I struggled for over six months to get the newsroom I worked for onto Mastodon. There were lots of reasons why not. And now they’re on Threads with ~10K followers, the engagement they need, and the tools they need to understand their audience. And their content starts conversations and is reaching people who need to see it. This stuff matters.
@ben I remember this same statement being made in 2014. “We have to get on Facebook.” Then “We have to pivot to video.”
You know the rest. There is no one more of a glutton for punishment than news media. There is no rake they won’t step on.
@theinstantwin I actually think it’s the Mastodon project that stepped on this rake. Everyone was aligned - they just didn’t have the tools they needed to be able to sign on, and the journalists who did sign up had a terrible time onboarding (including choosing instances that turned out to be problematic).
@ben @theinstantwin There’s no doubt the Mastodon onboarding process is harder than Meta made it. But if the main goal is engagement and distribution, we already know how this story ends.
And in 2016 i could blame Facebook. But now? I’d squarely blame the pub if I saw even one layoff as a result of “The algorithm is reducing our reach.”
@theinstantwin @ben
Choosing to ignore a market because it takes 'effort' is the most journalism thing I've seen in awhile.
@Dragon @theinstantwin The perception is that it’s a small, skewed market that is not very diverse and is mostly very technical people.
@ben @theinstantwin
It's still a market, and their specifically ignoring it due to 'effort' being required.
So posting on another app, and having the social media manager pay a tiny bit of attention to comments is too much?
Says far more about the news group than Masto
@Dragon @theinstantwin Everyone has to make trade offs with their time and resources. I think it says something about both.
@Dragon @theinstantwin Also, honestly? The way any software gets better is through continuous user research. The only way forward is to listen, and particularly to people who want to use it but say they can’t. Without this loop we’re relegated to being Linux on the desktop: something for hardcore enthusiasts only.
So while Mastodon does this the newsroom has moved on and does not.
Newspapers used to work hard to get any eyes on their pages. Each printed copy was claimed to be seen by 2-3 even 4 people. Idea being left at cafe, lunchroom more eyes to see pages.
Now it's too tough and too much work to literally post on an extra app.
I can only assume this newsroom doesn't have a tech section. Which is odd.
No wonder the industry is dying
I can only assume this newsroom doesn’t have a tech section. Which is odd.
Why would that be odd? Most newsrooms arose from the print space, which has no particular overlap with electronic communications. They’re often late to the game and working with minimal resources to get in.
Meanwhile, newsrooms born online found it difficult to generate revenue and have been going through a collapse / consolidation cycle for at least a decade.
On the one hand you have an industry unwilling / unable to spend money on technical folk, and on the other an industry unable to make sustainable revenue.
Yes, you have the thrust of it. News is dying, and the audience you're describing on the other app won't pay to consume it (not in nearly the volume needed to allow people to make journalism a career) and their views can't be audited in a way monetizeable via advertising.
So there's little value seen in a newsroom spending a nonzero amount of money (in setup and admin) to chase a projected zero dollars.
I suspect this status quo to maintain until and unless someone proves that you can use Mastodon as some kind of loss-leader to induce people to spend money on the business side of the newsroom.
The only return of any social media for a new site is clicks back to the website for ad views and stories clicked.
That's easy to measure. Historically FB has been very good at doing that, twitter not much good. Yet twitter has been journalists favorite for some reason other than actual business measures like web site clicks.
Several of the mainstream media folx I read here have pointed out they drive more traffic and get more attention here, than other spots
@Dragon @mtomczak @theinstantwin I've seen internal reports that show that Twitter isn't a great traffic driver comparatively - but it was where their peers hung out. It's where the journalists, politicians, etc, shared. That industry visibility also counts for a ton.
@ben @mtomczak @theinstantwin
Personally it does, reporters managed some celebrity! yahoo i guess. But for the newsrooms revenue? Clicks are cash. And twitter never delivered.
Just doesn't add up to me, but I'm a news consumer, not the captain of a dying industry desperate for eyeballs and clicks.
@ben @mtomczak @theinstantwin
I shouldn't be so harsh. I've seen twitter build several smaller new to reporting careers in various sports.
In a way, twitter was more about the reporter, than the stories or site the were working through
@mtomczak @ben @theinstantwin
Not having at tech section of any sort in 20223 is a choice I suppose.
News is dying, and there's an audience that can easily be reached by simply posting on another app.
This doesn't require an entire instance.
I'm very familiar with a journalism school. The students show up and tell the school they get news from tiktok, podcasts and social media. The school conintues to teach as if the newsrooms of the 1990s are still a likely employer.