Hyperlocal News: Journalism without the journalists
Many journalists are concerned that the rise of hyperlocal sites and citizen journalism is threatening the profession - but are they right to be worried?
PRINT journalists are dinosaurs who crush innovation and entrepreneurial endeavour. Because they struggle to comprehend the Brave New Digital World around them, these Jurassic beasts have an inclination to stamp on it, reveling in the destruction they wreak.
Or that’s what some would have you believe.
New media scepticism is often caricatured as either neo-Luddism or rampant professional snobbery. It is journalists, in particular those unimpressed by new media, who are most often subjected to the ‘get out of the way, Granddad’ sneering of the Geek Elite.
However, while pessimism about new media is sometimes driven by a fear of change combined with plain bloody-mindedness, at other times it is driven by a hard-nosed quest for facts about the future of a much-cherished profession – preferably without the hype. And there is an awful lot of hype.
This year, as every year since 2004, it is predicted that the trend will be towards hyperlocal community-level news. It is reasonable to assume that this tech-prophecy will once again remain unfulfilled, or at best emerge as something far short of the revolution we are regularly promised.
This is, however, not to say that there isn’t a revolution of sorts taking place. In the US for instance, AOL, CNN and even the mighty Google are making investments in the local idea. AOL purchased two local start-ups in 2009: Patch, which delivers local news to communities; and Going, which publishes event listings.
Aggregators Outside.in and Everyblock have been bought by CNN and MSNBC respectively. All moving in the right direction, you might say, and indeed there is a lot to be said for Outside.in in particular as a model that succeeds in delivering local information on an enormous scale. Some 57,830 neighbourhoods can’t be wrong, can they? However, what is scarce on this site, and indeed, on other similar aggregators is actual journalism. Political reporting is particularly thin on the ground. And this is a worry.
Here in the UK there are quality hyperlocal sites delivering interesting and varied content along the lines of that which used to occupy the pages of our local rags. The Lichfield Blog, and in particular, the William Perrin Kings Cross Environment site are excellent examples.
The Lichfield Blog is a not-for-profit site run by volunteers and contributors, both professional and amateur. It uses the excellent Addiply self-service advertising system to generate enough money to cover costs. But despite being very good, it’s not a model that will help save or improve journalism. Indeed it is a model that if not challenged could potentially put paid journalists out of business. It doubtless wasn’t the aim of the Lichfield Blog to replace local news media. It is a site that attempts to fill the gap left by departing or failing local media. Despite this it does point towards some of the dangers that journalism as a profession faces.
William Perrin, who featured in Guardian editor Alan Rusbridgers’ recent Cudlipp Lecture, established the extremely good campaigning Kings Cross Environment hyperlocal site. Like the not-for-profit Lichfield Blog, this site doesn’t offer much hope for journalists, either. In fact, it is perhaps best that sensitive hacks look away now.
Quoted in Rusbridgers’ lecture, Perrin says:
‘…we have a very strong community of people around here who send us stuff. None of the people who work with me are journalists. I’m not a journalist by any stretch of the imagination; it’s an entirely volunteer effort…what I do in my community some people label journalism, it’s a label I actually resist.’
Rusbridger goes on to point out that depending on an individual’s perspective,
‘…you may find that vision of new ways of connecting and informing communities inspiring or terrifying.’
He concludes that it is in fact both inspiring and terrifying. It is hard to disagree with him. In the sense that large media owners no longer hold all the cards and control local media, it is inspiring. However, it is also terrifying because this used to be a big part of the job that journalists did.
William Perrin is not dependent on the Kings Cross Environment site for his week in week out income. He has another job, which pays the bills. The Kings Cross site, like the Lichfield Blog is run by people who make their money elsewhere. It is, without wanting to sound disrespectful, a hobby.
It is perhaps at this point important to remember again who is to blame for the current sorry state of affairs in local journalism. The singular failure of media corporations to respond to the challenge of the internet is the cause of the demise of local newspapers. This, in conjunction with a single-minded drive for profit, has meant they are now publishing a product that is not only out-of-date but often of a poor quality. Newspaper owners have nearly destroyed local reporting by not moving quickly enough to change their business models, and not investing enough in the newspapers prior to that model changing. In the meantime the gap left by the decline of local newspapers has started to be filled by enthusiasts. It is not the enthusiasts’ fault that their projects are now being touted as media which will, depending on the commentator, either save or destroy journalism. They are not to blame. But there is a danger that unless journalists and media organisations start to take grass-roots projects seriously they will again be guilty of responding too late to a paradigm shift in the industry.
While hyperlocals may represent a threat should major newspaper groups not act quickly to develop a local news model, they could also represent an opportunity. It might not be the opportunity as touted by hyperlocal disciples, but it is certainly there. So how can media organisations, or journalists, utilise the hyperlocal model?
The first thing to recognise is so obvious as to almost not need saying. Media organisations, and hyperlocal writers and bloggers, want different things from the local audience. Sites like the Lichfield Blog require community engagement and encourage community involvement. People are doubtless motivated by lots of things to contribute to these sorts of sites. However, it is fair to say, that it is not money that drives them to volunteer and contribute. It is most likely a sense of community spirit. On the other hand, media organisations seeking to grab their share of the local news audience are not doing it for altruistic reasons. They want local money. This disparity in objectives allows us to make clear a distinction that is not emphasised often enough. Local journalism sites and hyperlocal news sites are not the same thing. The objectives are different, the business models are different, the people involved are different and they are involved for different reasons.
However, despite the differences in objectives, these models do have something to offer each other. Amateur hyperlocals often produce original and quirky content. These are the kind of stories that could be useful to local news sites run by the mainstream media. In reward for sharing this content the community correspondents could receive a wider audience and part of the advertising revenue. Some media groups have already experimented with this model using local correspondents in postcode specific blogs, but so far it has been tentative.
Elsewhere in the world the so-called Pro-Am model for news production is being adopted with much less reticence. In the Czech Republic, for instance, PPF Media’s hyperlocal project ‘Nase Adresa’ (our address) is an ambtious attempt at fusing the talents of enthusiasts and professional journalists. The potential benefits of this type of model are huge providing the relationship remains a fair one. Local correspondents would need to be correctly remunerated for their work and treated with the respect they deserve, while at the same time recognising that it’s only right they should play second fiddle to people who do the job for a living.
Mainstream media providers could also assist with journalism training for talented and keen community correspondents. This would help broaden the demographic of trained journalists and produce a new generation of hacks who have trained on the job and in their communities.
It’s a small democratisation of the media model, and it’s one that mainstream media can live with. A quiet revolution of cooperation rather than the shouty belligerence of some hyperlocal advocates. It’s also a proposition that journalists can live with. It’s a model that doesn’t replace them with untrained amateurs but encourages working alongside those enthusiasts while benefiting from their local knowledge and contacts. It’s evolution rather than revolution.
Sadly, it’s hard to see how new media hyperlocal start-ups that are not going to be based on non-profit models can succeed within the current environment. New and interesting approaches to advertising might help. The excellent Addiply system, for instance, helps publishers and advertisers to navigate their way around the complex world of online advertising. However, despite these innovations it is clear that making hyperlocal news pay from the position of an independent start-up is incredibly difficult. It may not even be possible in the light of the incredible growth of Twitter and its ability to show trending topics by region. Even Twitter is going local.
The only way that start-ups by groups of journalists could be profitable is through government funding, and in Wales it makes sense that this is considered. With some real funding they might have a chance of success.
In the short and medium term, however, if our interest is in rescuing journalism, sadly, we must again look to the mainstream media. The hyperlocal trend is something they have to embrace. And it’s about time, too. It’s time for them to get back to doing local reporting, and involve those that filled the gap whilst they were catching up. Of course it should have happened sooner and in some cases it’s perhaps already too late.
Most print journalists aren’t the progress-hating dinosaurs they are sometimes made out to be. But lots of the organisations they work for are. And, unfortunately, in some cases, they have awoken from their slumber too late to do anything about the huge incoming meteorite.
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flickr
I am old enough to remember the time when I was adequately paid as a freelance journalist not just for regular columns etc, but for ‘tips’. And anyone who called in with a story idea got paid – sometimes just a couple of guineas (even when decimalised btw).
Then newspapers got greedy and wanted everything for nothing.
Yes, even the venerable Western Mail: ask them how much they pay for ‘guest’ features such as the Thursday Essay. And my NUJ membership fee is how much ……?
I’m not sure I can whole-heartedly agree with your assertion that: “Most print journalists aren’t the progress-hating dinosaurs they are sometimes made out to be. But lots of the organisations they work for are.”
A lot of print journalists are progress-hating dinosaurs and they use their employer’s lack of investment and lack of foresight as a useful smoke-screen.
Attitudes are slowly changing. But it is still slow and arguably it is 10 years – or longer – too late. I remember working on the national newspaper of Wales about a decade ago and being banned from using the internet as it was likely to encourage me to waste my time.
More recently I know a former colleague and still a newspaper staffer who reluctantly agreed to take possession of a mobile phone for the first time less than 12 months ago – it is rarely switched on.
The often sneering and cynical attitude of print journalists, at all levels, to blogging, Twitter et al suggests to me that attitudes haven’t changed.
Hyperlocal sites such as The Lichfield Blog are continually evolving, faster than newspapers perhaps?
The Lichfield Blog is very different to when it first started a little over 12 months ago and in another 12 months could well look very different again.
The driving forces behind the blog have, from day one, looked to see how this site can be developed and can’t be accused of resting on their laurels.
Unfortunately, this isn’t true of the print media where complacency and arrogance remain the biggest barriers to securing a healthier future.
Excellent piece… but then maybe I’m biased…
One of things Addiply will never claim to do is drive anyone a full-time living; having run and managed http://www.myfootballwriter.com/norwichcity and http://www.myfootballwriter.com/ipswichtown over the last four years, without the additional revenue stream that syndication might bring – pumping fresh football content into a higher news portal – then the chances of local advertising supporting a full-time ‘beat’ reporter look slim.
But, of course, it is only when you offer a full network of, say, 24 Championship clubs that that opportunity arises… a fact of networked life recognised by all the provincial newspaper groups still stuck in their ivory silos.
In the meantime, Addiply aims to do no more than get the likes of http://www.thelichfieldblog.co.uk and http://www.greenerleith.org to a position where they might be ‘not-for-loss’ – on the basis that they are ‘hobby’ outlets for those involved.
That seems to be a reasonable and achievable aim; particularly if we can now offer such hyper-local operatives the chance to play with some big boy advertising; richer media banners, skys, MPUs etc – all with Flash support.
http://rickwaghorn.co.uk/2010/01/08/can-we-join-the-dots-in-digital-britain-mine-a-small-pot-of-gold-at-the-end-of-the-local-rainbow-well-maybe-look-above-you/
It remains very much a work in progress; nothing works, but everything might etc… that now, indeed, is the time for 1000s of little experiments, as the good lord Shirky maintains.
All the best etc
r
A very good and substantive contribution to the debate about where journalism is headed (or not).
The Internet is a game changer in every respect but my belief is that ‘content is still king’. There will always be a need for the journalism skills of writing, reporting and investigation. In fact these skills are needed more than ever. I don’t think ‘hyperlocal’ websites are necessarily going to be ‘competition’ as such to the journalism trade because most people get their online news and comment from pan national outlets (BBC and newspapers online etc).
Most local print newspapers could be classed as ‘aggregators’ in that they mainly regurgitate newswire stories – online hyperlocal sites will just do the same using rss feeds. The editorial or journalistic content is minimal and they are just carriers for advertising and sports results just as in the past.
The issue of how we pay for journalistic content is something that is taxing everyone’s brain at the moment and it is a pity that a solution might not be found until many good ‘old fashioned’ journalists have lost their jobs or do other things. I don’t know what the answer will be but it is good to see that intelligent people like Robert Williams are working on it.
Very interesting article. However, I’m worried that the community bloggers and such like who contribute to these hyperlocal news websites would be sold short.
Who wants to add to big news organisations’ profits? If anyone benefits financially, it should be the people who do the work. If there’s money to be made, it should stay with them.
If the news organisations have all but destroyed local news, surely that shows they have little respect for local communities. Maybe this is the reason why hyperlocal news websites are emerging – they are needed because the mainstream media have let us down.
There is no indication that they wouldn’t let us down again, so why have anything to do with them?
Interesting piece – technology has allowed a radical reduction in the skill set required to publish stuff. this allows people who care about their community to find a voice on line. our talk about local project aims to give these skills to as many people as possible. my own background in kings cross was civic action in the face of acute problems on my street. the writing about it online was intended to help that, not as an end in itself.
You mention ‘hobby’ as if that was somehow a bad thing – people often forget that there is a fine tradition of volunteering in britain in civic society. Others who do important things as non professionals include: lay magistrates, jurors, members of the house of lords, life boat crews, the territorial army, moutnain rescue, st john ambulance, animal welfare etc. whilst there is often a somewhat snooty attitude towards these people from professionals they provide vital civic service.
It is often put to me that journalists should seek refuge higher up the value chain, where professional journalistic expertise allows them to write things that the amateurs could never manage. Of great interest then is the ingress of specialist professionals into the higher value add reaches of journalism. Where people who are practising professionals in their field also write about it, using blog publishing platforms instead of or as well as newspapers.
Ben Goldacre et al are as much of a challenge to the traditional practice of journalism as me in Kings Cross – Ben Goldacre’s stuff also exposes much nonsense in the supposed high value add areas such as medical correspondent.
On my hyperlocal I’ve found that people really like you playing up local identity/knowledge. It seems to give them back a feeling of the old community which is often lost when large neighbouring towns gobble up outlying districts.
Some very good points raised here.
My only question would be, why seek government funding? What about private funding?
Agree wholeheartedly with Donato. We are backing into the future with our eyes closed. Nobody, but nobody, has any idea what the shape of future news delivery will take. The old giants of the industry are staggering and new (and social) media is in nowhere near ready to assume the mantle.
Why, then, should we skew the field with public funding? What will that achieve? How will we know if any model will work when it needs money it hasn’t earned – or deserved – the money it needs to succeed?
The more I think about this, the more I think that instead of looking for an online model, a Facebook for news, we should consider how people can make a living out of bringing the news. I think that we will see the emergence of three skills sets in online news delivery – originators (journalists), filters (editors, but editors who know where to maximise content online) and aggregators.
I see no reason why hyperlocal cannot fit in there, and I sincerely hope it has a future. I hope it can develop a low-cost model that will succeed in taking on large media organisations that no longer deserve our coin.
Lots of really interesting stuff here, and thanks for the positive feedback.
@Peter D Cox – In complete agreement with you mate. It’s a disgrace.
@PaulGroves – I know what you mean, but I think that attitude is increasingly rare. Although not working on a local or regional anymore I can’t really say.
The point also needs to be made about the reasons for this hostility, although a lot of the time it is stubborness and an inability to change, sometimes it is fear and insecurity about using new technology.
We need to make sure that good hacks, who might not have tech skills are brought along with us. It’s a heck of learning curve for some. However. I can’t argue with your point about complacency and arrogance in terms of print but I feel this is an attitude driven by the head-in-the-sand approach of owners.
@Rick – Thanks for commenting. I mentioned Addiply in the article as I think it is the ideal model for hyper-locals (clearly lots of other folk think it is too). The excellent thing about it is its simplicity and transparity in comparison say with Google – best of luck with it. Finding a way to make sites at least self-sustain is essentially to the future of online news media.
@CambriaPolitico – I think that hyperlocals could be competition if mainstream media doesn’t up its game quickly. But overall, in the long run, as I said in the piece hyperlocals and local news-sites should be considered different things. Your point about aggregators is very true, but falling standards in journalism meant that Churnalism was the norm in the world of print anyway.
Thanks for the compliment, it’s always a pleasure to read your site – long may it prosper!
@Will – Really pleased you found time to comment. I am a huge fan of your hyperlocal projects. I understand the Civic Importance of hyperlocal work and think it should be recognised on a par with other kinds of volunteering. What I don’t want it to do is become a primary news-source replacing professional journalistic output. That is a worry for me.
The point you make about Ben Goldacre and the higher-order subjects is fascinating. Looks like journalism could be squeezed from both above and below in the food-chain. All the more reason for us to get our act together.
@Ness – This is a concern I share as well. It is important that people are paid properly and rewarded for their work. The idea of nicking free content from volunteers makes very angry.
@Linda I agree, it is an important development. Just don’t want it to replace traditional professional journalism.
@Donato and @Duncan Higgit – Why not government funding? It’s about time that we recognised the civic importance of journalism. I’m not calling for the funding of already rich mainstream media but of start-ups. The government helps support all kinds of business, why not ones that really matter like hyperlocal sites? Duncan, I see where you’re coming from, but what of the professional standards of journalism. We’re not saying just anyone can do it – are we?
You meet plenty of people who would make good journalists and plenty of journalists that haven’t made good journalists. I think there’s a Darwinian element to online start-ups, and that can only be a good thing. Quality prospers.
Excellent post. At Greener Leith, we’re a charity with the aim of promoting sustainable development, better public spaces and community involvement – and it’s this last aim where we cross over into the ‘Hyperlocal.’ However, it’s clear that we do have entirely different motivations from the local newspapers.
This said, we’re delighted to see an emerging model that covers the costs of running our website – membership fees from supportive locals, combined with addiply and other sources of ad revenue.
And when you think about it, ‘membership’ fees aren’t so far away from subscriptions to newspapers, and perhaps if we had a larger ‘beat’ – there would indeed be a viable model there, but it relies upon the people / organisations generating the content to be doing more than simply reporting the news. This is a challenge, and as other folk commenting here have noted – the boundaries between articulate professionals, concerned citizens, ‘traditional journalism’ and professional opinion formers are becoming more and more blurred.
To me it seems as though the money – if that is the only measure of ’sustainable’ – lies in building a community of interest. That could be a geographical one – but it could also be based around something else entirely different. Mainstream media organisations need to hire community development workers as much as journalists if they’re going to successfully build a community around their brand.
My local (both in Aberystwyth and my hometown Dolgellau), The Cambrian News, is celebrating its 150th year. It still finds itself a popular read, but it has taken until late 2009 to grasp the internet. Yes, they had a website, but it was totally unreadable, unsearchable, and made now use of the social aspects of the we. In short, it was a place to put a phone number.
They now have a website, with an RSS Feed (updated weekly, with the top 5 articles, the day after printing). This is all very nice, and I’m glad to be able to get it, but it should have been done at least 5 years ago. They have not invested in connecting with readers, and from what I know of the Gwynedd editions at least, they do not send journalists to council meetings any more. They are struggling, although many still read it for the sports and photography pages. After all, getting your name in the paper, still means something.
This leaves the paper in a very weak position, with their main strength being their traditional place. Old habits die hard, and old black books of advertiser’s phone numbers die even harder. Any new startup on the block has a stiff challenge if they wish to make money. The Cambrian News only makes money because it can share resources over several papers in several counties, as well as a commercial radio station.
So without journalists reporting the council news (and after all, it is still the biggest local source of drama, conflict and issues which affect people’s day to day lives) who does the reporting? We are beginning to see councillor’s taking on this role. A rather dodgy area, but when my local councillor’s blog is as good as this (and this an example of *real* hyperlocalisation – a square mile, maybe), I’m not really complaining. Time and again I get much valued information on local issues related to planning, environment, council activities, campaigns etc. All things that affect my life directly, rather than discussions of .
In Wales we are already a very hyperlocally based society. This type of model suits us. This is why I think BBC Wales’s local news fails miserably. Who in Borth has any interest at all in what somebody does on a local level in Haye on Wye? Nobody. Most people in Borth probably couldn’t point to where Haye is on the map. I know I’d struggle! Of course the BBC can’t afford to micro manage local sites, so again there is a gap that needs to be filled.
Another point that needs to be made is that since the BBC Trusts decision to abort the BBC’s local video projects, I see none of the whinging news businesses that campaigned against it, moving rapidly into delivering any new and exciting local video content. This is one area where hyperlocal can work, and complement newspapers, whilst possibly cornering a segment of advertising income, although realistically, that can probably only pay for technical and admin costs rather than staffing.
And lastly (I’ve gone on a bit!), there is an existing and successful network of hyperlocal news with a combined circulation of 52,000. It has been going since 1973. Papurau Bro (Welsh language ‘Area Papers’) are run by volunteers with minimal grant funding (about a £1,000 each a year), and published monthly. Some have gone online, but they are at a turning point. They are not gaining new contributors as rapidly as they are losing them. Without finding an online model, I worry that this existing network, knowledge and commitment to discussing local issues, traditions and events will slowly wither. And if you can set up a Wales-wide network for all of them, including an advertising network, well, maybe there is some kind of funding model in Welsh hyperlocal after all…
Cheers for the namecheck (and apologies for only just getting here to add my twopenneth).
I always feel a little strange when The Lichfield Blog gets held up as an example – it was never intended to be anything of the sort…and I still don’t necessarily think it should be. You’re quite right to say that we are not the model that’s going to save journalism and we’re certainly not the model that ‘works’ just yet. Someone emailed me recently to ask for hyperlocal advice and I had to say to them that the best way is to find your own way because no-one has truly cracked it yet…but someone will. It could be us, it could be Will or it could be one of the big guns. But while we’re not saving journalism ourselves, we’re doing our bit. My day job is teaching journalism, so I’m figuring that the mistakes I make are ones my students won’t if they decide to embark on a hyperlocal journey in future.
I’m in a really interesting position having been on both sides of the fence. Working on regional newspapers and their websites has given me a really useful insight on how they work. Very often it’s not the people on the ground who aren’t willing to instigate change, it’s the cumbersome outfits they are working for. You try negotiating the modern day M6 in a Model T Ford and you’ll see what I’m getting at. The Lichfield Blog has been built on interaction and letting people genuinely help shape the site. None of the mainstream media would ever allow someone to tinker with their baby – I’ve actively left mine on more than enough doorsteps. Similarly, I don’t do it full time so I rely on goodwill and I’ve built that by having a two-way conversation with people – traditional newsrooms have been bled to death to the extent that journalists barely have time to pee, let alone interact with readers and contacts.
I’ve often been called a community blogger (mainly by senior industry folk who know my trade) – I don’t get offended because I’ve been called far worse in the past. But it just goes to show the snobbery that can exist towards those who don’t see their work on parchment – and while this attitude remains and this dedication to protecting print products at the expense of trying to develop a digital one, then mainstream media will continue trying to walk up the down escalator.
The only reason that hyperlocal sites have popped up is the old gap in the market thing. I always said with The Lichfield Blog that I would never have wasted my time if someone else was telling me today’s news about my area. But they weren’t, so I did. It wasn’t because I had some sort of civic pride (that’s developed over time!), but it was because I’m a nosey journalist at heart and wanted to know why this road was shut or where that police car was going. Traditional media could have shut the gate years ago but they didn’t and now they’re trying to keep the sheep in the field when half of them have already fled over the horizon. The only way to get them back is to make it worth their while.
I’ve always worked on the premise that local (or hyperlocal for ye modern fancy dans) is about news AND information. That’s why reporting on lost dogs (my particular fave!) needs to be given the same attention as the big tales. Too many traditional media have lost sight of that. Traditional local media is (in the main) no longer local. If you still have one, read your local paper. How many stories actually affect your area or about people or places you know? Our local Lichfield paper now covers areas beyond Lichfield which, to be blunt, I couldn’t give two hoots about because I have no relationship with. At least online we can sift throught the shi..ps and get to what we want.
See, you’ve got me started now, so I’d best shut up before I upset someone or say something daft that undermines all of my points above!
Ta muchness,
Ross
There’s a podcast of a recent discussion of hyperlocal journalism in Bristol (Bristol 24/7) on the University of Glamorgan’s Journalism blog, which readers might find interesting:
http://journalism.weblog.glam.ac.uk/2010/2/1/bristol-24-7-a-story-of-entrepreneurial-journalism-podcast
A very interesting and timely contribution. There will be a greater role for social entrepreneurs to fill the growing vacuum left by the mainstream media in regional news output.
The way ahead could well be through the creation of fleet-footed and innovative news outlets, mainly in digital form which co-operate with other journalists and so provide content to their readers which is both local, national and in time, international.
The mutual model is ideally placed to combine the benefits of scale with the advantage of local (or as the article calls them “hyperlocals”) news producers.
With new legislation in the House of Commons likely to place the mutual model on the same footing as proprietary companies, these are exciting times for creative, innovative social entreprenuers to maximise the latest digital platforms and so leverage the power of the internet.
I have always believed that “Content is King” online, and am pleased to see others finally “getting it”. Unleashing the democratic power of the internet within the mutual model is truly a vehicle to get power to the people.