Thriller writer James Patterson recently released the world’s first self-destructing book. It was a gimmick – you could buy the ‘self-destructing’ version of his latest novel, which erased itself after 24 hours, or you could wait another few days and buy it in traditional book form. Patterson’s a former ad guy, so it’s not surprising that he’d come up with something like this, a stunt closely aligned to the next generation’s affections with self-destructing and disappearing content. And while we won’t have a true gauge on how effective this promotion was for some time, it’s definitely gained Patterson a lot of attention which he’d otherwise not have received – so should other writers be considering new publishing options like this?
A Changing Conversation
We’re living in extremely interesting times, from a communications perspective. The advent of social media has changed the way we interact – people are more connected, in terms of both reach and access, than ever before. This connectivity is unprecedented – we don’t know the full effects and implications of this new world, because we’re all in the midst of living in and exploring it. But what we do know is it’s different. People’s habits are changing, audience expectations and evolving, and in this, the whole structure of arts and entertainment is shifting. What we’ve long known to be the way of things is mutating before us.
This is most obvious in publishing, newspapers being the easiest example, with print publications declining as more and more people get their daily news and information online. Books, too, are changing, with Kindles and eReaders becoming more commonplace. The flow-on effect of this is that the traditional publishing model is no longer as profitable – getting a book accepted by a major publisher has always been hard, but with an increasing amount of pressure on the bottom line, the money available for new writers is rapidly drying up. Some of those publishing losses are balanced out by lower costs – an eBook costs nowhere near as much to produce as a physical book, but the return is also diminished, because they can’t charge the same amount for a digital copy. Mostly, the result is flat, there’s really not a heap for publishers to gain from the shift to more electronic readers, but as with newspapers, where traditional outlets are getting beaten is by smaller, more agile competitors who don’t have the overheads and revenue requirements that are strangling the giants. The opportunities for new players – like self-publishers – are greater than ever – though it’s a hard path to reach any sort of significant audience.
The film industry’s facing similar challenges – with more and more films available via illegitimate means so quickly online, we’re seeing fewer arthouse films get picked up by big cinema chains. This is why you’re seeing so many big-budget Hollywood films – remakes of sequels of remakes – over and over, at the movies. Because people can’t replicate the experience of seeing those epic movies at home – advances in home cinema and larger TV screens mean we can get pretty much replicate an arthouse cinema experience in our lounge room. But we can’t do massive sound, we can’t do 3D. As such, Hollywood is taking fewer risks on smaller projects, which means less opportunity for young filmmakers coming through – in the late nineties we had low-budget debuts from Darren Aronofsky (‘Pi’) and Chris Nolan (‘Memento’) that may not have even been released in the modern cinema marketplace. Yet, those are the films that got those guys to where they are now – Aronofsky’s ‘Black Swan’ was a cinematic masterpiece, and Nolan’s now one of the biggest names in movies, fuelled by the success of his Batman trilogy. With Hollywood taking fewer risks in smaller films, we may be missing out on the next generation of great film directors, and with fewer opportunities for up and coming artists, we could, effectively, see a decline in the quality of cinema for years to come. Unless we start looking elsewhere.
The Diversification of Creation
What we have seen in the film industry is that more young artists are branching into new mediums. Where they may not have opportunities in film, more innovative and creative work is coming from platforms like YouTube, Vine and Instagram. Some of these artists have progressed from their online work to cinematic opportunities – Neill Blomkamp, the director of ‘District 9’, got his first big Hollywood break because Peter Jackson saw some of the short films he’d made in his spare time on YouTube. Josh Trank, who directed the excellent ‘Chronicle’ gained recognition through his short films posted online (including this Star Wars ‘found footage’ short). Trank is now slated to direct a new, standalone, Star Wars film, as well as the Fantastic Four reboot. The next wave of film-making talent is more diversified, spread across various mediums, pushing the boundaries of what’s possible in new forms – and as these two examples highlight, there can be significant benefits to just being present and proactive, posting content to build your profile and build recognition. While what we know as the traditional progression of film creative is changing, we’re seeing greater opportunities through access to cameras and editing/creation apps – if you’re looking for the directors of tomorrow, you might be better off checking out ‘Best of Vine’ than Sundance (note: one of the films that generated the most buzz at the most recent Sundance was ‘Tangerine’, which was shot almost entirely on an iPhone).
Opportunities in Innovation
So what does this mean for publishing? Really, it means that we need to consider ways to be more innovative with what we do. Patterson’s exploding novel may seem like a pretty gimmicky gimmick, but this is where we need to be looking as the next iteration of book publishing and connecting with our audiences. People these days are seeking more immersive experiences, with websites tied into content and apps tied into social media discussions. As more movie studios tap into this and get better at a 360 degree approach to their content, that immersion will become the expectation, and that expectation will extend to other forms of entertainment media. Exploding books are one thing, as a concept that might get you a bit more attention for your next book launch, but it’s not so much the idea itself that’s interesting about Patterson’s promotion. It’s the fact that an author like Patterson is innovating that’s interesting, and it highlights the need for all authors to consider new platforms, new processes, new ways to engage readers. The opportunities are there, the mediums are available – it may be worth taking the time to consider how to best use them to communicate and connect with your audience.
Here’s a important fact: The publishing industry is changing. What started with Amazon selling books at increasingly lower prices has now extended with e-books – Kindle sales in 2013 were up 26% on the previous year, eBook sales, which accounted for 0.1% of total book sales in 2006, now make up more than 20%. The change in consumer behaviour has lead to the demise of many booksellers, and I’m sure everyone’s felt that glint of sadness at seeing your local bookshop gutted , the words ‘Closing Down’ plastered across the front window. The industry’s making less money than it once was, and the difficult thing for writers is, less money in the industry means less money to put into projects, making it even harder to get your book published by any of the major players.
You can see a similar impact in the film industry – the squeeze on revenue leads to more producers looking to safer bets. In the 90s, there were more arthouse films, more opportunities for up-and-coming film makers. But as tickets sales have declined – whether due to advances in home theatre or the rise in movie piracy – those investing in films have become cautious. That’s why you see so many sequels and big budget remakes being made – they’re safe bets, they know there’s an audience for them. It doesn’t matter if you think Transformers is total crap, it makes the studios alot of money. We’re seeing this happening in publishing also – while there are still great, exciting and fresh new works being produced, the reduction in retail outlets has seen more emphasis on commercial thrillers and romance books, safe bets that make the publishers money. This atmosphere makes it increasingly difficult for unknown writers to cut through and get the majors to take a risk on your work. On one hand, it’s a sad thought, it was hard enough to get attention before, but there is another aspect in the shift in media consumption that can help, a way authors can help themselves, make themselves more enticing and even build an audience all on their own. Social media has changed the way people communicate, changed the approach to marketing and publication. While opportunities in traditional publishing are getting tougher to come by, the opportunity to build your own brand is greater than ever.
Utilising social media is a must for would be authors – here’s a few notes on the why and how of social for writers.
* You need to get yourself a blog. Obviously I’ve got an inclination towards WordPress, but there are a heap of options out there, and a heap of ways to leverage a blog to build your own audience. Writing is what you do, so you should be sharing it, and a blog is a quick, simple way to build awareness of your work and establish a digital showcase for all your projects.
* Join online writers’ communities. As social media facilitates greater connection throughout the world, it also allows every individual to have a voice. As a writer, this means you have more opportunity than ever to get involved in writers’ groups and communities and build a following that’s interested in what you have to say and what you produce. At the very least, being involved in the various social media communities will give you free education on writing and what’s happening in the industry. The amount of insight and info available is staggering, if you know the right places to look.
* All writers should sign up to Google+. Google+ has a heap of highly active communities, particularly for writers. The learning curve can be steep – G+ is different to other social networks – but the platform’s biggest strength is it’s communities. That’s where you can make connections and find like-minded people to learn from and share ideas with. Being on Google+ also allows you to sign up for Google Authorship, which has it’s own benefits for writers of all types.
* Twitter is an amazingly powerful tool. I know a lot of people are not sold on Twitter, not convinced that you can make much of an impact with 140 characters, but Twitter is the best tool for making connections and sharing your content. Use Twitter’s search function to find other authors and writer-types and follow them, as well as literary publications and organisations that hold writing competitions. Use applications like Hashtagify to locate relevant hashtags which you can use to find active literary conversations, as well as using them to gain exposure for your posts (the tags #writing and #amwriting are very popular and will help others locate your content). Find out what sources publishing industry folk are reading and see if you can get content published on the blogs they’re looking at to raise your profile (there’s an application called Twiangulate which can help you locate the main sources that specific users are looking at). Find Twitter chats on writing and take part if you can (great list of Twitter chats here). Twitter is also great for sharing your content – every time you publish a new blog post or announce that you’ve had something published, post it to Twitter, use relevant hashtags, and track any shares of your content with a management tool like HootSuite. From here, you can thank people for sharing your stuff, start conversations, and make connections that will help build your profile and establish your position. Writing the content is only one part of the equation – you need to actively promote and engage with your audience to build your presence.
* Share content on Tumblr, Pinterest and Facebook. Some people have a heavy reliance on Facebook, but I generally only use it for personal purposes these days, so my view on it may differ from yours, but you should always share your blog posts and updates on all these channels. Tumblr provides an opportunity to reach a new audience, with effective and engaging presentation options to use. Pinterest, while it is a visual-based platform, also gives you a way to reach a whole new group of people. Post interesting images and link them back to your blog, pin new blog posts with relevant hashtags (most of the major networks facilitate hashtag use, except LinkedIn). There are unique audiences on each platform, it’s in your interests to maximise opportunities by sharing to more networks, but research what’s working and where to find your target audience on each. All social platforms have different best preactises, best to learn and utilise these as you go.
* Investigate other platforms. Medium is a publishing platform which is focussed on writing over all else – the design is simple, the process is easy, the visual focus is the words. The groups for fiction work are very specific and there’s a lot of writing discussion being had, so long as you can find the right categories for your work. Definitely worth checking out.
These are just a few notes on the possible options for authors, and the ways in which writers can build their brand through social media. Taking these steps can open doors you never thought possible, and at worst, it can’t hurt to build a following. If you can establish a group of engaged followers who’ll share and amplify your message, it can only assist in building your status as a writer. Some people don’t think they have the time, some feel the learning curve is too steep, but as more people conduct an increasing amount of their daily interactions online, having a presence on social media is only going to become more important. Social gives everyone the opportunity to establish their skills and expertise, ways for writers, in particular, to showcase their talents and marketability. It’s worth investing the time to raise your profile and build connections – those actions could help you find new avenues to publishing success – and as the publishing industry evolves, you might just find yourself at the forefront of the next literary frontier.
Have you heard of Iggy Azalea? She’s a statuesque rapper who’s album recently debuted at number three on the US Billboard charts. She’s also Australian, though she’s not as well known here as she is in the US. Azalea (who’s real name is Amethyst Kelly) made her name in America after moving there to pursue her rap dreams at age 16. Azalea grew up in Mullumbimby in New South Wales but saw that her opportunities were limited in her home town, and home country as a whole. She decided that if she was ever going to make it, she’d need to head overseas – and the story of her success flows from there.
Azalea caught my attention recently when I read her story about leaving Australia. I could see what she was saying, could sympathise with the situation she faced. Here she was, obsessed with Tupac and desperate to be a female rap superstar, but living in a country town where others didn’t take her seriously and her opportunities for exposure were limited. While Azalea was referring to the music industry, the same can be said about writing to some degree, in that our creative culture, particularly our creative diversity, is not overly strong. In my conversations with international writers, and in the brief times I’ve spent in foreign cities, I’ve definitely felt that there’s a much bigger emphasis on creative arts and culture in other nations. Not everywhere, but in some places there is a distinct artistic undercurrent, a feel to it, and those creative communities are strong, visible and well supported. The sad reality of not having such a strong culture is that many writers end up in isolation, unsure if there’s an audience for their work or how to find it. What’s more, writers’ groups are often hard to locate and some writers are hesitant to join if they feel they’ve done nothing, like they won’t fit in.
This is not the fault of any person or group, I realise many arts organisations work very hard (and have done so for a long time) to create communities and provide writers with opportunities to join like-minded folk, but definitely my experience of larger cultural centres like London, New York, Seattle, even Vancouver, is that there’s a much bigger creative pulse, or at least, a more present one. Things like spoken word poetry have a real sense of purpose in these cities, a real pride of place, and while we do have similar communities in Melbourne, they’re much smaller, more underground – you have to be more active in seeking them out.
So what do we do about it? What can we do to foster a better literary culture and highlight opportunities for writers of all genres and styles? The answer is we all have to get involved. Joining a writers’ group is not just for your own benefit, it’s for the benefit of the wider writing community. Attending book launches, readings, spoken word events, joining discussions at your local writers’ centre – just being present and supporting these projects helps build that literary community and enhances recognition, making them easier to find. By taking part, you’re not only participating in something you’re interested in, you’re also endorsing that community, building it, helping create a wider network. This promotes more opportunities for writers to connect, which then leads to more niche writers finding others who feel the same. The rise of social media helps in this respect, as it enables people to find communities outside their geographic limitations, but it’s also important that we establish these groups locally, that we build support and acceptance for the various forms of written expression in order to create our own networks and our own localised culture.
We also need to recognise the passion and dedication that goes into all forms of writing. I’ve got little interest in the work of Matthew Reilly, but I respect the man greatly. I could go and hear him speak and get a heap out of it, regardless of whether I’ve read a line of his work. All writers have made a commitment, an effort that’s above and beyond what they have to do. We’re all in it together – we need to support each other in order to create a stronger literary eco-system, a stronger community that gives voice to more writers who might not have the confidence to ever release their efforts from their notebooks. Maybe we have writers who, like Iggy Azalea, are very talented at what they do, but they feel like there’s no chance for them – there’s no chance a female rapper could achieve significant success in Australia. That was a really sad sentiment for me to hear, and most teenagers in the same boat won’t have the tenacity to move to another nation to chase it. They’ll just give up. We have to do whatever we can to stop that, to embolden more voices and give them the confidence to chase their creative dreams, whatever they may be.
Writing events are about more than people trying to sell their books and in-crowd meet-ups. It’s about community, being part of something bigger. You have to go along to events and get involved wherever you can. Talk to people, tweet about it, tell others where you are and what you’re doing, introduce yourself – and I know it can be hard sometimes to go and get involved (my default position in such situations is ‘wall flower’) but it’s what you need to do, not only so we get to hear your voice as a writer, but so other writers, young writers especially, see what you’re doing and know they can get involved too. Writers are welcoming types, we all want to know more about the world and the people in it. We need to ensure that that openness remains part of our culture so we can encourage a stronger literary bonds and continue to see great writing emerge. So our stories remain as diverse as our society and an accurate reflection of our full creative capacity.
Reading through a heap of blogs each morning, one thing that stands out is the quality of the writing. Don’t get me wrong, many of them are excellent, but there are some that are well-researched and written by a professional who clearly knows his/her field, yet their writing is flat. It’s like reading an academic paper – very informative and valuable, but a slog, and most of the time I just move on, there’s other content to get through. Some of these posts would be significantly improved if the author noted a few simple changes, language economics, if you will, that can greatly improve the fluidity of your content.
Next time you write a blog post, try applying some of these to your work, test whether they might improve the flow of your piece. These are minor, simple changes that can make a significant difference to your content, and, by extension, it’s reach.
1. Remove all mentions of the word ‘just’. There are, of course, some places where ‘just’ is still necessary, but more often than not, ‘just’ just holds up the sentence flow. When writing a blog post you want to be authoritative, state what you believe. ‘It just won’t work’. ‘It just doesn’t add up’. Anytime you write the word ‘just’, go back and review the sentence and see if it might read better, stronger, without it. If you can say the same thing in fewer words, you should, always. And quite often ‘just’ ends up being just unnecessary.
2. Remove weakening ‘I’ statements. ‘I think…’, ‘I doubt…’ You’re the author of the piece, anything you say is your opinion. There’s really no need to state this again in your article.
‘I think a better way to do things is…’
You have to stand by your words and state them as fact. If you don’t believe they are fact, don’t say them, but if you’ve done your research and you’re making a point, that statement will be more powerful if you take out the self attribution.
‘A better way to do things is…’
Much stronger, that’s a voice readers will pay attention to. ‘I’ statements can be very strong in some contexts, so you shouldn’t remove them wholesale, but it is worth reviewing each to test if the sentence reads stronger without it.
3. Use definitive language. This somewhat reinforces the first two points, but it’s crucial that your statements be definitive when necessary. In my previous job, I remember seeing an e-mail where a salesperson had asked someone from my team whether a job could be done by a certain time. The response the salesperson got was ‘Should be fine.’ ‘Should be fine’ is not good enough – the sales team are dealing with clients, they need to know whether this will or won’t happen, and they shouldn’t have to waste time sending a clarifying e-mail because of this person’s weak response. ‘I think that’s right’ bears significantly different meaning to ‘That’s right’ – the second one gives you the answer, that’s how it is. That person knows what they’re talking about and you can have faith in what they say (so long as they are, in fact, right). You need to be definitive in your language and give clear, authoritative answers. If you’re reviewing your work and you find uncertain statements, clarify them or cut them out.
4. Be mindful of the over-use of adverbs like quickly, rapidly, slowly, etc. Sometimes these are already implied by the surrounding context and only serve to slow up your sentences. ‘He ran quickly’ – well, yeah, he ran, I’d assume he’d do so ‘quickly’. ‘It fell rapidly’. Yeah, gravity’ll do that. Sometimes that secondary adverb is not adding anything to the sentence and can be taken out to better suit the flow of the piece.
5. Try to frame things in the form of questions. This is one that will become more relevant in future, but worth considering now to try and get your head around how it’s going to work. In their most recent algorithm changes, Google made note of the move towards ‘conversational search’ – people speaking their search terms instead of typing them, then using follow-on questions based on the preceding search. When people do this, they won’t phrase things as formally as they would when writing. The functionality of speech based search relies on the text being conversational, how you would speak normally. You should be able to say ‘Where are the best beaches near me?’ and Google should come back with the relevant listings. In future, you’re going to get better search results for your content if you ensure questions like this are built into your blog posts. If you can match likely user questions, you improve your chances of showing up as a relevant item. It can be difficult to do, putting questions in doesn’t always gel with story flow (and the quality of the content should always come first), but keep it in mind. Can you build relevant questions into the piece that will work for both the flow of the content and for future search requirements?
And one other last note – where possible, always let your posts sit for at least twenty-four hours before publishing. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve written something that I thought was brilliant, only to re-read it the next day and be totally deflated. You’ll always find errors and things you want to change if you give yourself some distance from it and clear your head.
These rules are not prescriptive, there are, of course, places where they won’t apply, but it’s worth keeping them in mind as you go, testing your sentence structures and statements and looking for ways to make your work stronger, more bold. Using definitive language will help establish your authority on a topic and make it a more compelling reader experience, improving your content quality and performance overall.
Now read this alternate last sentence and see if you agree:
These rules are not prescriptive, there are, of course, places where they don’t apply, but I think it’s worth keeping them in mind as you go, testing your sentence structures and statements and looking for ways to make your work stronger, more bold. I believe using definitive language can help establish your authority on a topic and make it a more compelling reader experience, improving your content quality and performance overall.
Makes a difference, right?
I’ve had an overwhelming response to some recent articles on Social Media Today looking at SEO and social media best practice and the future of Facebook. There’s been quite a few more visitors to this page because of it (alot more than I’d expected), and I’ve generally kept this page confined to my fiction writing work, but I’m looking to add more social media insights here as soon as possible.
Thanks for reading, will have more info on the ‘Social Media Content and Strategy’ page soon.
I was watching a clip from Russell Brand’s latest show recently. In the clip, Brand was criticising the way he is portrayed in the media, saying they regularly use blatant untruths or information clearly taken out of context. Brand gave an example of an interview he did with MTV, where the presenter asked him a generic question to finish off – ‘What advice would you give the pop stars of today?’ Being a generic question, Brand gave a joke answer – ‘They should all take heroin’. The Daily Mail, Brand says, then ran a story on this under the headline: ‘Brand Tells Justin Bieber to Take Heroin’. This is clearly a sensationalised and mis-interpreted summary of what he’d said, an inaccuracy designed to push up hits.
The sad fact of it is journalists are being forced, to some degree, to report in this way. Tabloid sensationalism has always existed, but the new emphasis on page click metrics means journalists need to do whatever they can to make readers to press that mouse button on the headline. The more sensational it is, the more clicks it’s gonna’ get, plain and simple (I have no doubt Brand knows this too, but was making the point for evocative purposes). In fact, journalism seems to be becoming more and more of a dot-to-dot puzzle of keywords, with journos weaving the story as best they can between the search terms to ensure they maximum ‘click value’, and thus, better advertiser spend.
This got me thinking about the future of journalism, and more importantly, journalist jobs. With all the focus on clicks and sensationalism, that model, at some point, loses it’s effect, right? It’s like when you watch an ad for a TV show and it says: ‘You won’t believe what happens next…’ Then you watch the show and nothing happens. At some point, those promos lose their effect because you know they’re over-selling it to suck viewers in. Surely that’s true for journalists and publications too – the publications that continue to do it will at some point wear down your trust and you’ll look elsewhere for more balanced or more realistic reporting. But traditional media providers, in particular, are been forced into this style of blatant sensationalism. They’re scrambling, doing whatever they can to keep your eyeballs with them as they battle against the rising power of social media platforms. And looking at the data, this is a battle they ultimately cannot win. Here’s why:
Your Local Newspaper is Dead Meat
I read an article the other day, published by TheNewspaperWorks, which trumpeted the ongoing strength of press publications in the real estate sector. The writer backs these claims with data showing a large number of property buyers still rely on press publications, saying:
‘…newspaper real estate sections remain a critical influence in the buying cycle…’
This information was not surprising – the average age of a home buyer is 30+, on a good wage, etc. The major threat to all newspapers is social media, and the vast majority of social media users are under 30 years old. Those two numbers alone, with no other research, correlate to the above data. What’s missing from the NewspaperWorks article is the comparative numbers – the article says the numbers are still strong, but it doesn’t discuss the trends and changes over time. If it did, you’d see that graph descending, showing that over time social media and online use is eating into all readership and advertising numbers. That number will only continue downward as the next generation of consumers, increasingly familiar with social media, continue to move into older demographic markets like real estate. It’s one thing to say the numbers are okay now, it’s another to say where they’ll be in five years time.
Local papers are becoming less relevant as people become more aligned with Twitter and Facebook. Most people get the local paper, flick through, see if there’s anyone they know, then put it down. The local press used to serve more of a purpose in regards to local classifieds and news and events postings, but people these days rely on Facebook groups for information or web searches to find local services. That drop in relevance is obviously resonating with advertisers, as Australian regional newspapers reported a 17.7% decrease in advertising spend in the last financial year. Couple this with the fact that Facebook recently flagged their next advertising target would be small businesses, and the future is looking exceedingly grim for your local paper, which is obviously a major issue for young journalists, many of whom get their career start via cadetships with suburban and regional publications.
The other factor that signals the end of local newspapers – people can now follow local identities and influencers on Twitter and Facebook and stay up to date on local news. Where they once had to wait for the local paper to be published to get an update on a story, readers can now get news and updates as fast, or faster, than the local journalists can. The relevance of that local paper in the information cycle drops with every person who joins a Facebook community group or clicks ‘follow’ on a relevant local influencer, and it’ll be almost impossible for those publications to remain viable businesses as the next generational of digital natives become the target market. There’s nothing you’ll be able to report to them they don’t already know. Within five to ten years, suburban and regional publications won’t exist in hardcopy form.
Metro publications will survive longer, but not a heap longer. The divisive move to paywalls won’t be the solution either – why would a people to access news and information they can obtain for free from their Twitter account? Twitter and Facebook also provide the users with more customisable options for the news they get, so they can not only stay as up to date as any newspaper can, but they can do so on specialised topics and not have to pay for the additional content they won’t read. Of course, the argument is that people will pay for quality content, which is true (and many niche titles have had varyng levels of success with payalls based on this model), but the newspaper is mostly news. How much of it is editorial content – or, more specifically, how much of it is editorial content that readers will pay for when they could just follow the relevant influencers and track the conversations on Twitter and Facebook and remain just as informed? Seems like a tough value proposition, and one that’s no doubt got tougher as mainstream publishers try to produce more click worthy content, what with the keywords and headlines, etc.
Pretty soon, you’re going to be telling your kids how you used to read the news on paper that you bought from the shops, the same way my Dad tells me about how they used to gather round the wireless in the days before TV.
The Generational Shift
Of course, this is nothing new, I’m not blowing anyone’s mind with some revelatory powers of predictive genius, anyone in the media sector is accutely aware of these issues. The issue people may be less aware of is how fast it’s happening. Obviously, the smartphone penetration rate is currently the biggest factor in the shift, and Australia has one of the highest smartphone penetration rates in the world. According to data from Google, Australia’s penetration rate went from 37% in 2011 to 65% in 2013. That is a massive shift in an incredibly short space of time. While the major media corporations are definitely aware of this change, this data would suggest the death of the print newspaper is closer than many would think.
The biggest issue now facing traditional media producers is the generational shift. For the next generation of consumers, social media is already engrained in their day to day lives. It’s part of who they are. They live on Facebook and Twitter. They have no connection to a newspaper in physical form. As that generation comes through, it’ll be impossible to maintain the viability of print editions. But the change is also deeper than that. It’s not only affecting how they consume, but what they consume.
The next generation can choose the news they want see. They can follow whomever they want on Twitter for updates, get the news relevant to their interests, disseminate that with their friends on Facebook. It’s this that poses the biggest challenge for traditional media to capture. It used to be that they would tell us what the news of the day was, what was happening in the world, readers went to them for the info. But now readers can stay ahead of the curve, they can access all the information journalists can, just as fast. Now the media has to tailor their info to the readers in order to win readers with great content. It’s a significant shift in process and one many publications are struggling to combat – how do you stay relevant when you no longer control the information flow?
That’s not to say there’s no place for great journalism, there is and there always will be, but it’s getting harder for journalists to find a niche, an area they can own and make a career out of. The opportunities for journalists, in a traditional sense, are drying up and getting paid work will continue to be a challenge for all those in the field.
‘Branded Journalism’: The Future?
So what do you do? You’re a young journalist keen to get into the field, knowing you’re effectively chasing a dinosaur to ride. Will we lose great writers and insights because they need to get paid doing something else? Sure, there’s more opportunities to present your voice online, and it’s possible you could secure independent advertiser spend to fund that, but with so many voices and fewer central arbitrators, securing that sort of independence is going to remain a challenging proposal. One area that is interesting, that will undoubtedly grow as businesses push to best utilise social media platforms, is branded journalism.
It’s an element that remains key in the new media landscape – the power of storytelling. For a brand, being aware of the power of social media alone is not enough to ensure success. You can’t just fire up a Twitter account and whack on an Instagram profile and be down with the kids. Businesses need to produce shareable content. You want Facebook likes? You have to give people a reason to forward it on. You want re-tweets? People need to see the content and think ‘my followers would be keen to know this’. There has to be some substance to get ‘virality’ – it is one element that cannot be faked (or not entirely, though people continue to try). If businesses want to win in the social media landscape, they need to be active on social platforms, they need to produce engaging content that gets noticed, and they need to understand their online presence, what their target audience want to share. This was supported by a recent article by ShopSocially CEO Jai Rawat (here) in which used data from Searchmetrics to show the influence social media engagement now has on SEO. In the article, Rawat’s number one point to ensure content is more shareable and reaching it’s full engagement potential:
Great content. You know whose best placed to help businesses produce great content? Great writers.
The stories that get shared around the digital landscape are, above all, solid stories. Think about what was the last non-fiction story you re-tweeted (BuzzFeed lists don’t count). Why did you share it? What did it have that made you think your followers needed to see this? As noted on the graph above, people want to share interesting, funny and important things. Or they want to share what they’re doing, what they believe in. This is an area where businesses need engagement, they need real stories, real content that real people will read and share. Definitely, I can imagine some would instinctively recoil at the thought of their journalistic integrity being dictated by a brand affiliation, but there amazing opportunities for journalists and writers to help brands find authentic stories, real stories of people who benefit from their affiliation with the brand. Red Bull do great branded content, Under Armour does some great work – there are great brand stories to be told.
Brands that can provide engaging, interesting content to promote their products without pushing them in your face are the ones that will win the battle for social media dominance. Branded journalism will be one of the key factors in solidifying and strengthening brand image in the new media landscape, and ensuring ongoing success. The key to this will be the stories, making those links organic, making the brand a part of community discussion.
And maybe that need for stories, for intelligent, researched content, will help keep many fellow writers and journalists doing the work they love in the ever evolving media landscape.