be changed with advertising and everyone is looking for it. Take this comment for example. It is an ad for my podcasting/ad auction site.
I think you do it either way. So much of the podcasting industry is going to be changed with advertising and everyone is looking for it. Take this comment for example. It is an ad for my podcasting/ad auction site.
I got it!!!! Why not a Department of Podcast Security, Color-coded Threat Level System (note sarcasm).
But none of the ‘complete disclosure’ details will make a darned bit of difference if the content is boring. Even if you ‘complete disclosure’ up an infommerical, it’s still doing to be dull as rocks, focus on good content, good scripts, good presentations, and it all will sorta take care of itself. You hit the nail on the head tho, how to make “commercial content that has some soul to it”…that will be an everlasting struggle, as ‘soul’ is not ‘control’.
And you can go the PBS route, ‘Sponsored By’, ‘Made Possible Due to the Gifts and Support of’…
I got it!!!! Why not a Department of Podcast Security, Color-coded Threat Level System (note sarcasm).
But none of the ‘complete disclosure’ details will make a darned bit of difference if the content is boring. Even if you ‘complete disclosure’ up an infommerical, it’s still doing to be dull as rocks, focus on good content, good scripts, good presentations, and it all will sorta take care of itself. You hit the nail on the head tho, how to make “commercial content that has some soul to it”…that will be an everlasting struggle, as ‘soul’ is not ‘control’.
And you can go the PBS route, ‘Sponsored By’, ‘Made Possible Due to the Gifts and Support of’…
This problem is one of the reasons the Google Adsense style system is so attractive for content producers — the advertisers don’t directly influence the content – the content influences the advertisers.
Of course there is no way for this to work with audio or video content. Find a way to make that happen (context sensitive ads for audio/video) and you could succeed.
I think having advertisers influence “editorial” content (in any way) will put you right back in the payola/old media style world, a place you don’t want to be.
This problem is one of the reasons the Google Adsense style system is so attractive for content producers — the advertisers don’t directly influence the content – the content influences the advertisers.
Of course there is no way for this to work with audio or video content. Find a way to make that happen (context sensitive ads for audio/video) and you could succeed.
I think having advertisers influence “editorial” content (in any way) will put you right back in the payola/old media style world, a place you don’t want to be.
Brian: are you so sure about that? I know that if I were building a business around Google’s advertising that I’d do content that advertisers were willing to pay for. “Camcorders” for instance, pays a lot better than “world peace.”
Brian: are you so sure about that? I know that if I were building a business around Google’s advertising that I’d do content that advertisers were willing to pay for. “Camcorders” for instance, pays a lot better than “world peace.”
Well, I think you are right and wrong in that last statement, Robert. In a perfect world advertisers shouldn’t influence a blogger or editor to sway their believe on any issue whatsoever. However, if I am a popular blogger who happens to like Lexus, than I can freely and honestly write about the new IS 350 that I test drove (the day after my post on world peace). Then Google adwords can place relevant ads for sites that do car reviews, or luxury specific sites, etc. I have remained true and had the correct advertisers on my site. Enjoy your blog btw 🙂
Well, I think you are right and wrong in that last statement, Robert. In a perfect world advertisers shouldn’t influence a blogger or editor to sway their believe on any issue whatsoever. However, if I am a popular blogger who happens to like Lexus, than I can freely and honestly write about the new IS 350 that I test drove (the day after my post on world peace). Then Google adwords can place relevant ads for sites that do car reviews, or luxury specific sites, etc. I have remained true and had the correct advertisers on my site. Enjoy your blog btw 🙂
How do you know what advertisers are willing to pay for in Google? It varies on a monthly, daily, even hourly basis.
But I guess you are right that an excellent article on camcorders would draw more advertising that an excellent article on world peace — I am not saying that a context sensitive advertising model has no influence on the content you choose to produce — but you were talking about direct advertiser influence were you not?
Regardless though — you need not only the ads but also traffic that is interested in the ads. The only way to get traffic (other than various short term scams) is to create content that attracts and continues to attract viewers. The only way to create good content is to have experts on the subject that create interesting, desirable content. But this is what you would try to do anyway no?
How do you know what advertisers are willing to pay for in Google? It varies on a monthly, daily, even hourly basis.
But I guess you are right that an excellent article on camcorders would draw more advertising that an excellent article on world peace — I am not saying that a context sensitive advertising model has no influence on the content you choose to produce — but you were talking about direct advertiser influence were you not?
Regardless though — you need not only the ads but also traffic that is interested in the ads. The only way to get traffic (other than various short term scams) is to create content that attracts and continues to attract viewers. The only way to create good content is to have experts on the subject that create interesting, desirable content. But this is what you would try to do anyway no?
I sure hope “disclosure” isn’t your reason for us caring.
Why not just have a “Crap Meter”, and let it be user votable… That would take care of a significant issue not addressed in your “disclosures”: is the source simply a fan or follower that let’s his opinions get away from them. (Whether or not they paid you, I’d take everything you said about Microsoft, Winer, or PodTech as complete bullhockey.)
I sure hope “disclosure” isn’t your reason for us caring.
Why not just have a “Crap Meter”, and let it be user votable… That would take care of a significant issue not addressed in your “disclosures”: is the source simply a fan or follower that let’s his opinions get away from them. (Whether or not they paid you, I’d take everything you said about Microsoft, Winer, or PodTech as complete bullhockey.)
Robert: I like your premise, but my sense is that if you do this properly, you don’t need to disclose anything, really. Post the rules, and let your audience and editorial folks know them. The audience will know if they are somehow being fleeced. Which also means that you have to hire people who won’t be swayed. Set down the rules and make sure they are enforced.
Specifically, to your 5 points
1. I think there’s enough news out there that’s outside of typical news coverage that this shouldn’t actually be an issue. If you really want to cover Nvidia, find a story angle that lets your folks do that, without it being all about that one company. Yes, it’s more work for the editor and reporter, but that’s what you’re paying them for. To look under the rocks. It’s frankly what’s missing from most tech “news”coverage. Reprinting a company’s press release doesn’t count as reporting. And, I think it’s ok for reporters to have attitude.
2. You don’t talk to people who want prior restraint. Period. There’s other stories and companies out there.
3. You don’t talk to people who want questions in advance. Period. There’s other stories and companies out there.
4. I think this one is slightly trickier, but it should be pretty much handled the same way as above. But just don’t have writers and editors involved in NDAs etc, and they can then follow whatever story is interesting to the audience.
5. Ask vendors to donate the cost of good they want to schwag you with to a charity — I’m sure the Gates Foundation can use some more t-shirts or lunches.
Robert: I like your premise, but my sense is that if you do this properly, you don’t need to disclose anything, really. Post the rules, and let your audience and editorial folks know them. The audience will know if they are somehow being fleeced. Which also means that you have to hire people who won’t be swayed. Set down the rules and make sure they are enforced.
Specifically, to your 5 points
1. I think there’s enough news out there that’s outside of typical news coverage that this shouldn’t actually be an issue. If you really want to cover Nvidia, find a story angle that lets your folks do that, without it being all about that one company. Yes, it’s more work for the editor and reporter, but that’s what you’re paying them for. To look under the rocks. It’s frankly what’s missing from most tech “news”coverage. Reprinting a company’s press release doesn’t count as reporting. And, I think it’s ok for reporters to have attitude.
2. You don’t talk to people who want prior restraint. Period. There’s other stories and companies out there.
3. You don’t talk to people who want questions in advance. Period. There’s other stories and companies out there.
4. I think this one is slightly trickier, but it should be pretty much handled the same way as above. But just don’t have writers and editors involved in NDAs etc, and they can then follow whatever story is interesting to the audience.
5. Ask vendors to donate the cost of good they want to schwag you with to a charity — I’m sure the Gates Foundation can use some more t-shirts or lunches.
The company pays for ‘coverage’, you determine the makeup of that coverage, if they get too unhappy or short-term impatient they go elsewhere. But if you make it interesting enough, and it kicks up enough dust, they will be happy. Simple. The smart company knows that even bumps and warts can be good publicity, re: Southwest in A&E’s ‘Airline’. All in crafting a good story, content, baby, content.
You need a human interest story, something not gleaned from the usual PR or blogger fluff, which is where reporting comes in, so dust off your Journalism degree. Just sticking a camera some wonky software developers face ain’t gonna cut it. 🙂
Questions in Advance and Prior Restraint, are always no wins, it makes things but an infomerical, such be fine if you are an advertising agency, doesn’t seem to fit in here. In addition, it be a serious time waster, you wanta re-render everytime someone in the company has a spaz? You can give an outline and agenda of sorts, but the specific questions, no way. Think in terms of what Stride gum is doing with http://www.wherethehellismatt.com
Bottom line: they pay for coverage, up to you to make it all interesting, avoiding all the ‘PR Command and Control’ and ‘Marketing Beach-Ball’ demands that kill good human-interest stories.
As for gifts and such, kick up some lawyers and go contest raffle, or just give away. And the Gates Foundation just got billions upon billions more, find another charity.
Let the end-result work be judged on it’s own, not stupidly crazy ‘Honor Tags’ or ‘sell-out meters’.
The company pays for ‘coverage’, you determine the makeup of that coverage, if they get too unhappy or short-term impatient they go elsewhere. But if you make it interesting enough, and it kicks up enough dust, they will be happy. Simple. The smart company knows that even bumps and warts can be good publicity, re: Southwest in A&E’s ‘Airline’. All in crafting a good story, content, baby, content.
You need a human interest story, something not gleaned from the usual PR or blogger fluff, which is where reporting comes in, so dust off your Journalism degree. Just sticking a camera some wonky software developers face ain’t gonna cut it. 🙂
Questions in Advance and Prior Restraint, are always no wins, it makes things but an infomerical, such be fine if you are an advertising agency, doesn’t seem to fit in here. In addition, it be a serious time waster, you wanta re-render everytime someone in the company has a spaz? You can give an outline and agenda of sorts, but the specific questions, no way. Think in terms of what Stride gum is doing with http://www.wherethehellismatt.com
Bottom line: they pay for coverage, up to you to make it all interesting, avoiding all the ‘PR Command and Control’ and ‘Marketing Beach-Ball’ demands that kill good human-interest stories.
As for gifts and such, kick up some lawyers and go contest raffle, or just give away. And the Gates Foundation just got billions upon billions more, find another charity.
Let the end-result work be judged on it’s own, not stupidly crazy ‘Honor Tags’ or ‘sell-out meters’.
Didn’t Stowe Boyd used to do something similar? It seems like I remember him having some way of indicating whether he had no connection, was just an advisor, or earned income from software he talked about.
Didn’t Stowe Boyd used to do something similar? It seems like I remember him having some way of indicating whether he had no connection, was just an advisor, or earned income from software he talked about.
You have to keep things separate. Take GETV for example. Let them “do their own thing” and do the stories they want. Then at the end, have a “paid for” section where they report honestly on stories from sponsors. This would be much better than to mix “real” segments and “paid for” segments.
Also, you need to keep your “editorial news” shows separate from your “paid by sponsors” shows, just like the TV networks used to. If it is clear what is what, then you won’t have to worry about your “real” shows getting polluted by your “paid for” shows.
You have to keep things separate. Take GETV for example. Let them “do their own thing” and do the stories they want. Then at the end, have a “paid for” section where they report honestly on stories from sponsors. This would be much better than to mix “real” segments and “paid for” segments.
Also, you need to keep your “editorial news” shows separate from your “paid by sponsors” shows, just like the TV networks used to. If it is clear what is what, then you won’t have to worry about your “real” shows getting polluted by your “paid for” shows.
I didn’t read thru all the comments but I am sure someone might have mentioned this.
Consider the scenario in which you have set up such a meter and you have a vcast with a red rating or a 10/10 rating – I say the video shouldn’t be up there. I wouldn’t be interested and I believe no one would be except the fans.
And you can’t get ‘fans’ of a particular person(like Paris hilton 🙂 )/group (Apple) on a general site like podtech’s.
For that you should set up a fan site in which case the meter becomes redundant.
If your blog/vlog is popular people are going to talk about it and make their own opinions. They will have just one more thing to talk about. If thats what you want….
I didn’t read thru all the comments but I am sure someone might have mentioned this.
Consider the scenario in which you have set up such a meter and you have a vcast with a red rating or a 10/10 rating – I say the video shouldn’t be up there. I wouldn’t be interested and I believe no one would be except the fans.
And you can’t get ‘fans’ of a particular person(like Paris hilton 🙂 )/group (Apple) on a general site like podtech’s.
For that you should set up a fan site in which case the meter becomes redundant.
If your blog/vlog is popular people are going to talk about it and make their own opinions. They will have just one more thing to talk about. If thats what you want….
this is the reason why i wouldnt let neither the prosecutors nor defense attorneys buy me a 50 cent cup of coffee at the courthouse when i was a crime reporter. even the appearance of impropriety is unacceptable in ideal circumstances. with a background like this, i imagine we will work out a process that can pass muster with my mentors at jschool.
this is the reason why i wouldnt let neither the prosecutors nor defense attorneys buy me a 50 cent cup of coffee at the courthouse when i was a crime reporter. even the appearance of impropriety is unacceptable in ideal circumstances. with a background like this, i imagine we will work out a process that can pass muster with my mentors at jschool.
I like the idea, im just curious about the design. What will it look like? How are you going to present your sell out meter? Are you going to break it up like you did in your post.
I like the idea, im just curious about the design. What will it look like? How are you going to present your sell out meter? Are you going to break it up like you did in your post.
“Audiences get turned off when they know that content isn’t actually coming from the heart but rather is coming from the deep wallets of a big company.”
Actually, Robert, this isn’t always true. There’s a huge, thriving contract publishing business out there where entire magazines are created for companies – and consumers actually like them.
In the UK, for example, the highest circulating magazine is a contract publication – Sky’s listings mag. Magazines for supermarkets like Sainsbury and Waitrose sell 300-400,000 copies, beating their “independent” rivals.
So I’d suggest you’re wrong. It’s not the source of the money that’s paying for a publication – it’s the quality of the product. If all a product is is hard sell, it turns people off. But not if it’s done under contract, and done well.
“Audiences get turned off when they know that content isn’t actually coming from the heart but rather is coming from the deep wallets of a big company.”
Actually, Robert, this isn’t always true. There’s a huge, thriving contract publishing business out there where entire magazines are created for companies – and consumers actually like them.
In the UK, for example, the highest circulating magazine is a contract publication – Sky’s listings mag. Magazines for supermarkets like Sainsbury and Waitrose sell 300-400,000 copies, beating their “independent” rivals.
So I’d suggest you’re wrong. It’s not the source of the money that’s paying for a publication – it’s the quality of the product. If all a product is is hard sell, it turns people off. But not if it’s done under contract, and done well.
If PodTech wants to have mass market appeal, i.e. not just techies, and especially not just bloggers, then the majority of the audience will likely not care in all honesty, in which case such disclosure can provided by following a small but clear link for those that care (and there are people that do and should).
While the idea of seeing some huge ‘under-the influence meter’ under some politians would be great, if not humourous, it’s probably overkill.
If PodTech wants to have mass market appeal, i.e. not just techies, and especially not just bloggers, then the majority of the audience will likely not care in all honesty, in which case such disclosure can provided by following a small but clear link for those that care (and there are people that do and should).
While the idea of seeing some huge ‘under-the influence meter’ under some politians would be great, if not humourous, it’s probably overkill.
yes, it’s about audience and placement. pod tech already has the corporate section, so is that where the commercial (paid for coverage) stuff would go? seems to me that would be the place. we at coBRANDiT get into producing paid commercial pieces, and we brand everything with our name. people who see our stuff know we do paid work. also, our content is designed to live on the brand/sponsor’s website, so the affiliation is clear there. as many here have said, it really comes down to quality. we try to produce commercial content with “soul” (as you say) by having stories told by real people, and shot in a documentary style. we’re interested in word-of-mouth, and assume that the audience for our content is largely comprised of people who want inside info, or are interested in our clients. the only source for inside info on a brand/client is (usually) the brand/client. it comes down to producing credible commercial info, and voice.
yes, it’s about audience and placement. pod tech already has the corporate section, so is that where the commercial (paid for coverage) stuff would go? seems to me that would be the place. we at coBRANDiT get into producing paid commercial pieces, and we brand everything with our name. people who see our stuff know we do paid work. also, our content is designed to live on the brand/sponsor’s website, so the affiliation is clear there. as many here have said, it really comes down to quality. we try to produce commercial content with “soul” (as you say) by having stories told by real people, and shot in a documentary style. we’re interested in word-of-mouth, and assume that the audience for our content is largely comprised of people who want inside info, or are interested in our clients. the only source for inside info on a brand/client is (usually) the brand/client. it comes down to producing credible commercial info, and voice.
I like the idea of the sellout meter. It’ll definately help readers trust (or, I suppose, distrust) the material on the site. The only thing that bothers me about it is that it could potentially be a turnoff to those hoping you’ll sell out to them.
I like the idea of the sellout meter. It’ll definately help readers trust (or, I suppose, distrust) the material on the site. The only thing that bothers me about it is that it could potentially be a turnoff to those hoping you’ll sell out to them.
Mr. Scoble, you know those sections in the last trade rag you looked at that read “Advertisement” in small print at the top… They’re made to look like editorial but aren’t… I gloss right past those and don’t give a second thought to the rep of the pub carrying it.
Just my $.02
LikeLike
Mr. Scoble, you know those sections in the last trade rag you looked at that read “Advertisement” in small print at the top… They’re made to look like editorial but aren’t… I gloss right past those and don’t give a second thought to the rep of the pub carrying it.
Just my $.02
LikeLike
Gerald: I usually do the same but for a different reason: the content usually sucked and sounded like a committee designed and developed it. Which is probably how it was developed.
But commercial content that has some soul to it? I’d read that (or listen to it, watch it). Not if it looks like Nestle’s home page, though.
LikeLike
Gerald: I usually do the same but for a different reason: the content usually sucked and sounded like a committee designed and developed it. Which is probably how it was developed.
But commercial content that has some soul to it? I’d read that (or listen to it, watch it). Not if it looks like Nestle’s home page, though.
LikeLike
Unlike Gerald, I DO pay attention to what outside influences may be swaying any article, blog, podcast, TV show – whatever.
I do like the idea of a sell-out meter, but I am curious how it would be presented. Is it a scale of 0-100 (and if so, will you publish what causes the “contribution” to move along the scale? That sounds overly complex.
If you can devise an easy way to portray to users (and a similar way to portray the same info to listeners, who may never visit your website – just download the podcast, then that might be interesting.
I’m still of the opinion that these types of things are best left for the Social Networking community to decide. Put your “here’s how we sold out” text on each Podcast then have a community driven “slider” that allows listeners to set a level for how much THEY think you have sold out – based on your disclosure, and the correspoding content. People are generally going to get this kind of thing right.
Rob
LikeLike
Unlike Gerald, I DO pay attention to what outside influences may be swaying any article, blog, podcast, TV show – whatever.
I do like the idea of a sell-out meter, but I am curious how it would be presented. Is it a scale of 0-100 (and if so, will you publish what causes the “contribution” to move along the scale? That sounds overly complex.
If you can devise an easy way to portray to users (and a similar way to portray the same info to listeners, who may never visit your website – just download the podcast, then that might be interesting.
I’m still of the opinion that these types of things are best left for the Social Networking community to decide. Put your “here’s how we sold out” text on each Podcast then have a community driven “slider” that allows listeners to set a level for how much THEY think you have sold out – based on your disclosure, and the correspoding content. People are generally going to get this kind of thing right.
Rob
LikeLike
Maybe a green, yellow, red color system? If you’re totally pure, you get a green. If you are selling out just a little bit, like doing something for a sponsor but not with any other influence, you might be a yellow. Sell out totally and you get a red.
Each of these five things is binary. Either you’re in the clear or you aren’t.
I was even thinking of doing a “sell out aggregator” for each employee here. If Irina never sells out, wouldn’t that help her brand?
LikeLike
Maybe a green, yellow, red color system? If you’re totally pure, you get a green. If you are selling out just a little bit, like doing something for a sponsor but not with any other influence, you might be a yellow. Sell out totally and you get a red.
Each of these five things is binary. Either you’re in the clear or you aren’t.
I was even thinking of doing a “sell out aggregator” for each employee here. If Irina never sells out, wouldn’t that help her brand?
LikeLike
Kr8tr: I like giving the community the ability to tell us that you think we sold out.
LikeLike
Kr8tr: I like giving the community the ability to tell us that you think we sold out.
LikeLike
I think you do it either way. So much of the podcasting industry is going to be changed with advertising and everyone is looking for it. Take this comment for example. It is an ad for my podcasting/ad auction site.
As Nike says: Just Do It!!!!!!
LikeLike
I think you do it either way. So much of the podcasting industry is going to be changed with advertising and everyone is looking for it. Take this comment for example. It is an ad for my podcasting/ad auction site.
As Nike says: Just Do It!!!!!!
LikeLike
I got it!!!! Why not a Department of Podcast Security, Color-coded Threat Level System (note sarcasm).
But none of the ‘complete disclosure’ details will make a darned bit of difference if the content is boring. Even if you ‘complete disclosure’ up an infommerical, it’s still doing to be dull as rocks, focus on good content, good scripts, good presentations, and it all will sorta take care of itself. You hit the nail on the head tho, how to make “commercial content that has some soul to it”…that will be an everlasting struggle, as ‘soul’ is not ‘control’.
And you can go the PBS route, ‘Sponsored By’, ‘Made Possible Due to the Gifts and Support of’…
LikeLike
I got it!!!! Why not a Department of Podcast Security, Color-coded Threat Level System (note sarcasm).
But none of the ‘complete disclosure’ details will make a darned bit of difference if the content is boring. Even if you ‘complete disclosure’ up an infommerical, it’s still doing to be dull as rocks, focus on good content, good scripts, good presentations, and it all will sorta take care of itself. You hit the nail on the head tho, how to make “commercial content that has some soul to it”…that will be an everlasting struggle, as ‘soul’ is not ‘control’.
And you can go the PBS route, ‘Sponsored By’, ‘Made Possible Due to the Gifts and Support of’…
LikeLike
This problem is one of the reasons the Google Adsense style system is so attractive for content producers — the advertisers don’t directly influence the content – the content influences the advertisers.
Of course there is no way for this to work with audio or video content. Find a way to make that happen (context sensitive ads for audio/video) and you could succeed.
I think having advertisers influence “editorial” content (in any way) will put you right back in the payola/old media style world, a place you don’t want to be.
LikeLike
This problem is one of the reasons the Google Adsense style system is so attractive for content producers — the advertisers don’t directly influence the content – the content influences the advertisers.
Of course there is no way for this to work with audio or video content. Find a way to make that happen (context sensitive ads for audio/video) and you could succeed.
I think having advertisers influence “editorial” content (in any way) will put you right back in the payola/old media style world, a place you don’t want to be.
LikeLike
Brian: are you so sure about that? I know that if I were building a business around Google’s advertising that I’d do content that advertisers were willing to pay for. “Camcorders” for instance, pays a lot better than “world peace.”
LikeLike
Brian: are you so sure about that? I know that if I were building a business around Google’s advertising that I’d do content that advertisers were willing to pay for. “Camcorders” for instance, pays a lot better than “world peace.”
LikeLike
Well, I think you are right and wrong in that last statement, Robert. In a perfect world advertisers shouldn’t influence a blogger or editor to sway their believe on any issue whatsoever. However, if I am a popular blogger who happens to like Lexus, than I can freely and honestly write about the new IS 350 that I test drove (the day after my post on world peace). Then Google adwords can place relevant ads for sites that do car reviews, or luxury specific sites, etc. I have remained true and had the correct advertisers on my site. Enjoy your blog btw 🙂
LikeLike
Well, I think you are right and wrong in that last statement, Robert. In a perfect world advertisers shouldn’t influence a blogger or editor to sway their believe on any issue whatsoever. However, if I am a popular blogger who happens to like Lexus, than I can freely and honestly write about the new IS 350 that I test drove (the day after my post on world peace). Then Google adwords can place relevant ads for sites that do car reviews, or luxury specific sites, etc. I have remained true and had the correct advertisers on my site. Enjoy your blog btw 🙂
LikeLike
Robert:
How do you know what advertisers are willing to pay for in Google? It varies on a monthly, daily, even hourly basis.
But I guess you are right that an excellent article on camcorders would draw more advertising that an excellent article on world peace — I am not saying that a context sensitive advertising model has no influence on the content you choose to produce — but you were talking about direct advertiser influence were you not?
Regardless though — you need not only the ads but also traffic that is interested in the ads. The only way to get traffic (other than various short term scams) is to create content that attracts and continues to attract viewers. The only way to create good content is to have experts on the subject that create interesting, desirable content. But this is what you would try to do anyway no?
LikeLike
Robert:
How do you know what advertisers are willing to pay for in Google? It varies on a monthly, daily, even hourly basis.
But I guess you are right that an excellent article on camcorders would draw more advertising that an excellent article on world peace — I am not saying that a context sensitive advertising model has no influence on the content you choose to produce — but you were talking about direct advertiser influence were you not?
Regardless though — you need not only the ads but also traffic that is interested in the ads. The only way to get traffic (other than various short term scams) is to create content that attracts and continues to attract viewers. The only way to create good content is to have experts on the subject that create interesting, desirable content. But this is what you would try to do anyway no?
LikeLike
I sure hope “disclosure” isn’t your reason for us caring.
Why not just have a “Crap Meter”, and let it be user votable… That would take care of a significant issue not addressed in your “disclosures”: is the source simply a fan or follower that let’s his opinions get away from them. (Whether or not they paid you, I’d take everything you said about Microsoft, Winer, or PodTech as complete bullhockey.)
LikeLike
I sure hope “disclosure” isn’t your reason for us caring.
Why not just have a “Crap Meter”, and let it be user votable… That would take care of a significant issue not addressed in your “disclosures”: is the source simply a fan or follower that let’s his opinions get away from them. (Whether or not they paid you, I’d take everything you said about Microsoft, Winer, or PodTech as complete bullhockey.)
LikeLike
Also, doesn’t the notion of a “disclosure meter” tell us you will be selling out, but you’ll try to warn us?
That’s cute but pathetic. Maybe it gives you some sense of credibility but not me.
LikeLike
Also, doesn’t the notion of a “disclosure meter” tell us you will be selling out, but you’ll try to warn us?
That’s cute but pathetic. Maybe it gives you some sense of credibility but not me.
LikeLike
Robert: I like your premise, but my sense is that if you do this properly, you don’t need to disclose anything, really. Post the rules, and let your audience and editorial folks know them. The audience will know if they are somehow being fleeced. Which also means that you have to hire people who won’t be swayed. Set down the rules and make sure they are enforced.
Specifically, to your 5 points
1. I think there’s enough news out there that’s outside of typical news coverage that this shouldn’t actually be an issue. If you really want to cover Nvidia, find a story angle that lets your folks do that, without it being all about that one company. Yes, it’s more work for the editor and reporter, but that’s what you’re paying them for. To look under the rocks. It’s frankly what’s missing from most tech “news”coverage. Reprinting a company’s press release doesn’t count as reporting. And, I think it’s ok for reporters to have attitude.
2. You don’t talk to people who want prior restraint. Period. There’s other stories and companies out there.
3. You don’t talk to people who want questions in advance. Period. There’s other stories and companies out there.
4. I think this one is slightly trickier, but it should be pretty much handled the same way as above. But just don’t have writers and editors involved in NDAs etc, and they can then follow whatever story is interesting to the audience.
5. Ask vendors to donate the cost of good they want to schwag you with to a charity — I’m sure the Gates Foundation can use some more t-shirts or lunches.
LikeLike
Robert: I like your premise, but my sense is that if you do this properly, you don’t need to disclose anything, really. Post the rules, and let your audience and editorial folks know them. The audience will know if they are somehow being fleeced. Which also means that you have to hire people who won’t be swayed. Set down the rules and make sure they are enforced.
Specifically, to your 5 points
1. I think there’s enough news out there that’s outside of typical news coverage that this shouldn’t actually be an issue. If you really want to cover Nvidia, find a story angle that lets your folks do that, without it being all about that one company. Yes, it’s more work for the editor and reporter, but that’s what you’re paying them for. To look under the rocks. It’s frankly what’s missing from most tech “news”coverage. Reprinting a company’s press release doesn’t count as reporting. And, I think it’s ok for reporters to have attitude.
2. You don’t talk to people who want prior restraint. Period. There’s other stories and companies out there.
3. You don’t talk to people who want questions in advance. Period. There’s other stories and companies out there.
4. I think this one is slightly trickier, but it should be pretty much handled the same way as above. But just don’t have writers and editors involved in NDAs etc, and they can then follow whatever story is interesting to the audience.
5. Ask vendors to donate the cost of good they want to schwag you with to a charity — I’m sure the Gates Foundation can use some more t-shirts or lunches.
LikeLike
Agree with Steve and Goebbels simultaneously.
The company pays for ‘coverage’, you determine the makeup of that coverage, if they get too unhappy or short-term impatient they go elsewhere. But if you make it interesting enough, and it kicks up enough dust, they will be happy. Simple. The smart company knows that even bumps and warts can be good publicity, re: Southwest in A&E’s ‘Airline’. All in crafting a good story, content, baby, content.
You need a human interest story, something not gleaned from the usual PR or blogger fluff, which is where reporting comes in, so dust off your Journalism degree. Just sticking a camera some wonky software developers face ain’t gonna cut it. 🙂
Questions in Advance and Prior Restraint, are always no wins, it makes things but an infomerical, such be fine if you are an advertising agency, doesn’t seem to fit in here. In addition, it be a serious time waster, you wanta re-render everytime someone in the company has a spaz? You can give an outline and agenda of sorts, but the specific questions, no way. Think in terms of what Stride gum is doing with http://www.wherethehellismatt.com
Bottom line: they pay for coverage, up to you to make it all interesting, avoiding all the ‘PR Command and Control’ and ‘Marketing Beach-Ball’ demands that kill good human-interest stories.
As for gifts and such, kick up some lawyers and go contest raffle, or just give away. And the Gates Foundation just got billions upon billions more, find another charity.
Let the end-result work be judged on it’s own, not stupidly crazy ‘Honor Tags’ or ‘sell-out meters’.
LikeLike
Agree with Steve and Goebbels simultaneously.
The company pays for ‘coverage’, you determine the makeup of that coverage, if they get too unhappy or short-term impatient they go elsewhere. But if you make it interesting enough, and it kicks up enough dust, they will be happy. Simple. The smart company knows that even bumps and warts can be good publicity, re: Southwest in A&E’s ‘Airline’. All in crafting a good story, content, baby, content.
You need a human interest story, something not gleaned from the usual PR or blogger fluff, which is where reporting comes in, so dust off your Journalism degree. Just sticking a camera some wonky software developers face ain’t gonna cut it. 🙂
Questions in Advance and Prior Restraint, are always no wins, it makes things but an infomerical, such be fine if you are an advertising agency, doesn’t seem to fit in here. In addition, it be a serious time waster, you wanta re-render everytime someone in the company has a spaz? You can give an outline and agenda of sorts, but the specific questions, no way. Think in terms of what Stride gum is doing with http://www.wherethehellismatt.com
Bottom line: they pay for coverage, up to you to make it all interesting, avoiding all the ‘PR Command and Control’ and ‘Marketing Beach-Ball’ demands that kill good human-interest stories.
As for gifts and such, kick up some lawyers and go contest raffle, or just give away. And the Gates Foundation just got billions upon billions more, find another charity.
Let the end-result work be judged on it’s own, not stupidly crazy ‘Honor Tags’ or ‘sell-out meters’.
LikeLike
Didn’t Stowe Boyd used to do something similar? It seems like I remember him having some way of indicating whether he had no connection, was just an advisor, or earned income from software he talked about.
Of course I can’t find it now, though.
LikeLike
Didn’t Stowe Boyd used to do something similar? It seems like I remember him having some way of indicating whether he had no connection, was just an advisor, or earned income from software he talked about.
Of course I can’t find it now, though.
LikeLike
You have to keep things separate. Take GETV for example. Let them “do their own thing” and do the stories they want. Then at the end, have a “paid for” section where they report honestly on stories from sponsors. This would be much better than to mix “real” segments and “paid for” segments.
Also, you need to keep your “editorial news” shows separate from your “paid by sponsors” shows, just like the TV networks used to. If it is clear what is what, then you won’t have to worry about your “real” shows getting polluted by your “paid for” shows.
LikeLike
You have to keep things separate. Take GETV for example. Let them “do their own thing” and do the stories they want. Then at the end, have a “paid for” section where they report honestly on stories from sponsors. This would be much better than to mix “real” segments and “paid for” segments.
Also, you need to keep your “editorial news” shows separate from your “paid by sponsors” shows, just like the TV networks used to. If it is clear what is what, then you won’t have to worry about your “real” shows getting polluted by your “paid for” shows.
LikeLike
I didn’t read thru all the comments but I am sure someone might have mentioned this.
Consider the scenario in which you have set up such a meter and you have a vcast with a red rating or a 10/10 rating – I say the video shouldn’t be up there. I wouldn’t be interested and I believe no one would be except the fans.
And you can’t get ‘fans’ of a particular person(like Paris hilton 🙂 )/group (Apple) on a general site like podtech’s.
For that you should set up a fan site in which case the meter becomes redundant.
If your blog/vlog is popular people are going to talk about it and make their own opinions. They will have just one more thing to talk about. If thats what you want….
LikeLike
I didn’t read thru all the comments but I am sure someone might have mentioned this.
Consider the scenario in which you have set up such a meter and you have a vcast with a red rating or a 10/10 rating – I say the video shouldn’t be up there. I wouldn’t be interested and I believe no one would be except the fans.
And you can’t get ‘fans’ of a particular person(like Paris hilton 🙂 )/group (Apple) on a general site like podtech’s.
For that you should set up a fan site in which case the meter becomes redundant.
If your blog/vlog is popular people are going to talk about it and make their own opinions. They will have just one more thing to talk about. If thats what you want….
LikeLike
this is the reason why i wouldnt let neither the prosecutors nor defense attorneys buy me a 50 cent cup of coffee at the courthouse when i was a crime reporter. even the appearance of impropriety is unacceptable in ideal circumstances. with a background like this, i imagine we will work out a process that can pass muster with my mentors at jschool.
LikeLike
this is the reason why i wouldnt let neither the prosecutors nor defense attorneys buy me a 50 cent cup of coffee at the courthouse when i was a crime reporter. even the appearance of impropriety is unacceptable in ideal circumstances. with a background like this, i imagine we will work out a process that can pass muster with my mentors at jschool.
LikeLike
I like the idea, im just curious about the design. What will it look like? How are you going to present your sell out meter? Are you going to break it up like you did in your post.
LikeLike
I like the idea, im just curious about the design. What will it look like? How are you going to present your sell out meter? Are you going to break it up like you did in your post.
LikeLike
“Audiences get turned off when they know that content isn’t actually coming from the heart but rather is coming from the deep wallets of a big company.”
Actually, Robert, this isn’t always true. There’s a huge, thriving contract publishing business out there where entire magazines are created for companies – and consumers actually like them.
In the UK, for example, the highest circulating magazine is a contract publication – Sky’s listings mag. Magazines for supermarkets like Sainsbury and Waitrose sell 300-400,000 copies, beating their “independent” rivals.
So I’d suggest you’re wrong. It’s not the source of the money that’s paying for a publication – it’s the quality of the product. If all a product is is hard sell, it turns people off. But not if it’s done under contract, and done well.
LikeLike
“Audiences get turned off when they know that content isn’t actually coming from the heart but rather is coming from the deep wallets of a big company.”
Actually, Robert, this isn’t always true. There’s a huge, thriving contract publishing business out there where entire magazines are created for companies – and consumers actually like them.
In the UK, for example, the highest circulating magazine is a contract publication – Sky’s listings mag. Magazines for supermarkets like Sainsbury and Waitrose sell 300-400,000 copies, beating their “independent” rivals.
So I’d suggest you’re wrong. It’s not the source of the money that’s paying for a publication – it’s the quality of the product. If all a product is is hard sell, it turns people off. But not if it’s done under contract, and done well.
LikeLike
Robert, don’t you know selling-out is the new Web 2.0?
Posts for sale? Sure! Thanks to PayMeToBlog.com
Every post that appears is paid for. You pay me, I blog. It’s that simple. Buy a post today!
LikeLike
Robert, don’t you know selling-out is the new Web 2.0?
Posts for sale? Sure! Thanks to PayMeToBlog.com
Every post that appears is paid for. You pay me, I blog. It’s that simple. Buy a post today!
LikeLike
Depends on the audience big time.
If PodTech wants to have mass market appeal, i.e. not just techies, and especially not just bloggers, then the majority of the audience will likely not care in all honesty, in which case such disclosure can provided by following a small but clear link for those that care (and there are people that do and should).
While the idea of seeing some huge ‘under-the influence meter’ under some politians would be great, if not humourous, it’s probably overkill.
LikeLike
Depends on the audience big time.
If PodTech wants to have mass market appeal, i.e. not just techies, and especially not just bloggers, then the majority of the audience will likely not care in all honesty, in which case such disclosure can provided by following a small but clear link for those that care (and there are people that do and should).
While the idea of seeing some huge ‘under-the influence meter’ under some politians would be great, if not humourous, it’s probably overkill.
LikeLike
You don’t have to choose between advertising and editorial – you can run both.
The sum is more interesting than either one alone and the separation will improve both because they’re not trying to occupy the same space.
LikeLike
You don’t have to choose between advertising and editorial – you can run both.
The sum is more interesting than either one alone and the separation will improve both because they’re not trying to occupy the same space.
LikeLike
yes, it’s about audience and placement. pod tech already has the corporate section, so is that where the commercial (paid for coverage) stuff would go? seems to me that would be the place. we at coBRANDiT get into producing paid commercial pieces, and we brand everything with our name. people who see our stuff know we do paid work. also, our content is designed to live on the brand/sponsor’s website, so the affiliation is clear there. as many here have said, it really comes down to quality. we try to produce commercial content with “soul” (as you say) by having stories told by real people, and shot in a documentary style. we’re interested in word-of-mouth, and assume that the audience for our content is largely comprised of people who want inside info, or are interested in our clients. the only source for inside info on a brand/client is (usually) the brand/client. it comes down to producing credible commercial info, and voice.
LikeLike
yes, it’s about audience and placement. pod tech already has the corporate section, so is that where the commercial (paid for coverage) stuff would go? seems to me that would be the place. we at coBRANDiT get into producing paid commercial pieces, and we brand everything with our name. people who see our stuff know we do paid work. also, our content is designed to live on the brand/sponsor’s website, so the affiliation is clear there. as many here have said, it really comes down to quality. we try to produce commercial content with “soul” (as you say) by having stories told by real people, and shot in a documentary style. we’re interested in word-of-mouth, and assume that the audience for our content is largely comprised of people who want inside info, or are interested in our clients. the only source for inside info on a brand/client is (usually) the brand/client. it comes down to producing credible commercial info, and voice.
LikeLike
Owen, that’s exactly where it’ll go. If that changes we’ll let you know.
LikeLike
Owen, that’s exactly where it’ll go. If that changes we’ll let you know.
LikeLike
In addition to the policies that address journalistic integrity, how about the use of an ombudsman?
Not an evangelist, but an independent voice within the organization that would be the voice of the reader/viewer?
Also, I think that this ombudsman would also give an insight into the journalistic processes and culture that podtech operates within.
LikeLike
In addition to the policies that address journalistic integrity, how about the use of an ombudsman?
Not an evangelist, but an independent voice within the organization that would be the voice of the reader/viewer?
Also, I think that this ombudsman would also give an insight into the journalistic processes and culture that podtech operates within.
LikeLike
I like the idea of the sellout meter. It’ll definately help readers trust (or, I suppose, distrust) the material on the site. The only thing that bothers me about it is that it could potentially be a turnoff to those hoping you’ll sell out to them.
LikeLike
I like the idea of the sellout meter. It’ll definately help readers trust (or, I suppose, distrust) the material on the site. The only thing that bothers me about it is that it could potentially be a turnoff to those hoping you’ll sell out to them.
LikeLike