Tag Archives: advertising

Newspaper: Grand Island, Nebraska

Posted on May 23, 2007 | 3 Comments

As a former newspaperwoman, I’m always studying and critiquing newspapers, whether I’m at home (with my subscription) or traveling. More recently I’ve also started considering newspapers’ websites (see here for a previous post of the subject of newspapers online). Well, this trip is no different.

Since this isn’t my first time to visit Grand Island, Nebraska, this isn’t the first time I’ve perused The Independent. I’ve never been particularly impressed with the Indy, as it’s apparently called. I had never visited the website before, though. It apparently won the award for best newspaper website in 2005, presented by the Nebraska Press Association, which should be saying something.

Content
I was told by a member of the editorial staff on this visit that the paper does have several blogs on its website. I was glad to hear the paper’s apparently not too far behind the curve, anyway. However, when I visited the site today, I couldn’t find any blogs, despite an hour of searching. It should go without saying that content should be accessible, and even if I’d found it after hunting for an hour, it wouldn’t qualify as that.

I did actually find one blog (on blogspot, not on the actual site) linked to on the website; this blog is about the impending redesign of the product, and it has two posts. The last was more than a month ago. I’m sure that wasn’t what my acquaintance was talking about. It couldn’t be.

As my husband pointed out recently, newspapers already have what so many online ventures struggle to create: Content. The problem of newspapers’ slow news cycle could be easily curtailed by, once stories are finished and have been edited, putting them online. Even in a blog-style format, this would help a newspaper beat its other print competitors (if any exist) and better compete with non-print media. And why should the paper care that it’s releasing its content in one method before another? Newspapers generally produce higher-quality, more indepth articles than other news venues. The obstacle is the slow cycle, and by cutting out production, printing and delivery time, newspapers’ content could be available at least eight hours sooner.

As for content generally (not related to the website), I’m struck by how much of the paper is filled with wire content, from page one on, and even on the opinion page. I’m disappointed that local topics have not been addressed in the editorial since I’ve been visiting, either.

Traffic
Quantcast estimates a decent amount of traffic to The Independent’s website. Quite a bit more than it slates for the similarly sized Enid News & Eagle.

Design
When I first reached http://theindependent.com, I was struck with confusion. The site is crowded, and it lacks meaningful hierarchy. This is not a novel problem, but it is a problem. As I briefly mentioned earlier, The paper is undergoing a redesign of the print edition, which should in part help with the flow to the online edition. From the mockups on the redesign blog, it should improve the look for the print edition, anyway.

Accessibility
I was quite perturbed that I couldn’t view a story on the website without registering — which, while free, entailed releasing my life history, exact age, gender and address. This information doesn’t seem relevant. I’m fine with the site tracking where I came from, what stories I read, etc., but I don’t like having to relinquish a ton of personal data just to see when an article that appeared in my search was published. If I hadn’t been doing research for this post, I would have not registered and instead ceased using the site. I’d like reading the New York Times, but I don’t because it asks me to register. Same thing. The incentive isn’t that great.

Advertising
The Independent does allow people to buy and submit classified ads via its website, which is a good thing. A person or business can also purchase an ad to be displayed on the website, and all the print edition’s advertising content is available via the web, as well. These are important, and good first steps (I guess) for a newspaper, since they make money and please advertisers. Having advertising information online, though, may be — at least to some extent — putting the cart before the horse (I’ll use this cliché since I’m discussing a paper in a rural, agricultural setting).

→ 3 Comments

Posted in newspapering, technology

Tagged , , ,

‘All that and a bag of chips’

Posted on May 8, 2007 | 1 Comment

I complained previously about its use of the word giddy, in a romantic context. The tourism department claimed, in that ad, that vacationing in Arkansas would make you fall in love.

This is my second complaint about Arkansas Department of Tourism‘s marketing. It’s not just because theirs is the only spiel I hear, though. I hear Missouri and Oklahoma appeals on a regular basis, and other states promote themselves in my hearing during football season, particularly.

Now, the department states: “We’ve got all that and a bag of chips.”

Rocketboom referenced slang from the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s on Thursday.

Of course, hopefully somewhere in the state a visitor could find a bag of chips. They may even be able to choose between corn, potato or vegetable chips. That’s not the point. What does “and a bag of chips” really say about Arkansas?

• We live on (and offer vacationers) unhealthy, fried food?

• We’re backward and behind the times (the phrase originated by The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, according to on definition at Urban Dictionary)?

• Chips are so good that they beat out the scenery, wildlife, cultural and historical offerings of the state (including the diamond mine)?

The phrase is nearly 15 years old, and it’s a saying that’s had its day. Its 15 minutes of use is well past.

I don’t know what they were thinking. I urge the department of tourism to pull this ad. It’s hurting their cause, not helping it.

→ 1 Comment

Tagged , , ,

How shoddy writing will deter customers

Posted on April 25, 2007 | 4 Comments

Reading Solar Style‘s relatively brief FAQ page — my husband suggested one of the company’s solar cell phone/iPod chargers for his birthday gift — I was turned off on the company. Why? The page contained at least six horrible typos.

Particularly when I’m studying a company I’m not familiar with, this kind of rampant lack of attention to detail is quite off-putting. Can I trust this company with my dollars? Is its warranty reliable? Or is this just a fly-by-night operation?

I’d like to think well of this organization. It’s promoting eco-responsibility, and that’s something I value. But I also don’t want to spend a chunk of money on equipment made by a company with perhaps shoddy workmanship. After all, if Solar Style leadership doesn’t care enough about its image to ensure clean writing (one of the most immediate reflections of its integrity to potential customers), why would I be confident about the quality of the company’s product?

Even though I know my husband would appreciate a solar charger, I doubt he’ll be getting one from me at this point, from this company.

Write well — cleanly, without errors, at least — or if you can’t accomplish this alone, hire qualified help in this field. It’s essential to successful business.

→ 4 Comments

Tagged , , , , , ,

Viable online presence for newspapers

Posted on April 23, 2007 | 4 Comments

Newspapers (“old media”) are, as a class, behind in the online world. (They’re not alone in this.) It’s no secret: check out these sources:

• New media
• Print media recovery will be slow
• Newspapers slow to adopt online revenue streams

I’ll admit, it’s nice to hold an actual paper in my hands beside my morning coffee. It’s not the same to go online and RSS the topics I’m interested in. However, too many newspapers have only the barest online presence.

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: The state’s largest newspaper. I’ve found two regular items (so far) that are in the print edition and aren’t online. The ever-popular In the News (in the left column of each day’s front page, and the weekly menu planner, which appears on page 2 of each Wednesday’s Food section. In particular it would be nice for the menu planner to be available online. What if we recycle our subscription at the end of each day, but I’m behind on setting my menu for the week? Too late. Even with a subscription to the hard copy, this content is not available online. That’s a no-no.

Another problem: The paper’s photos aren’t online. It has a “replica” version of the paper, but you can’t make it big enough onscreen to read without a subscription to the print edition, and you can’t link to any of its content.

The Tulsa World and the Northwest Arkansas Times have stepped it up and now offer to sell prints of its photos online.

Even the advertising portions of the Democrat-Gazette family publications are outmoded: My husband requested an ad he was placing in the Siloam Springs Herald-Leader be placed online, and it was not a possibility. At the very least, newspapers should be utilizing this method of potential new revenue.

Another hurdle newspapers face in having viable websites is the dated nature of their content. Newspapers should have, at the least, blogs on their sites, so they don’t have to be behind all other media when news breaks.

Newspapers will always own the in-depth corner of the news-coverage market. Newspapers are also usually best at separating opinion from analysis from straight news. They’re also hard to beat when it comes to small markets’ local coverage.

They need to read the plummeting subscription (and advertising revenue) writing on the wall and take a hard look at the online world — which is here to stay — and answer the tough questions. Should content be available to registered members only? What are the trade-offs involved in that decision? How should an online edition be paid for? Should be merely prop up the tactile product or should an online edition offer exclusive content?

Yes, they’re tough questions, but they must be answered. Perhaps part of the problem is newspapers’ old, techno-phobic leadership. Younger members of newspaper staff should be included in these discussions, since they’re more aware of the internet as a whole. It’s possible that each individual newspaper will reach a different end result after answering the hard questions. There may not be right and wrong answers, but ignoring the internet is a definite wrong answer.

These considerations are important to me, since I’ve worked in the newspaper industry and I enjoy newspapers. But my subscriptions are in the process of running out, and I’m not renewing. I like knowing what’s going on around me. I want to be informed. But I honestly don’t know if I’ll visit the existing area newspaper websites, or if I’ll just go without knowledge of local goings-on. The available newspaper websites aren’t friendly. Newspapers shouldn’t consider that a viable option, but I know plenty of area residents in the same situation.

→ 4 Comments

Posted in newspapering, reporting, technology

Tagged , , , , ,

Viable online presence a must

Posted on April 23, 2007 | 3 Comments

I’ve been musing recently about several television identities’ lack of useful presence online.

These shows are missing out on capturing the attention of younger audiences. We may not comprise the majority of their potential viewership, but it’s worth reaching out to the younger generations.

Effective websites today have new content on a frequent basis. They also must be fully, easily, searchable. We don’t have cable, and in our rocky, hilly region, we only get two channels. I’ll talk here about what I know, which is ABC. (The other option is PBS.)

Martha Stewart recently launched her new, upgraded site. It’s grand. It has video archives of the show, and you can search for past content, too.

Oprah only recently added video of recent shows to her website. Edit: Oprah’s website did recently add video, but it’s just the show intros. Even for past days, only the introduction is available.

Live with Regis and Kelly’s site doesn’t have a search box. I can’t see even today’s show online, either. It’s a big ad, to make visitors turn on the tube, rather than offering viable content in its own stead.

The View and Good Morning America both have sites only within the ABC site, which is cumbersome and nearly impossible to search. It also doesn’t offer video content.

TV shows have such an easy avenue for new content. Offering the entire show to be viewed online should be a gimme, just the start.

Our local ABC affiliate is, sadly, ahead of the curve when it comes to website content, although it’s still unwieldy and ugly. It even has a blog, however cheesy it may be.

One reason (besides it being a no-brainer) TV shows and networks should offer their shows online: People will watch them, and this can be advertising-supported.

Case in point: I catch up on new episodes of several shows (Ugly Betty among them) via the web, when the episode airs when I’m unavailable. I don’t have to pay for TiVo, but I can still watch when I want. A couple weeks ago, however, I decided I’d like to fill an hour or two with CSI. I like crime-fighting, investigative shows, and my husband doesn’t. Besides, we don’t get CBS, as I already mentioned, so I went to CBS.com. I didn’t get my fix, though. I spent more than thirty minutes trying to get it to work on my Mac, to no avail.

Moral of the story: Don’t just offer video content, offer it in an accesible format. I downloaded a couple pieces of new software and new plugins, but alas. No success. The industry has standards, so comply with them. Make your content accesible: Online, and in a reachable format. It’s a win-win: You can sell advertising for the site if it’s got decent content and visitor levels, so it’s another potential revenue stream. Why wouldn’t you?

→ 3 Comments

Posted in technology

Tagged , , ,

Word: Giddy

Posted on April 3, 2007 | 1 Comment

My husband and I, when were were still courting, had many a conversation about the word giddy.

gid·dy [gid-ee] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, -di·er, -di·est, verb, -died, -dy·ing.
–adjective
1. affected with vertigo; dizzy.
2. attended with or causing dizziness: a giddy climb.
3. frivolous and lighthearted; impulsive; flighty: a giddy young person.
–verb (used with object), verb (used without object)
4. to make or become giddy.

[Origin: bef. 1000; ME gidy, OE gidig mad (as var. of *gydig), deriv. of god God, presumably orig. “possessed by a divine being”]

Neither one of us can remember exactly what the point of those talks were, but they were memorable. He pasted the definition from a 100-year-old on the envelope of one of the letters he sent me. Perhaps he was unhappy I wasn’t falling down in love.

A new television advertisement, from the Arkansas state tourism department, claims vacationing in Arkansas will make people giddy, among other love-at-first-sight characteristics. Kind of a funny use of the word.

Come to Arkansas and fall in love!

Seriously, this use of the word makes me less than giddy. Use of good words (and giddy is certainly that) would normally make me happy, but this doesn’t. It’s absurd. Maybe the state’s trying to jump on the oddvertising bandwagon?

→ 1 Comment

Posted in word

Tagged , ,

TV ad follows fund drive model

Posted on March 27, 2007 | 1 Comment

I promise to not fill this blog up with complaints about defective local TV ads, but I couldn’t give this one a pass. Wow.

First, there’s the annoying spokesman, with a more annoying voice. Not a surprise.

Second, and much worse, Royal Window‘s (multitudinous) spots are designed to mimic a fund drive, complete with the ringing phones in the background toward the end. The spokesperson talks in that kind of voice. Without mentioning the competition, the announcer (aka company owner?) belittles all other such companies.

The creators should know that fund drives, a la PBS perturb the audience. We skip our weekly PBS fix during those weeks of the year. I doubt we’re alone. Does the company really think it will/should/can guilt the audience into purchasing its products? It may work for PBS, but that’s a cause people at least somewhat believe in. New windows is not a cause.

This campaign (can you call it that, when it’s so poorly done?) simply makes me that much more happy my husband and I have begun watching most of our must-see shows on DVD, commercial free.

Marketing technique is a subject of interest to both of us, but I’ll not call this effective or useful, let alone interesting.

→ 1 Comment

Tagged , , ,

(product) Marketing for a cause

Posted on March 17, 2007 | 2 Comments

Bono’s (red) campaign to save lives in Africa: Shop (read: indulge your American consumerism) to help fight AIDS in Africa, a serious, good, immense cause. It’s part of The Global Fund.

In one respect it’s a good ploy, capitalizing on a well-known characteristic of America to reach your end. But does the end justify the means? No, a thousand times no, as I became convinced in my numerous philosophy classes and in life. The end does not justify the means. Couldn’t people do more good by not buying the new toy (shirts at Gap, Razr phones from Sprint, etc.) and giving the entire purchase price to the cause? Granted, this way (Bono’s way, and Oprah’s way) people you are around become instantly aware (if they’ve noticed the advertising of this campaign, anyway) that you support the cause. That’s good, because it may induce peer pressure to get them involved. But will it actually get enough more purchases that it would best the initial full purchase price? Probably not.

People may buy the items because they’re stylish, or because they like the color red, even if they don’t care (or know) about the campaign. This would add to the total haul.

Apparently the campaign’s founders claim people wouldn’t donate the cost of a new iPod, and they may be (sadly) right — but would they donate the cost of half an iPod? Or of half a T-shirt? I think it could happen. I’ve done such things.

Disclosure: I bought a GAP shirt, inspi(red).

I had a gift card to spend at GAP, and marketing for a good cause is a much better cause than giving all of the money to GAP. Sure, GAP gets its cut (half) on its (red) products — those items cost more to buy than other comparable items in the store — but I guess at least I’m helping to get the word out about a worthy cause.

It still makes more sense to me for people to donate.

If you must make a purchase: Buy an independent-designed, shirt to support your cause: More of the funds will be given toward the cause. Example: I recently bought a T-shirt on Etsy, from Saving Darfur to be exact. Right there in the shop it states where the proceeds have gone, exactly. It’s easier to believe that a (much) higher percentage of the sale will go toward the cause, rather than lining the pocketbook of the (greedy) merchants. I’d had my eye on this shirt for a while, and I’m glad I finally stepped out.

The (red) campaign has additional (unintended, I’m sure) repercussions for nonprofits as a whole, per this piece here.

→ 2 Comments

Tagged , , ,