Developing a model that works

The news industry is broken. A business model based on 100+ years of being the only game in town has left us slow on the draw, slow to compromise and scared to try anything new without knowing exactly what the results will be.

But we’re merely slow and scared. Not incapable. Lately I’ve seen more ideas bring thrown around and tried out. I hope this becomes a trend.

Last week I met with a couple Marketing/advertising poobahs from the Des Moines Register. They talked, believe it or not, about James Wilkerson — a newsroom journalist — and the work he did to webify their garage sale listings. It’s a pretty cool application that allows people to search for sales in a certain location or with certain keywords and print out matches to a map.

I think it exemplifies an idea covered here about how the Internet might make money. The trick?

The way for Main Street Web ventures to make money is to help other people to make money.”

I like that idea, and think our organizations are uniquely positioned to take advantage. The argument is that it’s not enough to simply deliver an audience to your advertisers in hopes they make a purchase, but to cut out that middle process entirely. Sell sales to your advertisers. Instead of something passive like CPM, we could turn it into something far more tangible… CP$?

That idea makes a lot of sense to me. It’s doable. It makes advertising with us valuable in a far more tangible way that a Google ad, TV or radio spot. But it’s far from the only idea out there. And I may be missing that’s a better fit.

With that in mind, I present the mechanisms of Time’s 50 best websites 2008 and the way they make money, thieved fiendishly from Valleywag.com.

I’ll also tack on one more link with some ideas.

FINALLY, SOME CONTEXT:

Lest anyone think otherwise, I do commit journalism for a living. I hope to continue doing so well into senility. The recent rash of business-related posts (from a clueless dude whose only business-sense comes from his small-business owner mommy and investor daddy, no less) is because I’ve decided things like this have very little to do with bad work in the newsroom. I don’t think doing more video will save the industry. I don’t think Twittering beat reporters are the magic bullet. The product isn’t broken, just dated, and it’s changing fast.

It’s the business side that’s utterly damaged, and I don’t see enough — ANY — discussion, navel-gazing, twitter updates or general rowdiness because of it. These past few posts have been my attempts to change that. I’ve been dropping my bucket of substandard water into the ocean in hopes others will do the same.

This entry was posted on Saturday, June 28th, 2008 at 11:03 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

No Comments

Be the first to comment on this entry.

Have your say

Fields in bold are required. Email addresses are never published or distributed.

Some HTML code is allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
URIs must be fully qualified (eg: http://www.domainname.com) and all tags must be properly closed.

Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted.

Please keep comments relevant. Off-topic, offensive or inappropriate comments may be edited or removed.