Tag Archives: Associated Press

Associated Press stirs anger on Twitter with sponsored Tweets announcement

The Associated Press stirs up anger on Twitter over promoted tweetsThe Associated Press last night stirred up a small storm on Twitter as it announced that it will begin to run sponsored Tweets in the timeline of its main @AP Twitter account and signed Samsung as its first sponsor. The story has raised concerns among some journalists as to whether this would damage AP’s credibility as a news organisation. Some have gone as as far to say they were unfollowing AP, that it shouldn’t do it and that it devalues the brand (check out the Storify reaction below).

What these aren’t are official Promoted Tweets from Twitter, but rather promotional messages sent out as Tweets on @AP. Initially it plans to send out two a day this week timed with the 2013 International CES – the consumer electronics show — in Las Vegas. Hardly a huge deal. Read More »

The best social media policy ever written

Benjamin Franklin (center) at work on a printing press. Reproduction of a Charles Mills painting by the Detroit Publishing Company.There have been a lot of good guides and tips published on social media policy. There have also been a lot of good ideas put down about social media as well as some not so good ideas.

We’ve seen the good from The New York Times with its ‘Five guiding principles of social media’ and the Cabinet Office guidance for civil servants.

We’ve had more good from the BBC with its social media usage guidelines and The Guardian with its six tips for social media engagement. And then there has been the bad. Read More »

The New York Times: Five guiding principles of social media

The New York Times takes a common sense guide to social media policyThere has been an awful lot written about social media guides for journalists. Some good and some not so good.

This ranges from Sky News going anti social media earlier this year, and taking an approach similar to the one taken by the Associated Press took late last year when it has released new social media guidelines, to the tips and guidelines from the likes of The Guardianthe BBC and the Journalism Foundation among others. The New York Times, however, has a different approach.

Read More »

Sky News goes anti-social media with bans on retweeting others

The Twittersphere lit up last night as it was reported that Sky News was introducing a new social media policy that bans its journalists from retweeting non-Sky sources. Essentially the broadcaster that has done so much to establish its reputation in social news is taking an anti-social media approach.

Staff were informed of the new social media policy in an email that told staff not to “re-tweet information posted by other journalists or people on Twitter”. Read More »

AP advises staff not to retweet in social media guidelines

The Associated Press has released new social media guidelines on how staffers should handle re-tweets (tips/guidelines from the Guardian and the BBC are also worth checking). Basically for the AP it comes down to not retweeting anything with an opinion. Doesn’t this slightly defeat the point of retweets or is that just me?

When someone says something that is interesting or controversial you want to share that with your followers. That’s the nature of social media and Twitter particularly. Read More »

The Empire strikes back or the old order’s attempt to bring an end to the age of free

 They’ve had enough. Enough of all you freeloaders stopping by their sites and not paying. Enough of you ignoring the ads they’ve served up for you. And enough of you reading and sharing their stuff elsewhere.

 

‘They’ is traditional newspaper and media publishers who are now online. And their point of view can best be summed up by (New Zealand) National Business Review boss Barry Colman who told subscribers he was drawing a line under “the
crazy model adopted by newspapers in most parts of the free world in
which they pay the enormous costs of running professional newsrooms
only to give away their content away free.”

As a
result, the age of free, the ability to read almost anything, anywhere
online and not have to cough up for it, is something they now want to
bring to a close. And there’s a concerted effort going on from some of
the biggest guns in the industry, to try and make this happen. Consider
that:

1 – The Newspaper Licensing Authority, which represents Britain’s national newspaper groups, wants to dole out licenses before you can share links.

The
idea is that if you professionally monitor the websites of newspapers
(which most agencies and in house marketing departments do), you will
need an annual license from the NLA for the simple act of forwarding a
URL of a newspaper website by email….which obviously brings traffic
back to said site.

While focusing on the relatively soft
target of people like myself who need to monitor the media as part of
their jobs, the NLA doesn’t actually have the cojones to go after
Google News, under the rationale that Google doesn’t make money from it
(news to Google I’m sure). But the Associated Press in the US does.

2 – Last year the Associated Press got in hot water
when it announced it was charging bloggers for using as little as five
words of its content in posts. The AP kind of backed down, but now this
proposal rears its head again in a different form. However it’s not
small time bloggers that are in the AP’s sights but global search
engines like Google, (Microsoft) Bing and Yahoo!.

According to the New York Times, AP President Tom Curley said “if
someone can build multibillion-dollar businesses out of keywords, we
can build multihundred million businesses out of headlines and we’re
going to do that.”
And that I think is the crux of it. It’s not so much copyright as a case of, “we want some of what they’re getting!”

Though
the AP gets money for its content to appear on Google News and the
Huffington Post, it doesn’t get anything from general search results.
This is what it wants to change via – just like Britain’s NLA – a
system where it doles out licenses before you can link back.

A
system that sounds to me much like 18th century trade protectionism.
Buy a license to import or export goods – or in this case, buy a
license before you can send links around.

“The current days of the Internet will soon be over”

3 – And then we have the giant of the English speaking media world Rupert Murdoch planning to charge
for his portfolio of newspapers in the US, the UK and Australia with a
News International team in Sydney looking into ways that this might
work. Murdoch has put so much behind this that Wired in its latest
issue wondered: “Can Rupert Murdoch save online news?”

According to Murdoch,
“We will control the prices for our content and we will control the
relationship with our customers…the current days of the internet will
soon be over.”
So that’s that then.

Well maybe not. I wonder whether ultimately the attempts of the old guard are ultimately doomed for three reasons:

1
- For this to work everyone really has to be aligned. So ALL major
newspaper groups need to be in step and start charging. Otherwise, news
is news and consumers will carry on going to where its free.

The Daily Telegraph in the UK for one has already decided
that free is ultimately more lucrative as it allows it to sell loads of
other stuff onto its user base. And what the New York Times has in mind doesn’t really sound like charging for content either.

The
biggest gap in the charging wall however will come from online TV news
services like BBC and CNN online. With their websites being much like
online newspapers with added video anyway, they stand to benefit from consumers who simply just want ‘the news’ (as opposed to the news from The Times etc).

2 – As the Wired piece admits,
it’s all very well to charge for the Wall Street Journal, but looking
at other titles in Murdoch’s stable how about the tabloid The Sun (or
the New York Post in the US)? Will a subscription model really work
there?

3 – The Web is the hotbed of invention. Perhaps
charging will provide an opportunity for other services to emerge,
Huffington Post style, to carry on providing free content. And really
there often is a work around to a lot of these ideas. For example, I
mentioned the newspaper licensing agency here in the UK. The NLA
intends to charge for sending links by email but not via
Twitter….well fine, guess we’ll Twitter direct message the links,
which get forwarded to, um, email.

Ultimately what
publishers are trying to do is to turn back the tide of history and how
often does that work? I don’t think it can, especially since free is
now the norm, encouraged by none other than the likes of Rupert Murdoch
in the first place. Interesting times in watching publishers trying to
make this stick over the coming year though.


Image – Myrrh.ahn