In case you haven’t noticed, we’ve been writing a lot about what a variety of smart people think 2011 will bring to the world of journalism. Will paywall go up everywhere or come tumbling down? Will hyperlocal thrive? Will nonprofits run out of donors?
But beyond the predictions of the noted and notable, we wanted to ask you, the Lab reader, what you thought was coming. We did so in the form of a 25-question survey, and here are the results.
Important note: This survey is wildly unscientific. Fifty people completed it, and not everyone answered every question. Talk with your physician before using any of these isolated data points to wager any money or make decisions of even the slightest import. The intention here was to get a broad idea of what our readers are thinking, and maybe to be entertaining. Capice?
Here are the questions and what the survey said, Richard Dawson-style:
Two of the biggest online-only brands stood above the crowd: The Huffington Post (27 percent) and Gawker Media (15 percent). The Daily Beast, Mashable, and Patch also got more than one vote. Among those getting single mentions: Flipboard, Inside Higher Ed, StockTwits, and The Batavian.
As might be expected, ProPublica led the way with 24 percent of votes. Talking Points Memo, Politico, The Texas Tribune, Slate, The Daily Beast, and Patch also got multiple votes. (Politico’s nature as online-dominant in audience, print-dominant in revenue makes it a tough news org to squeeze in the online-only category.)
Getting single mentions, among others, were Left Coast nonprofits Bay Citizen, Voice of San Diego, and California Watch, plus for-profits GlobalPost, TBD, and GigaOM.
One wag suggested “Clay Rosen,” squeezing the two top vote-getters into one: Clay Shirky (20 percent of votes) and Jay Rosen (11 percent). Jon Stewart, Ken Doctor, and Mark Cuban got multiple votes each. Getting single mentions: Julian Assange, Steve Jobs, Tim Wu, Tim O’Reilly, and Jonathan Zittrain, among others.
John Paton’s efforts to turn around the moribund Journal Register Co. have gotten noticed: he led the way with 14 percent of votes, far outpacing The Guardian’s Alan Rusbridger and CUNY’s Jeff Jarvis. (Personally, I would have put Jeff in the Clay/Jay outsider category, but he wears enough hats that he could probably fit anywhere.) Others getting mentions: WaPo/TBD-ex Jim Brady, New York’s Adam Moss, Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall, Gawker’s Nick Denton, and Rupert Murdoch.
These ran the gamut. Among the most interesting:
— A major U.S. city will lose its one remaining major metro daily.
— Newspapers will be caught with their pants down for mobile usage in 2011, with website usage dropping and moving to mobile competitors.
— The beginning of more widespread paywalls, which will work for some but fail for most.
— Mobile traffic — especially tablets — rises by 30 percent.
— Partisans will attack mainstream media outlets for percieved bias. Websites will be hit. Bastions of populism will be humbled.
— Revenue from e-content (online, iPad, Kindle, smartphones, etc.) will exceed revenue from traditional sources.
— Stories will tend to focus on continued congressional bickering, while ignoring the stagnating economy and reputation of the U.S. in times of dramatic shifts in global power structures for the budding generations of tech natives.
— The Awl will be acquired.
— Twitter will launch a branded international news aggregation service, similar to the AP, but focused on real-time online content. It will be staffed with former newspaper journalists.
Optimism (of a sort) abides: The top answer was “none,” with 32 percent of responses. None of the answers got much momentum, though Newsweek, The San Francisco Chronicle, USA Today, The Detroit News, and Forbes each got two or more mentions.
Voting was close: 47 percent think the paywall will be judged a success; 53 percent think it’ll fall short of expectations. Whatever those are.
The most popular answer was three newspapers. Given that The Wall Street Journal is already bepaywalled, and the Times is set to join that number in a few weeks, the popularity of three suggests most surveyed don’t think the paywall momentum will spread too far beyond that. (Here’s the current list of the countries biggest papers.)
A really scattershot response to a pretty scattershot question. Maureen Dowd got three votes, Ezra Klein and David Carr two each. Among the more unexpection mentions: Malcolm Gladwell, Ira Glass, and Dexter Filkins. (Maybe someone thinks The New Yorker is primarily an online operation.)
Most folks believe Patch will still be under 1,000 by next year’s end. (I’m not so sure.)
Old media wins — barely: 57 percent say the NYT, 43 percent HuffPo.
These numbers don’t shake out like the primetime ratings do: 41 percent say CNN, 37 percent say Fox, and 22 percent say MSNBC.
The Washington Post wins out, 80 percent to 20 percent.
Perhaps a trick question, depending on how NewsBeast finally decides to handle its URLs. But 83 percent think the Beast half will win out.
Another close call: 56 percent say Google, 44 percent Facebook.
Our survey takers weren’t Rupert optimists: 36 percent say it’ll be a success, with 64 percent saying no.
The answers were a random spray: no two predictions matched up. Some of the more intriguing: AOL and Yahoo, Tribune and Yahoo, US Weekly and The Huffington Post, Slate and The Atlantic, TBD and the Washington City Paper, Clear Channel and Pandora, Politico and Roll Call, and Gannett and Groupon. (Although if Groupon can turn down Google’s money, I can’t imagine them hitching themselves to a newspaper wagon.)
Messrs. Sulzberger, Keller, and Slim (among others) should be happy with the results: The New York Times was the runaway winner, garnering 44 percent of all votes cast. Tying for a distant second (at 9 percent) were The Guardian and The Wall Street Journal. Others getting votes: ESPN, NPR, and Reuters.
82 percent of survey-takers said yes, mobile would make up a tenth of total web traffic in 2011. Current estimates vary, but these suggest the current number’s around four percent.
Average answer: 11.8 million. Median answer: 10 million. Mode: also 10 million. One pessimist suggested 4 million, portending great doom for the Twitter platform; the biggest twoptimist (ugh) guessed 25 million.
Again, optimism reigns: 40 percent of respondents said no significant outlets will close in 2011. Salon and Slate led the way among those who thing one will.
They passed 500 million this year. 56 percent of survey takers say they’ll hit a billion in 2011.
The aggregators will continue to take slots away from news orgs, survey says: 74 percent of respondents said they expected news orgs to publish less than half of the top 10 apps.
The most common prediction (48 percent) was for continued but unspectacular growth in 2011, to somewhere between 4 and 6 million. An optimistic 17 percent said Foursquare will surpass 10 million active users; a pessimistic 7 percent said it’ll drop below its current user base.
57 percent of survey-takers predict Android beating out Apple’s mobile products. This is another area with lots of warring numbers, but these numbers suggest Android still has some catching up to do — especially if the iPhone heads to Verizon in the U.S. in 2011.
As we draw to a close, it’s time for this year’s predictions from Martin Langeveld, which are the closest thing we have to a tradition around here. We just posted a look back at Martin’s predictions for 2010, a year ago. Here’s what he foresees for 2011; check back next year to see how he did.
Digital convergence: News, mobile, tablets, social couponing, location-based services, RFID tags, gaming. My geezer head spins just thinking about all this, but look: All these things will not stay in separate silos. Why do you think AOL invested $50 million or more launching Patch in 500 markets, without a business model that makes sense to anyone? What’s coming down the pike is new intersections between all of these digital developments, and somehow, news is always in the picture because it’s at the top of people’s lists of content needs, right after email and search. There are business opportunities in tying all of these things together, so there are opportunities for news enterprises to be part of the action. Some attempts to find synergies will work, and some won’t.
But imagine for a moment: personalized news delivered to me on my tablet or smartphone, tailored to my demographics, preferences, and location; coupon offers and input from my social network, delivered on the same basis; the ability to interact with RFID tags on merchandise (and on just about anything else); more and more ability not only to view ads but to do transactions on tablets and phones — all of these delivered in a entertaining interfaces with gaming features (if I like games) or not (if I don’t). In other words: news delivered to me as part of a total environment aware of my location, my friends, my interests and preferences, essentially in a completely new online medium — not a web composed of sites I can browse at my leisure, but a medium delivered via a device or devices that understand me and understand what I want to know, including the news, information and commercial offers that are right for me. All of this is way too much to expect in 2011, but as a prediction, I think we’ll start to see some of the elements begin to come together, especially on the iPad.
The Associated Press clearinghouse for news. Lots of questions here: Will be it nonprofit or for-profit? Who will put up the money? Who will be in charge of it? What will it actually do? It will probably take all year to get the operation organized and launched, but I’m going to stick with the listing of opportunities I outlined when news of the clearinghouse broke. I continue to believe that the clearinghouse concept has the potential to transform the way that news content is generated, distributed and consumed. (Disclosure: I’m working on a project with the University of Missouri to explore potential business models enabled by news clearinghouses.)
Embracing real digital strategies. Among newspaper companies, Journal Register will continue to point the way: CEO John Paton ardently evangelizes for digital-first thinking — read his presentation to the recent (Nieman-cosponsored) INMA Transformation of News Summit, if you haven’t seen it. Is there another newspaper company CEO who agrees with Paton’s mantra, “Be Digital First and Print Last”? I doubt it, because what it means, in Patton’s words, is that you “put the digital people in charge, and stop listening to the newspaper people.” Most newspaper groups pay lip service to “digital first,” but in reality they’re focused on the daily print edition. And that’s why audience attention will continue to go to new media unencumbered by print, like Huffington Post, the Daily Beast, Patch, Gawker Media, and hosts of others. So for a prediction: Journal Register will outsource most of its printing, sell most of its real estate, bring the audience into its newsrooms with more news cafes like their first one in Torrington, Conn. It will announce by year end that 25 percent of its revenue is from digital sources. It will also launch online-only startups in cities and towns near its existing markets, perhaps with niche print spinoffs. And finally, toward the end of 2011, we’ll see some reluctant and tentative emulation of Paton’s strategies among a few other newspaper groups.
Newspaper advertising revenue. An extrapolation of the 2010 trend (see my 2010 scorecard) would mean 2011 quarters of, say gains of 2 percent, 4 percent, 6 percent and 8 percent. But for that to happen, marketers would have to decide, during Q4 of 2011, to direct 8 percent more money into advertising in a medium that continues to report “strategic” cuts in press runs and paid print circulation, that is not finding fresh eyeballs online, that has an audience profile getting older every year, and that has done little R&D or innovation to discover a digital future for itself. With sexy new opportunities to advertise on tablets and smartphones coming along daily, why would any brand, retailer, or advertising agency be looking to spend more in print? My prediction is for a very flat year, with the quarterly totals (for print plus online revenue) coming in at Q1: +1.5%, Q2: +2.0%, Q3: no change and Q4: -3%. That final quarter will revert to negative territory primarily because of major shifts in retail budgets to tablet and smartphone platforms and to digital competitors like Groupon.
Newspaper online ad revenue. This has been a bright spot in 2010, with gains of 4.9 percent, 13.9 percent, and 10.7 percent so far. Assume another gain in Q4. But there are several problems. First, at most newspapers a big fraction of so-called online revenue is hitched to print programs with online components, upsells, added values, or bonuses. So there’s no way to tell whether the reported numbers are real, representing actual gains purely in ads purchased on web sites, whether there’s a lot of creative accounting going on to make the online category look better than it actually is, or whether it would even exist without the print component. Secondly, there’s a lot of new competition at the local level for dollars that retailers earmark for web marketing. Groupon, alone, will do close to $1 billion in revenue this year, compared with about $3 billion total online revenue for all newspapers combined. Add the “Groupon clones” like LivingSocial, and the social couponing business is probably already at about 50 percent of newspaper online revenue, and could well pass it in 2011, very much at newspapers’ expense. That’s why I predict newspaper online revenue will be: Q1: +5.0 percent, Q2: +3.0 percent, Q3: no change and Q4: no change.
Newspaper circulation. The trendline here has been down, down, down, every six-month reporting period ending March 31 and September 30. Complicating the picture: newspapers have been selling combo packages, ABC-qualified, where a single subscriber counts for two because they are buying (sometimes on a forced basis) both a 7-day print subscription and a facsimile digital edition. Lots of inflated and un-real circulation will show up in the 2011 numbers. But if we look at print circulation alone, which ABC will continue to break out, demographics alone dictate a continuation of the negative trend. My prediction: down 5 percent in each of the spring and fall six-month ABC reporting periods. That will mean that by year’s end, print newspaper penetration will fall to about one in three households (a long way down from its postwar peak of 134 newspapers sold per 100 households in 1946).
Online news readership. There are a couple of ways to look at this. For newspaper websites, NAA recently switched from Nielsen to Comscore because they liked Comscore’s numbers better. As a base measure, Comscore is showing about 105 million monthly unique visitors and 4 billion pageviews to newspaper sites, with the average visitor spending 3.5 minutes per visit. Prediction: all three of those metrics will stay flat (plus or minus 10 percent) during 2011. The other way to look at it is: Where are Americans getting their news? The Pew Research Center looks at this on an annual basis, and in 2010 showed online, radio, and newspapers more or less tied as news sources for Americans. Is there any doubt where this is going? In 2011, Pew might add mobile as a distinct source, but it will show online clearly ahead of newspapers and radio, with mobile ascendant.
Newspaper chains. Nobody can afford to buy anybody else, and no non-newspaper companies want to buy newspapers. There might be some mergers, but really, there are no strategic opportunities for consolidation in this industry, because there are no major efficiencies or revenue opportunities to be gained. Everybody will just muddle along in 2011, with the exception of Journal Register, which as noted above will move into adjacent markets with digital products and generally show the way the rest should follow.
Stocks. The major indices will be up 15 to 20 percent by September, but they’ll drop back to a break-even position by the end of 2011. Newspaper stocks will not beat the market. Others: AOL and Google will beat the market; Yahoo and Microsoft will not.
Check in next year around this time as we look back at all the predictions for 2011 and how they turned out.
PREDICTION: At least technically, the recession is over, with GDP growth measured at 2.8 percent in Q3 of 2009 and widely forecast in Q4 to exceed that rate. But newspaper revenue has not followed suit, dropping 28 percent in Q3. McClatchy and the New York Times Company (which both came in at about that level in Q3) hinted last week that Q4 would be better, in the negative low-to-mid 20 percent range. This is not unexpected — in the last few recessions with actual GDP contraction (1990-91 and 2001), newspaper revenue remained in negative territory for at least two quarters after the GDP returned to growth. But the newspaper dip has been bigger each time, and the current slide started (without precedent) a year and a half before the recession did, with a cumulative revenue loss of nearly 50 percent. Newspaper revenue has never grown by much more than 10 percent (year over year) in any one quarter, so no real recovery is likely. This is a permanently downsized industry. My call for revenue by quarter (including online revenue) during 2010 is: -11%, -10%, -6%, -2%.
REALITY: CLOSE, ONE CIGAR. Actuals for Q1, 2, and 3: -9.70%, -5.55%, – 5.39%. And Q4, while not a winner, will probably be “better” than Q3 (that is, another quarter of “moderating declines” in news chain boardroom-speak). So, a win on the trendline, and pretty close on the numbers.
PREDICTION: Newspaper online revenue will be the only bright spot, breaking even in Q1 and ramping up to 15% growth by Q4.
REALITY: CLOSE, ONE CIGAR. Actuals for Q1, 2, and 3: +4.90%, +13.90%, and +10.7%. Since Q1 beat my prediction and was the first positive result in eight quarters, I’d say that’s a win, and pretty close on the ramp-up, so far. Q4 might hit that 15%.
PREDICTION: Newspaper circulation revenue will grow, because publishers are realizing that print is now a niche they can and should charge for, rather than trying to keep marginal subscribers with non-stop discounting. But this means circulation will continue to drop. In 2009, we saw a drop of 7.1% in the 6-month period ending March 31, and a drop of 10.6 percent for the period ending Sept. 30. In 2010, we’ll see a losses of at lest 7.5% in each period.
PREDICTION: I don’t think we’re out of the woods, or off the courthouse steps, although the newspaper bankruptcy flurry in 2009 was in the first half of the year. The trouble is the above-mentioned revenue decline. If it continues at double-digit rates, several companies will hit the wall, where they have no capital or credit resources left and where a “restructuring” is preferable and probably more strategic than continuing to slash expenses to match revenue losses. So I will predict at least one bankruptcy of a major newspaper company. In fact, let’s make that at least two.
REALITY: CORRECT — TWO CIGARS. Well, MediaNews Group filed its strategic bankruptcy in January, as did Morris Publishing. So this was a quick win. Canwest Ltd. Partnership, publisher of 12 Canadian papers, filed in January as well.
PREDICTION: Yup, there will be closings and frequency reductions. Those revenue and circulation declines will hit harder in some places than others, forcing more extinction than we saw in 2009.
REALITY: WRONG. Nope, everybody managed to hang on, nobody of any size closed.
PREDICTION: It’s interesting that we saw very little M&A activity in 2009 — none of the players saw much opportunity to gain by consolidation. They all just hunkered down waiting for the recession to end. It has ended, but if my prediction is right and revenue doesn’t turn up or at least flatten by Q2, the urge to merge or otherwise restructure will set in. Expect to see at least a few fairly big newspaper firms merge or be acquired by other media outfits. (But, as in 2009, don’t expect Google to buy the New York Times or any other print media.)
REALITY: WRONG. Google didn’t buy the Times or any other newspaper, but by the same token, there were no significant mergers or acquisitions all year. So much for Dean Singleton’s promise of “consolidation” in the industry after MediaNews emerged from its quick bankruptcy.
PREDICTION: Given the fact that newspaper stocks generally outperformed the market (see my previous post), it’s not surprising that there were few changes in the executive suites. But if the industry continues to contract, those stock prices will head back down. Don’t be surprised to see some boards turn to new talent. If they do, they’ll bring in specialists from outside the industry good at creative downsizing and reinvention of business models. Sooner would be better than later, in some cases.
REALITY: NOT FLAT WRONG, BUT NOT CLOSE. Perhaps the closest any company came to truly shaking things up was Journal Register Company, which in January appointed as its CEO John Paton, an executive with experience in Hispanic media. He’s not an outsider, but he’s preaching a very different gospel that includes a clear vision for a web-based future for news. Elsewhere, Tribune, still dealing with bankruptcy, tossed CEO Randy Michaels, not for strategic reasons but because accusations of sexism and other dumb behavior were “tarnishing” the company’s name.
PREDICTION: There will be more and more launches of online and online/print combos focused on covering towns, neighborhoods, cities and regions, with both for-profit and nonprofit bizmods. Startups and major media firms looking to enter this “space” with standardized and mechanized approaches won’t do nearly as well as one-off ventures where real people take a risk, start a site, cover their market like a blanket, create a brand and sell themselves to local advertisers.
REALITY: CORRECT. This is happening in spades. AOL’s Patch launched hundreds of sites. It may be a “standardized” approach, but it’s not “mechanized,” and hired more journalists than any company has in decades. At the same time, one-off ventures continue to sprout in towns and cities everywhere.
PREDICTION: At the end of 2008, this wasn’t yet much of a discussion topic. It became the obsession of 2009, but the year is ending with few actual moves toward full paywalls or more nuanced models. Steve Brill’s Journalism Online promises a beta rollout soon and claims a client list numbering well over 1000 publications. Those are not commitments to use JO’s system — rather, they’re signatories to a non-binding letter of intent that gives them access to some of the findings from JO’s beta test. Many publishers, including many who have signed that letter, remain firmly on the sidelines, realizing that they have little content that’s unique or valuable enough to readers to charge for. JO itself has not speculated what kind of content might garner reader revenue, although its founders have been clear that they’re not recommending across-the-board paywalls. So where are we heading in 2010? My predictions are that by the end of the year, most daily papers will still be publishing the vast majority of their content free on the Web; that most of those experimenting with pay systems will be disappointed; and that the few broad paywalls in place now at local and regional dailies will prove of no value in stemming print circulation declines.
REALITY: CORRECT. Most papers are still publishing the vast majority of their content free on the web. ALSO CORRECT: Broad paywalls have done little to stem the decline in print. JURY STILL OUT: But it’s too soon to tell whether those experimenting with paywalls are disappointed. All eyes are on the impending paywall start at the New York Times.
PREDICTION: The recently announced consortium led by Time Inc. to publish magazine and (eventually) newspaper content on tablets and other platforms will see the first fruits of its efforts late in the year as Apple and several others unveil tablet devices — essentially oversized iPhones that don’t make phone calls but have 10-inch screens and make great color readers. Expect pricing in the $500 ballpark plus a data plan, which could include a selection of magazine subscriptions (sort of like channels in cable packages, but with more a la carte choice). If newspapers are on the ball, they can join Time’s consortium and be part of the plan. Tablet sales will put a pretty good dent in Kindle sales. One wish/hope for the (as yet un-named) publisher consortium: atomize the content and let me pick individual articles — don’t force me to subscribe to a magazine or buy a whole copy. In other words, don’t attempt to replicate the print model on a tablet.
REALITY: CORRECT, MORE CIGARS. My iPad description and data plan price point were right on the mark. It’s hard to say for sure whether iPad sales have put much of a dent in Kindle sales, since Amazon doesn’t release numbers, but Kindle sales are way up after a price cut. The magazine consortium, now called Next Issue Media, still has no retail product, but it does look like it intends to “replicate the print model on a tablet” rather than recognizing atomization. Meanwhile, the Associated Press is recognizing atomization with its plan for a rights clearinghouse for news content.
PREDICTION: Twitter usage will continue to be flat (it has lost traffic slowly but steadily since summer). Facebook will continue to grow internationally but is probably close to maxing out in the U.S. With Facebook now cash-flow positive, and Twitter still essentially revenue-less, could Zuckerberg and Evan Williams be holding deal talks sometime during the year? It wouldn’t surprise me.
REALITY: WRONG, MOSTLY. Twitter is still fairly flat in web traffic, but it’s growing via mobile and Twitter clients, so its real traffic is hard to gauge. No talks between Twitter and Facebook, though.
PREDICTION: The Federal Trade Commission will recommend to Congress a new set of online privacy initiatives requiring clearer “opt-in” provisions governing how personal information of Web users may be used for things like targeting ads and content. Anticipating this, Facebook, Google and others will continue to maneuver to lock consumers into opt-in settings that allow broad use of personal data without having to ask consumers to reset their preferences in response to the legislation. In the end, Congress will dither but not pass a major overhaul of privacy regs.
REALITY: CORRECT. Indeed, we don’t have any major overhaul by Congress, but we’re actually seeing more responsible behavior from all of the big players with regard to privacy, including better user controls on privacy just announced by Microsoft.
PREDICTION (with thanks to Art Howe of Verve Wireless): By the end of 2010 a huge shift toward mobile consumption of news will be evident. In 2009, mobile news was just getting on the radar screen, but during the year several million people downloaded the AP’s mobile app to their iPhones, and several million more adopted apps from individual publishers. By the end of 2010, with many more smartphone users, news apps will find tens of millions of new users (Art might project 100 million), and that’s with tablets just appearing on the playing field. During 2009, Web readership of news (though not of newspaper content) overtook news in printed newspapers. Looking out to sometime in 2011 or 2012, more people will get their news from a mobile device than from a desktop or laptop, and news in print will be left completely in the dust.
REALITY: JURY STILL OUT, BUT LOOKING CORRECT. To my knowledge, nobody has a handle on how many news apps have been sold or downloaded, but certainly it’s in the tens of millions, counting both smartphone and tablet apps. One the other hand, a lot of people with apps on their phones don’t use them. As to where mobile ranks among news delivery media, the surveys haven’t picked up the trends yet, but wait till next year.
PREDICTION: I accurately predicted the Dow’s rise during 2009 and that newspaper stocks would beat the market (see previous post), but neglected to place a bet on the market for 2010, so here goes: The Dow will rise by 8% (from its Dec. 31 close), but newspaper stocks will sink as revenue fails to rebound quarter after quarter.
REALITY: ON THE MONEY. As of mid-afternoon December 15, the Dow is up 10.19% for the year, so I claim a win on that score. The S&P 500 is up 11.11%, and the NASDAQ is up 15.63%. Among newspaper groups, McClatchy (up 33%), Journal Communications (up 26%) and E.W. Scripps (up 44%) handily beat the market, but all the other players indeed sank or underperformed the market: New York Times Company is down 23%, News Corp. is up 5%, Lee Enterprises is down 30 percent, Media General is down 30% and Gannett is up 4%.
Editor’s Note: Our sister publication Nieman Reports is out with its winter issue, which focuses on changes in beat reporting. We’re highlighting a few entries that connect with subjects we follow in the Lab, but we encourage you to read the whole issue. In this piece Denver Post sportswriter Lindsay Jones talks about how Twitter became part of her day job.
My name is Lindsay Jones, and I am a Twitter-holic.
OK, I admit it. I didn’t take to this Twitter revolution right away. Soon after I joined The Denver Post in the summer of 2008 to be the beat reporter for the Denver Broncos, my editor asked me to tweet as part of my routine at training camp. Twitter wasn’t well known back then, and I remember wondering why anyone would possibly want to receive a 140-character message from training camp or during a nationally televised game.
I did it anyway, and boy, was I wrong.
By the next spring, Twitter — along with other social media — was playing a huge role in my coverage. Tweets were now as big a part of my job as filing stories for the paper, just as they were for my NFL sports writing colleagues. Twitter has completely changed the way we cover football, as I’m sure it has changed all other sports beats.
The Denver Post’s Broncos Twitter account was launched during my first training camp with the team. Since then close to 14,000 tweets have been sent — the majority from me. Nearly all relate directly or indirectly to the Broncos and the NFL, a combination of breaking news from me or my Post partners, analysis (particularly during games), and some back and forth with the public. Some are auto tweets from our Broncos and NFL print and online news stories, columns and analysis.
Every device that connects to the Internet, from mobile phones to MiFis to computers to TiVOs, needs a unique ID number (also called an IP address) in order to make contact with other devices on the network. The world will run out of addresses by March 2011. This means that for those in developing areas like China and India who finally have access to technology, they won’t be able to get online. But it also means that large-scale U.S. providers such as Comcast won’t be able to support new customers as they have in the past. Why? Our current standard, IPv4, is the Internet Protocol developed in 1981. It’s been 30 years, and we’re out of numbers. The next iteration is IPv6, which is ultimately more secure and is much more extensible. Eventually, ISPs will have to make the switch and migrate all of their customers. However, those people connecting via IPv6 won’t be able to access content that’s being housed on IPv4. The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NPR, local blogs — basically any content producer who hopes to continue reaching a worldwide audience — will either have to start migration now or will face losing millions of visitors starting Q3 next year.
Lots of new hyperlocal initiatives will launch before summer 2011 by a vast number of traditional media organizations. Millions and millions of dollars will be spent recreating templated sites based on zip code or geography alone. All of the local ad dollars being counted on will instead shift towards social commerce sites like LivingSocial and Groupon, which have started to include compelling editorial content. Interest among journalists will grow, while consumer interest continues to stagnate. Only the hyper-personal sites that focus on niche content and geography rather than neighborhoods alone will succeed.
2011 will be the year of the tablet. We’ll see close to two dozen tablets come to market, most running some version of Android. Consumers will continue to love the iPad, while publishers will continue developing what is essentially a web-centric experience for a device that does much, much more. Smart entrepreneurs will leapfrog traditional news organizations by focusing on dynamic content curation via algorithm. Think Pulse 2.0, Flipboard, Wavii — but even more engaging.
Geofencing will become an integral part of the checkin experience in 2011. Right now, many mobile social networks use a fuzzy radius to locate members, and it’s easy to game the system. But it’s also harder for retailers and others interested in social commerce to effectively use networks like Foursquare and Gowalla because it’s difficult to verify that a user is actually inside of a store or at a specific location. For news orgs trying to syndicate content, the best many can do now is to leave vague tips around town. Geofencing technology requires very strict location parameters, allowing a number of interesting possibilities. For example, check-ins can be triggered automatically, expiring assets (such as event tickets or breaking news alerts) can be pushed to users, and a moving target — like a parade or car chase — can be tracked or commented on. And with geofencing, someone can’t check into his favorite restaurant repeatedly while driving past it his way to work.
Data-filled firehoses will spring leaks everywhere in 2011. And not just WikiLeaks. Twitter is releasing a personal metrics dashboard soon. Other social networks are discussing how to release data streams about and for their users and the content being discussed. News organizations will soon find a fantastic opportunity to harness all of that data, to parse it, and to develop stories about everything from the U.S. government to our cultural zeitgeist. DocumentCloud is a breakthrough, an essential tool developed by journalists for journalists. I hope to see more of its ilk released in 2011.