There’s a lot of interest around social media newsrooms, these days. So, let me ask this straight – who is a social media newsroom targeted at?
Let me start with this post on The Buzz Bin – Wake Up! Your Online Newsroom Might Need a Makeover. Key takeaways? Videos. Shareable. Social properties. Mobile component. Agree with all…I’d list these too, right-away. But aren’t they mere technologies that enable a ‘social’ layer atop a conventional newsroom? Question is, are these what makes a social media newsroom?
Next stop…a couple of live examples.
BASF’s social media newsroom.
Press release modules with comments enabled? Check. Social properties integration? Check. Tags? Check. The works? Check.
Intel’s social media newsroom.
Tabbed interface? Check. Videos? Check. Facebook box? Check. RSS? Check. The works? Check.
EMC’s social media newsroom.
People’s opinions encapsulated? Check. Videos? Check. Tweets? Check. The works? Check.
Now, the question again – who is a social media newsroom targeted at?
Is it mainstream media and journalists? If yes, the above examples do a wonderful job by providing easy and convenient access to the most appropriate information, to its target set. But what is so social about it? The tools, social properties and works?
In a Bulldog Reporter interview, Intel’s online media relations manager, Patrick Darling says, among other things, “The audience has morphed and expanded far beyond traditional journalism. Our audience now potentially includes anyone who has a desire, for example, to share something about Intel on Facebook“.
Now, that is what I’m talking about!
If the idea of a social media newsroom is to make news accessible, not in terms of mode/technology/apps, but in terms of ease of understanding beyond the usually assumed target set – journalists/media – to the common folks (geek/non-geek/the reasonably intelligent etc.), then one of the first and basic things that a social media newsroom must probably address is the way content is articulated within them.
Let me take an example.
An October 27 press release in Intel’s social media newsroom (Intel, Other Top Companies Unveil New Cloud Mission: Open Data Centers) is quite well formatted, in terms of the template – the classic 4 bullet highlights on top, 13 hyperlinks in the body content, an option to see the brilliantly assembled multimedia version of the release with tons of photos, videos and the works.
The body content, possibly the soul of the announcement that explains what it is about says this, “Intel will work with its hardware and software partners, engaging the industry to innovate on open standards, delivering a faster ramp to the next stage of the Internet, and delivering an open, interoperable and secure cloud that will empower the next generation of business, movies, gaming, music, social media and other yet-to-be-invented Web services.”
That’s one single sentence loaded with PR-style jargon. Oh I’m sorry, I am in PR too, so I’m not blaming Intel alone here – I think we PR folks have conventionally agreed to create content for an evolved media and haven’t yet started to talk to other kinds of audiences who may benefit from such announcements. We have always been focused on creating content, the way we (as brands…as clients) want and pass it on to media…and expect media to translate it in simpler terms to their (and eventually our) target audiences.
If they are supposed to be social media newsrooms, doesn’t the social element go beyond conventional journalists? Conventional journalists/media have an obligation to report and opine on news – that is their occupation. They will write about your client if they find a decent fit with their beat and your client’s news/announcement, irrespective of how you have created your content.
But isn’t the objective of the social media newsroom to go beyond conventional media, because now, as we all love to say, everybody’s a media outlet? If a regular techie in a IT firm is a media outlet too (via his blog, twitter/Facebook profile and perhaps his own LinkedIn Group), do social media newsrooms craft content easy enough for him to (a) comprehend (b) get excited about and (c) share that piece of information? I think the third one is what we’re all working towards, and not the first two. And here I think the second one is the most important – if people like that do not get excited/interested in our communication, why would they use the plethora of sharing tools made available in the social media newsroom to share that piece to their networks?
I do understand that every piece of news content cannot be comprehensible, nor should be comprehensible for every kind of audience. For instance, financial announcements (results) has to be communicated only in a certain way and may not be open to excessive simplification. But I’m not talking merely about jargon – some jargon may be necessary evil. Take another example – all releases in EMC’s social media newsroom start with, “EMC® Corporation (NYSE:EMC), the world leader in information infrastructure solutions, today announced that…“.
This is a classic PR format again. We in PR have been drilled to start releases like this, so there’s nothing wrong with it all. This could be a SEO tactic as well, since ‘world leader in information infrastructure solutions’ and ‘EMC’ will be associated by Google forever, going by the number of times it is repeated! But, is that how people refer to EMC, in normal practice? By normal, I mean people outside the boardrooms, outside the media newsrooms and outside the communications team’s cabins. Imagine a sentence like that on Twitter! Won’t we ignore such sentences on Facebook and Twitter? If the language in the ‘social’ space online is conversational (not informal – there’s a huge difference), how would these stiffly formatted content be appropriate?
Jargon, carefully constructed terminologies and controlled messaging were fine till the only players were a company’s communication team and media outlets. Now, considering everybody is a media outlet, the out-there media may not care for jargon and controlled messaging. They would perhaps call such press releases as gobbledygook and may not find it interesting enough to share with their networks.
If so, that takes us back to the old school of media outreach – companies speaking to media, in the hope of reaching out to the media’s audiences and thereby, the company’s target audiences. The only difference is that the information transaction between the company and media is now public. But just because it is public may not mean it is meaningful or comprehensible to people out there.
So, what do you think? Do social media newsrooms need to work on their content as much as their technology and web 2.0 tools? Is there a need to redraft press releases from the ground up and make them not just comprehensible, but also relatable to a larger set of audiences, beyond the core set of audiences?
I’m sure some kinds of news will lend themselves better to this, than others, but I suppose merely adding videos, photos, hyperlinks and shareable tools do not make a social media news release and consequently, a social media news room. The content creation perhaps needs a fresh outlook…one that does not address the mainstream media, but instead treats the media as just one of the broader set of audiences who may be interested in that piece of news.
In fact, one possible way to move towards better story telling online would be create parallel versions of press releases – how about crafting 7-10 catchy sentences that explain the content of the release…as an essence…and add shareable tools next to each one of them? That way, you are creating excitement for any normal reader, with a sentence in normal English and giving him a valid reason to hit ‘share’ and spread that sentence.
From that perspective (of language…not sharing tools), let me leave you with an interesting social media newsroom…of a company I have never heard of, till I did a search to find a positive example to end this blog post – Scania! Its news reads refreshingly simple…a news item’s heading goes, “Scania facilitates emergency services”, and the body text starts like this…”If an accident occurs with a Scania vehicle involved, rescue teams can do a better job using a new information booklet.”
It falls short on conventional web 2.0 tools, but how’s that for opening a piece of news?
Photo source: SF Weekly