Designing a big news site is about more than beauty

It appears to be Pick On News Web Designers Day today. This comic — poking at news sites’ unwillingness to link, misuse of thumbnails, and addictions to share buttons, among other things — made the rounds of Twitter, to the point of crashing cartoonist Brad Colbow’s site.

But even more talked about, on Hacker News anyway, was web designer Andy Rutledge’s unrequested redesign of the website of The New York Times. He finds the current site too busy, too data-dense, and he suggests an alternative, here. (That’s specifically a section front for Politics; you can see the existing page on nytimes.com here.)

Rutledge’s design has a lot to recommend it: it’s clean, spacious, has nice typography, and feels high-end, the way something like the Times should to differentiate itself from the competition. (I’m focusing just on his design rather than his ideas about journalism, which are pretty wrong-headed and seem derived from some more-puritan-than-the-Puritans ideal — how free news is inherently bad, that the act of “featuring” some stories over others is a violation of news purity, “there is no ‘most popular’ news,” “almost all news organizations have abandoned reporting in favor of editorial,” etc.)

But as nice-looking as it is, it also misses some of the point of what it means to design for the Times. The Times generates a ton of content every day. Looking at Times Wire, I see 169 stories published just in the past 18 hours — and I don’t believe that’s actually capturing everything that flows through the Times’ blogs and sundry other online spaces. And it’s a Tuesday! The challenge of a news organization that pumps out that much content is how to present it all in a way that maximizes its value, both journalistically and financially. There are many, many beautiful websites around the Internet that, as lovely as they are, would be awful as an entry point of a news site. (Similarly, stripping stories down to just headlines — no intro text, which Rutledge dislikes for some reason, no thumbnails — may maximize typographic beauty, but it doesn’t do much for enticing a click.)

This isn’t just a problem for the Times; it’s also a problem for the massive aggregators like HuffPo and Gawker. (Whatever one thinks of the controversial Gawker redesign, it is nonetheless an attempt to wrestle with this problem.) Rutledge’s design, on a commonly sized laptop screen (1440×990), would link to exactly three stories in the first screenful of content. The Times’ current Politics page links to 13.

Now, that doesn’t mean the Times Politics page is perfect. It’s actually kinda ugly, and confusing, and cramped. But, as ex-Timesman Michael Donohoe writes at Hacker News, it’s also based on a design that’s approaching six years old. (Here’s the front page of nytimes.com on April 2, 2006, when the current design was put into place. Look familiar?) That raises another of the major challenges news sites face: Because they produce so much content, every day, nonstop, major change is hard to pull off. That’s true with any extensive website, but it’s particularly true of a news website that takes its responsibilities to the historical record even a little bit seriously.

Think how much the Times’ digital output has changed since 2006, how many new targets those stories hit — an iPhone app, an iPad app, a Kindle edition, a mobile site. And each of those, I’d wager, meet more of Rutledge’s wishes: they’re cleaner, more spacious, more obvious nav targets. And the bits of nytimes.com that have gotten designed/redesigned since 2006 — DealBook, Opinion, T — all share that spirit.

(And if Rutledge really does want nothing more than a long stream of decontextualized headlines, may I suggest either Times Wire or Today’s Paper?)

The legitimate question is why hasn’t the front page of nytimes.com seen that same kind of love. I suspect the institutional inertia question is a big part of it. I suspect another is the Times’ strong print DNA, which privileges the editor’s judgment in story placement in ways that lead to echoing of complex, text-heavy print layouts that match the Times-on-paper.

But the other piece is that no one has figured out a way to present lots and lots of constantly updated information in a way that (a) is beautiful, (b) is effective at story discovery, and (c) privileges editorial control.

Beautiful by itself isn’t that hard — there are lots of beautiful sites on the web, and lots of talented designers. When it comes to effective story discovery, the innovation has all been in the direction of algorithms and raw feeds. An algorithm is how Facebook surfaces items in your News Feed; a raw feed is how Twitter organizes tweets from the people you follow, in straight reverse chronological order. But neither of those is perfect for human editorial control, which is something news organizations rightly value; there are tons of visual and contextual cues on those complicated nytimes.com pages that tell me what Times editors think is more or less important for me to see. (And, in any event, most news organizations have nothing near the amount of data needed to create Facebook-style personalization. The Times, with its article recommendations, is about as close as it gets.)

I guess my overarching point is that, while there are no doubt lots of pages on nytimes.com or any other news site that could use a once-over, the problems of large-scale information architecture for news sites are really hard problems. Smart people think about these problems. And their solutions require more than a nice slab-serif typeface and some white space.

NewsTrust dives into the fact-check business with expanded Truthsquad

Just in time for the 2012 elections, the cottage industry of media fact-checking is ramping up. That latest addition is Truthsquad, which began last year as a pilot project of NewsTrust. TruthSquad will differentiate itself from its peers by bringing in the crowd, combining the talents of professional journalists with the eagerness (if not competitiveness) of the public to separate fact from less-than fact. As the Truthsquad homepage puts it, they’re “developing a pro-am network to fact-check political claims during the 2012 elections.”

What’s new is additional financial backing from Craig Newmark and a partnership with the Center for Public Integrity — and with them Truthsquad plans to go big, creating widgets and tools for fact-checking statements on any news site and joining PolitiFact and FactCheck.org as part of the Internet’s informal truth-sleuth network.

The big push is a new phase for NewsTrust, which plans to shift its focus from its news curation and media literacy work to focus on fact-checking and building out Truthsquad with a launch this fall. When I spoke to Fabrice Florin, executive director of NewsTrust, he said the current state of politics and media have made for a environment ripe for fact-checking.

“Truthsquad shows a lot of promise because it directly addresses a need,” said Florin. “There is a growing amount of misinformation, particularly in this political climate. We have an opportunity to provide a useful service by encouraging a collaboration between journalists and citizens.”

“We don’t expect citizens to be better than journalists.”

Truthsquad will be working on two fronts, on its website and on embeddable widgets for stories on any news site. In both cases readers could either suggest or assess statements for their truth (or truthiness), which would require supporting facts and links to make a determination. Through the partnership with the Center for Public Integrity, Truthsquad will have a handful of journalists providing fact checks as well as a community manager to give readers guidance on how to verify information and identify reliable sources.

“We don’t expect citizens to be better than journalists — we know an experienced journalist can get more work done,” he said. “But just getting citizens to participate in it will help them develop more of an open mind, build their research skills and appreciate the value of looking at different perspectives.”

Here’s one example, a dispute over the veracity of a Glenn Beck quote about how the government calculates inflation. Among Truthsquad readers, 41 say the statement is true; 112 say it’s false; 16 aren’t sure. Each have their opportunity to present evidence, but in the end Truthsquad editors (represented in this case by MediaBugs boss Scott Rosenberg) come in to render a final verdict. (In this case, “mostly false.”)

One key to getting people involved in the project will be using game-like mechanics in the truth vetting process with things like quizzes, points, or badges, Florin said. In their pilot project, they discovered that traffic and engagement on the Truthsquad project was 10 times higher than to the main NewsTrust site. “From our experience at NewsTrust, it’s no longer enough to get people informed, you have to get them engaged,” he said.

Another way to get people involved in fact-checking is by connecting with news that matters to them, particularly local or community news. Florin points to the growth of fact-checking at local and regional news sites, places like Voice of San Diego and Honolulu Civil Beat among others. He said they want to help those organizations augment what they do and drive more eyeballs to their work.

Fact-checking is something of a growth market, as PolitiFact (a Pulitzer winner, thank you) and Factcheck.org have shown, because of what they propose: well-packaged conclusive answers. Unlike a typical news item, you’ll (hopefully) have a concrete idea whether what you’ve been told is true or false.

Florin said the growth in fact-checking is a response not just to public officials getting bendy with the truth, but also how people consume information now. With an expanding universe of news options, once someone find a source of information they like or agree with, they tend to cling to it, Florin said. The reason Truthsquad is partnering with FactCheck.org and PolitiFact is to get people thinking about what they read and hear, and from there, questioning it.

“In the fact-checking space we have an opportunity to add value, galvanize and promote the few organizations that are doing this,” he said. “We’re trying to grow the fact-checking movement, we want to be the glue that holds these organizations together.”

Links on Twitter: Digital ad revenue up at The Atlantic, Times Open returns and The Awl gets a new publisher

PSA: NPR is looking for a supervising editor for digital news http://nie.mn/qtgbDh »

The @Awl has a new publisher, @JohnShankman, and is looking for office space in Manhattan http://nie.mn/qpeqaO »

Developers everywhere take note: NYT’s Times Open is back this fall http://nie.mn/qxNIA3 »

Why it’s time for book publishers to think like start-ups http://nie.mn/nQOaoV »

Reuter’s @AntDerosa says he’s taking a break on Tumblr because of its instability http://nie.mn/qEcCLL »

Digital ad revenue at The Atlantic is up 42 percent over this time last year http://nie.mn/rbsIYh »

The WSJ’s Mark Schoofs is ProPublica’s newest senior editor http://nie.mn/mQy4bU »

Lucky is building a fashion blog network and directing ad dollars to contributors http://nie.mn/qJNf2W »

Want to be a longshot? Tips on how to get a submission into @Longshotmag, which goes live Friday http://nie.mn/nvCsJy »

Better know a Murdoch: Slate and Longform.org showcase the best profiles of Rupert Murdoch http://nie.mn/r33YEA »

Bill Keller plans to pack up his NYT magazine column and head to the op-ed pages http://nie.mn/oWjwru »

Flipboard is rolling out an ad program, beginning with ads in The New Yorker http://nie.mn/rmM0rZ »

For the Texas Tribune, “events are journalism” — and money makers

Texas Tribune Festival logo

When Evan Smith helped launch the nonprofit Texas Tribune in 2009, he set out to get people engaged in their government again, especially in places where newspaper coverage has dwindled. The Tribune introduced blogs, multimedia, troves of government data, and something old-fashioned for an online news startup: face-to-face conversations.

The Tribune has hosted more than 60 public events — all free — attracting top influencers, big audiences, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in corporate sponsorships. Now the Tribune is blowing up the event and throwing The Texas Tribune Festival, a weekend of ideas for policy wonks, lobbyists, and anyone else invested enough in local government to pay $125 for a ticket.

“Events are journalism — events are content. And in this new world, content comes to you and you create it in many forms,” says Smith, the Tribune’s chief editor and chief executive.

One goal: to combat low levels of public engagement on a lot of the issues the event will address. “We think much of the technology world embraces ‘push’ as opposed to ‘pull’ as a way to reach people,” Smith says. “We are taking a ‘push’ approach to content, and that means going to people with content where they live.”

The speaker list includes top names in the universe of Texas politics: energy tycoon T. Boone Pickins, former U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro. And the topics covered are also the Tribune’s core coverage areas: health and human services, energy and the environment, public and higher education, and race and immigration.

Evan Smith

If that all sounds familiar, it’s because the idea is modeled on the New Yorker Festival. In 2009, Smith hired the person who created that festival, Tanya Erlach, the former senior talent manager for The New Yorker. (“She’s not reinventing the wheel; this is her wheel,” Smith says.) Erlach handles everything from programming to logistics.

Smith is the first to admit that events don’t only produce journalism. They also produce revenue. And even the free events, including the TribLive speaker series, have been money-makers. They are cheap to produce, for one thing, and often underwritten by corporate sponsors. Smith estimates the Tribune raised about $650,000 in corporate support last year, which includes events. He expects to raise $1.3 million this year. While major gifts from philanthropists represented almost all of the Tribune’s revenue in 2009, Smith expects more financial diversity in 2011, with income from philanthropy, corporations, and events evenly split. Altogether, the Tribune has raised $9.3 million in barely two years — far more than like-minded nonprofit startups elsewhere.

“A lot of better established nonprofit news organizations — and I’m not counting the public broadcasting TV and radio stations but the sites that are similar to ours, ones that have been in existence longer — really have not approached the task of soliciting corporate support, underwriting, and sponsorships. We’ve just not seen other folks approach this, and they started to call us and ask us and our folks, you know, ‘How are you doing this?’”

If journalism is to survive, Smith says, business must be in the DNA. It’s in the Tribune’s DNA. Another Tribune co-founder was a venture capitalist, John Thornton, who initially raised $4 million in startup funding, including $1 million of his own cash and a large grant from the Knight Foundation. While Smith does not handle fundraising, he does reach out to executives personally to solicit their support.

Is Smith sheepish about that? “Hell, no.” Is there a conflict of interest? “Our only bias is in favor of Texas.” Public radio and television, he points out, rely heavily on corporate underwriting. The Tribune is neither paying people to speak at the festival nor covering their expenses. And the only reward for a corporate sponsorship is “a handshake and a tax letter,” he says.

“The work we do is important. And it needs to be paid for,” Smith explains. “There are appropriate sources of revenue out there. There is nothing to be ashamed of when putting a ‘for sale’ sign on as much stuff as possible, provided that it doesn’t have a negative impact on the work that you do or doesn’t create a negative perception of your integrity.”

Besides the financial value of the Tribune’s events, Smith says, there’s also value in the B word — you know, the word that tends to be uncomfortable in journalism circles. “Just as some other organizations may shrink from associating with corporate interests, there are some organizations, I suspect…that don’t fully appreciate the value of branding,” he says. A big festival is a platform for the Tribune to present itself as a grown-up operation, to build credibility and attract new readers.

Tickets went on sale July 11, with a discount for Texas Tribune contributors. Smith is working out a deal with sponsors to make admission free for college students.

Vadim Lavrusik: Five key building blocks to incorporate as we’re rethinking the structure of stories

Editor’s Note: Vadim Lavrusik is Facebook’s first Journalist Program Manager, where he is responsible for, among other things, helping journalists to create new ways to tell stories. (You may remember him from his work at Mashable.) In the article below, he provides an wide-angle overview of the key forces that are re-shaping the news article for the digital age.

If we could re-envision today’s story format — beyond the text, photographs, and occasional multimedia or interactive graphics — what would the story look like? How would the audience consume it?

Today’s web “article” format is in many ways a descendent from the golden age of print. The article is mostly a recreation of print page design applied to the web. Stories, for the most part, are coded with a styled font for the headline, byline, and body — with some divs separating complementary elements such as photographs, share buttons, multimedia items, advertising, and a comments thread, which is often so displaced from the story that it’s hard to find. It is only scratching the surface of the storytelling that is possible on the web.

In the last few years, we’ve seen some progress in new approaches to the story format on the web, but much of it has included widgets and tools tacked on for experimentation. And it doesn’t fully account for changes in user behavior and the proliferation of simple publishing tools and platforms on the web. As the Huffington Post’s Saul Hansell recently put it, “There are a lot more people saying things than there is stuff to say in this world.” Tools like Storify and Storyful enable journalists to curate the conversation that’s taking place on the social web, turning ephemeral comments into enduring narratives. A story, Jeff Jarvis notes, can be the byproduct of the process of newsgathering — the conversation.

And the conversation around the story has become, at this point, almost as important as the story itself. The decisions we make now — of design and of content creation — will inform the evolution of the story itself. So it’s worth stepping back and wondering: How can we hack today’s story into something that reflects the needs of today’s news consumers and publishers, integrates the vast amounts of content and data being created online, and generally leverages the opportunities the web has created? Below are some of the most crucial elements of online storytelling; think of it as a starting point for a conversation about the pieces tomorrow’s story format could include.

1. Context

Context wears many hats in a story. It could mean representing historical context through an interactive timeline or presenting contextualized information that puts the story in perspective. It could be an infographic, a subhead with information — or cumulative bits of information that run through a narrative. When the first American newspaper, Publick Occurrences, was published, many of its stories were only a few sentences in length. Most of its stories were reports that were gathered through word of mouth. But because of the infrequency of the publication and short length of the stories, it failed to provide the reader with adequate context in its stories. Haphazard newsgathering led to a somewhat chaotic experience for readers.

Today, though, with publication happening every millisecond, the overflow of information presents a different kind of challenge: presenting short stories in a way that still provides the consumer with context instead of just disparate pieces of information. We’ve seen a piece of the solution with the use of Storify, which enables journalists to organize the social story puzzle pieces together to suggest a bigger picture. But how can this approach be scaled? How can we provide context in a way that is not only comprehensive, but inclusive?

2. Social

Social platforms have, in short, changed the way we consume news. Over the last decade, we consumers spent a big portion of our time searching for news and seeking it out on portals and news sites. Now news finds us. We discover it from friends, colleagues, and people with whom we share intellectual interests. It’s as if on every corner one of our friends is a 1900s paperboy shouting headlines along with their personal take on the news in question. The news is delivered right to us in our personalized feeds and streams.

Social design makes the web feel more familiar. We tend to refer to readers and viewers as consumers, and that’s not only because they consume the content that is presented or pay for it as customers; it’s also because they’re consumed by the noise that the news creates. Social design adds a layer that acts as a filter for the noise.

Stories have certainly integrated social components so far, whether it’s the ability of a consumer to share a story with friends or contribute her two cents in the comments section. But how can social design be integrated into the structure of a story? Being able to share news or see what your friends have said about the piece is only scratching the surface. More importantly, how can social design play nice with other components discussed here? How do you make stories that are not just social, but also contextual — and, importantly, personal?

3. Personalization

One of the benefits of social layering on the web is the ability to personalize news delivery and provide social context for a user reading a story. A user can be presented with stories based on what their social connections have shared using applications like Flipboard, Zite, Trove, and many others. Those services incorporate social data to learn what it is you may be interested in reading about, adding a layer of cusomtization to news consumption. Based on your personal interests, you are able to get your own version of the news. It’s like being able to customize a newscast with only segments you’re interested in, or only have the sports section of the local newspaper delivered to your porch…times ten.

How can we serve consumers’ needs by delivering a story in a format they prefer, while avoiding the danger of creating news consumers who only read about things they want know (and not news they should know)? Those are big questions. One answer could have to do with format: enabling users to consume news in a format or style they prefer, enabling them to create their own personalized article design that suits their needs. Whatever it looks like, personalization is not only important in enabling users to get content in a compelling format. It’s also crucial from the business perspective: It enables publishers to learn more about their audiences to better serve them through forms of advertising, deals, and services that are just as relevant and personalized.

4. Mobile

Tomorrow’s story will be designed for the mobile news consumer. Growing accessibility to smartphones is only going to continue to increase, and the story design and format will likely increasingly cater to mobile users. They will also take into account the features of the platform the consumer is on and their behavior when they are consuming the content. The design will take into account how users interact with stories from their mobile devices, using touch-screen technology and actions. We’re already seeing mobile and tablet design influence web design.

These are challenges not only of design, but of content creation. Journalists may begin to produce more abbreviated pieces for small-screen devices, while enabling longform to thrive on tablet-sized screens. Though journalists have produced content from the field for years, the advancement of mobile technology will continue to streamline this process. Mobile publication is already integrated into content management platforms, and companies like the BBC are working on applications that will enable users to broadcast live from their mobile phones.

5. Participation

Citizens enabled by social platforms are covering revolutions on mobile devices. Users are also able to easily contribute to a story by snapping a picture or video and uploading it with their mobile devices to a platform like iReport. Tomorrow’s article will enable people to be equal participants in the story creation process.

Increasingly, participation will mean far more than simply consumption, being cast aside as a passive audience that can contribute to the conversation only by filing a comment below a published story (pending moderator approval). The likes of iReport, The Huffington Post’s “contribute” feature, or The New York Daily News’ recent uPhoto Olapic integration — which enables people to easily upload their photos to a story slideshow and share photos they’ve already uploaded to Facebook, Flickr, and elsewhere — are just the beginning. To harness participatory journalism, these features should no longer be an afterthought in the design, but a core component of it. As Jay Rosen recently put it, “It isn’t true that everyone is a journalist. But a lot more people are involved.”

Image by Holger Zscheyge used under a Creative Commons license.

Links on Twitter: Google+ boots businesses, newspapers launch re-branding campaign, Condé partners with Adobe

Is Netflix trying to kill the DVD? People panicked when Apple ditched the floppy drive, at first http://nie.mn/prNyq8 »

‘@JosephStash is doing an excellent job tracking the Oslo explosions on Storify http://nie.mn/q3hWHK »

“Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss’ legal crusade against Facebook has finally come to an end” — for the third time http://nie.mn/pMKYnA »

Congrats! MT @dansinker: Thrilled to announce I’ll be joining Mozilla to head up the Knight-Mozilla News Partnership: http://nie.mn/qA0qCr »

Khoi Vinh says publishers need to start designing for the mobile web, not building “replica apps” http://nie.mn/pTFjrM »

Condé Nast and Adobe are partnering to define a new set of metrics for digital content http://nie.mn/pPV8TF »

Remember “Got Milk?” This is like that, but for the newspaper industry http://nie.mn/pLn8oe »

YouTube is starting to look like a TV network http://nie.mn/pWAGwc »

Google is kicking out corporate accounts on Google+ http://nie.mn/oAGfUH »

Ars Technica tries a new way to monetize a much-anticipated article with a Kindle ebook for Mac fans

It by now nearly qualifies as an ancient ritual in the tech world: Apple releases a new version of Mac OS X, and Ars Technica’s John Siracusa delivers a comprehensive, almost scriptural, review of it.

A Siracusa review is meticulous, esoteric, thoughtful — and long. His appraisal of OS X 10.7 “Lion,” published Wednesday, weighs in at 27,300 words, split across 19 webpages. And in the tech-journalism world, as in the rest of the field, how best to monetize long-form work is a matter of some question. So this year, Ars Technica decided to also sell it as a $5 Kindle ebook. Ken Fisher, the founder and editor of Ars, is “pleasantly surprised” by the outcome.

“It’s the same review that you get for free on Ars. You don’t have to pay for it,” Fisher said. But people have: The ebook sold 3,000 copies in the first 24 hours, Fisher said. That’s a fraction of the 3 million pageviews the review has seen on the web, but Fisher thinks of it as free money. Ars has sold alternate versions of long-form content for 10 years, but Fisher said he underestimated the power of Amazon’s one-click experience, which makes impulsive purchases painless. “I was surprised by how many people told us they read the review online and they just wanted their own copy to go back to. Or they just bought it as a tip-jar kind of thing,” Fisher said.

Five dollars happens to be the same price as a monthly “Premier” subscription to Ars Technica, which disables advertising and makes Ars stories available in single-page versions and PDF format. That enticement appealed to some: Within 24 hours of running the Lion review, Ars had signed up 150 new members. (The total number of Premier subscribers is a “strong four-digit number,” Fisher said.) For the Lion review, Ars also offered subscribers versions in ePUB and Mobi formats for other ebook readers.

Of course, there was still much grousing from people who think $5 is an outrageous price — an outrage! — for a review, but Fisher said most of the feedback has been positive. (“Only in today’s First World economies can people complain that they can’t get something for free that they can get for free,” he said.) Fisher was reluctant to put the price as high as five bucks at first, wanting to experiment with lower prices. But Amazon’s tiered royalty structure is designed to incentivize slightly higher prices; Ars’ revenue from a $4.99 ebook is roughly 10 times what it would make from a 99-cent ebook.

One person who doesn’t directly share in the ebook proceeds is John Siracusa, who is a freelancer (and a working programmer by day). Every 18 months or so, when Apple updates its OS, Ars negotiates a one-time advance payment with Siracusa. “We say to John, ‘We know you’re going to do your thing. It’s going to be amazing. What do you want?’” Fisher said. “We give him what he wants and more.”

The ebook is, ironically, absent from Apple’s own iBookstore. Because Ars could not publish the Lion review before Lion was released, as per Apple’s stringent non-disclosure agreement, Ars could not initiate Apple’s lengthy review process until it was too late.

“With Amazon, it’s actually easy. They don’t require an ISBN. You upload it, they check it for quality, and boom, it’s in the Kindle store. I think they took eight hours,” Fisher said. “Amazon was the only one fast enough, so they got the business.”

There are frustrating limitations to the Kindle format, Fisher said. The Kindle hardware does not handle graphics well, and screenshots play an important role in Siracusa reviews (while, for example, comparing the pixel heights of window buttons). Moreover, the authoring tools are crude. Reviews are designed for web first, print second, and the design does not translate easily to Kindle’s file format. Clint Ecker, Ars’ technical director, designed the book in, of all things, Pages, Apple’s word processor. Fisher said he is unlikely to make corrections and tweaks to the Kindle version unless it’s a serious error — for example, when Siracusa erroneously reported the number of registers in a CPU. (Yeah, I don’t know, either.) Meanwhile, the web version has already seen lots of small updates.

Ars Technica actually made its first Kindle foray in March with “Unmasked,” a compilation of extraordinary stories about the hacking group Anonymous and its high-profile target, the security firm HBGary. That ebook, currently $1.99 at Amazon.com, has sold 1,000 copies, which Fisher considers a success.

“Our roots are in long, in-depth, technical explainers, and this is just another great explanation that people appreciate that content and open their wallets for it. We’re definitely going to plan more in-depth stuff,” Fisher said. “We don’t have to put up a paywall for people to consume it. We just offer it in different ways.”