links for 2007-12-18
-
via Romenesko. Investigative reporting = profit.
Long-term outsourcing: Bad.
Outsourcing specific tasks in the short term: Good.
If anyone knows anything about webifying complex ArcView data, or knows someone who does know something (and would be willing to do some of it for a reasonable price), please drop me a line.
I would like to figure it out myself, eventually, but I have a feeling that two/three weeks just ain’t gonna cut it.
Derek has been, as a man smarter than I so eloquently put it, “like a dog with a chew toy on this issue.” And it’s hard to do more than he has to bring the problem with Caspio to the very audience who needs to see it. But as one of about three Gannettoids who has bucked the Caspio trend in our company-wide frenzy to shovel data onto the web, I think I should offer up an explanation.
As I see it, there are only two reasons Caspio could seem like a good idea:
1) In the time-honored tradition of telegraphists, railroad conductors and blacksmiths, you believe that where we are is where we are going. That point placement on google maps and rote data publication are as good as it gets, and more importantly, as good as it’s going to get.
2) You acknowledge that things will change, but you have actively decided that it’s not worth thinking about. In fact, you have outsourced the job of thinking about change, and trust Caspio to do it for you.
Now, obviously, things aren’t quite this black and white. The decision to go with Caspio is probably not a careful consideration, but a flip-of-the-wrist, “Whatever. These guys can handle it, at least in the short term” deferral.
The problem is that it’s not a short-term solution. The farther into Caspio’s bed you crawl, the harder it is to back out. When you do make a decision to change direction, what happens? Do you continue to pay for the existing content? Do you pull it down and try to recreate it on your own? The more you use their system, the less elegant your reponse to these questions can be. The result will be expensive or ugly. Or both.
FULL DISCLOSURE: I considered going with Caspio for a short time. First job, I needed fast results, and Caspio definitely seemed like the path of least resistance. (Case in point: The newsroom might get full server access in January. Might.) And David Milliron, Director of Media Services for Caspio, is a person I respect both as a good guy and a talented journalist.
But in the end, we decided that, a) Going with Caspio could not be a short-term solution, for reasons already described, and b) We were in no position to make a long-term decision. It was that simple.
If you want pretty arguments weighing the value of Caspio vs. other solutions, ask around and check out what Derek has to offer. I’m no expert on that stuff, nor do I want to be. But the bottom line is that going with Caspio is passing the innovation buck. And, what with new ways to share information being developed every day, now seems like an awful time to mortgage our potential role.
There’s been a lot of just-below-the-surface discussion lately about news orgs finding stories they can own. Des Moines owns the Iowa Caucus. The Washington Post is the source for national politics. And in the biggest official move towards this kind of thinking, the Deseret News has decided it wants to serve up LDS news for the whole world.
The thinking goes something like: “Hey, what with this new-fangled InterTubes thing, we can draw visitors from all over the web. So how can we ge them to come here?” And widgets, digg/reddit submissions, and RSS feeds ensue.
The shortcoming is that not all newspapers have that one thing that’s going to draw the whole web audience to their doorstep. I mean, as cool as Branson is, I just don’t think that’s going to cut it. So nevermind the whole Interweb — if you gain a national following of LDS devotees but lose the geographic draw of your own city, you’re going to lose money. End of story. Staying relevant at home has to come first. Once you have that down, the rest can follow.
So enough lead-in. Here’s the article that got me thinking. Why? Because I’ve made the same argument in the past, and almost got laughed out of the room. But here goes again:
By my estimate, There are two types of newspaper stories: Whoswhats and whyhows. The former is newspaper of record stuff; hirings, firings, reports, meetings, births, deaths and all the rest. The latter is everything else; your insightful features (how does a person with X disease et through the day?), your incisive investigations, or even the not-so incisive (Why did they lose X amount of my money?).
We’ve spilled many a bucket of ink on the whoswhats over the years. But with TV, local news sites, and all forms of niche publications, it represents the low-hanging fruit — the stuff any wannabe journo with a Blogger Profile or a minute of airtime can do.
Investigations. Asking hard questions. Providing information that no one else can provide. Or wants to. That is what we can offer that no one else can. Several organizations are covering City Hall, but not everyone is willing to look at overtime. Or liability payments. Or the role of campaign contributions in City decisions.
Even with IRE pounding the idea of CAR into newsroom heads for decades, the fact still remains: We geeks are uniquely qualified to do these stories. And now, more than ever, our industry needs just that.
That sound (think bozo the clown when a kid just misses the bucket) was my Knight application getting KOd. Dang.
I have to think the fact that it’s already been done, (and quite successfully) had something to do with it.
However, from the “ya win some, ya lose some” Department: The News-Leader is embracing Django. This is good for many reasons, but mostly because I can now stop worrying about the frantic e-mails my kindly web host sends me every few weeks telling me I’m just about out of space.
It also comes as some relief. Shoveling data to the web makes sense in some situations. But it’s there’s not a one-size fits all solution (Sorry Caspio).