3 ms·

To the people down-voting. I'd love to hear your criticism against this idea.

larrys 15y ago
"they have the ability to have feet on the ground" This is very expensive compared to an automated online system like google has. But more importantly the local papers don't have the traffic necessary in order to make this a success. And people aren't doing searches on their local newspaper website for "plumber topeka kansas" they are doing it on google.
- seanp2k2 15y ago
  No, but plumbers in Topeka, Kansas with ads in the paper might want in on websites too. The whole "print adapting to the Internet" is a whole other problem domain, but I think it's a great idea. Now just convince the local papers :)
  - smcnally 15y ago
    Having spent more than a year "convincing the local papers" how they could expand into local digital, and mostly having very smart people nod sagely then do nothing, Google has little to fear from them IMO.
    - mgkimsal 15y ago
      I'm guessing most of them were probably already in Google's pocket - having their ad inventory controlled by Google and collecting a monthly check. Classic short term vs long term strategy. Short term, the company can stay in business, long term, you're around solely at Google's pleasure.
      - smcnally 15y ago
        Some had been working with GOOG already. Some with YHOO. (this was '07-08) There was healthy skepticism all around - the deadliest aspect was where they (claimed to have) felt more comfortable handling the design and development themselves rather than working with any partner. "Healthy" as they rightly felt they could self-implement and wondered at motivations behind partners' help offers. "Deadliest" as there was a track record of "needing to do it in-house" and yet not doing it at all. Our motivation to help was straightforward: we'd been partnering with hundreds of newspapers for decades. Their vitality - circulation, reach, revenue - directly effected same for our products. We had the resources and incentive to build and "give away" products and services to our partners as it was clearly in our interest. Lessons learned included 1) even gratis is not sufficient positioning for adoption. "Gratis with guaranteed revenue generation" wasn't either: high-touch execution support and hand-holding through the process is what made it work where it did. 2) just because people are smart and capable of executing doesn't mean they will; if they were capable and still hadn't yet executed, they almost certainly would not without some fundamental shift. Illogical, IMO, but those realizations have made other opportunities recognizable.
- mgkimsal 15y ago
  No one is saying a news organization couldn't also have automated systems. It's not an either/or situation. The local newspaper site doesn't have to be the only place where ads are shown, just like google.com isn't the only place where google ads are shown. Google has a large network, and newspapers could have a similar network. They had a great position 10 years ago, but I think it's still tenable now for some news organizations in many markets to be an information hub for that region, and some of that would/should involve becoming an information network, which includes an ad network. Sites all over SE Michigan should have the option of running ads from an ad network managed by the Detroit Free Press, for example.
  - larrys 15y ago
    Excellent points. And while I did state that "feet on the street" are very expensive one thing that small business people definitely need is hand holding with respect to placing advertising. And I agree with what you are saying about assembling the network of sites. The idea then would be to assembling a group of sites where the ads could run (similar to what google has done) and have the local sales force which knows the market offering the ad inventory. Hard to believe this isn't being done already.
    - mgkimsal 15y ago
      The 'assembling of sites' - those are the businesses that the salespeople are visiting every day - at least one level. The 'link exchange' idea for newspapers and their advertisers could be implemented quickly in many regions. But... it's not that hard to believe it's not being done. This requires foresight and effort and some hard work that's outside the core competency of most media outlets. It requires a shift/pivot that most didn't see coming. Everyone wants the easy way out - just let google handle ours ads, and we get a check every month! Then one day you realize google controls a significant portion of your revenue, controls the relationships with the companies advertising on your site, and doesn't feel it needs you around anymore. Rude awakenings to be sure. Additionally, most tech savvy people migrated to SV or NYC, leaving much of the rest of the country with less forward-thinking/visionary/tech-hungry people to drive this sort of thing. And if other papers aren't doing it, why should we? We might make a mistake! There is a business model here to be developed, but it's also not one which is going to be a multibillion $ homerun overnight. At the same time this sort of idea is being ignored by major papers/newsoutlets, larger companies like AOL were/are buzzing about "hyperlocal" and trying to get volunteers to write about local soccer games. Why? To have the content to drive hyper-local ads. At least, that was my understanding. But who's going to sell those ads? It should be newspapers, but they should be controlling local new media networks, instead of rolling over and playing dead (quite convincingly, imo).

"they have the ability to have feet on the ground" This is very expensive compared to an automated online system like google has. But more importantly the local papers don't have the traffic necessary in order to make this a success. And people aren't doing searches on their local newspaper website for "plumber topeka kansas" they are doing it on google.

seanp2k2 15y ago
No, but plumbers in Topeka, Kansas with ads in the paper might want in on websites too. The whole "print adapting to the Internet" is a whole other problem domain, but I think it's a great idea. Now just convince the local papers :)
- smcnally 15y ago
  Having spent more than a year "convincing the local papers" how they could expand into local digital, and mostly having very smart people nod sagely then do nothing, Google has little to fear from them IMO.
  - mgkimsal 15y ago
    I'm guessing most of them were probably already in Google's pocket - having their ad inventory controlled by Google and collecting a monthly check. Classic short term vs long term strategy. Short term, the company can stay in business, long term, you're around solely at Google's pleasure.
    - smcnally 15y ago
      Some had been working with GOOG already. Some with YHOO. (this was '07-08) There was healthy skepticism all around - the deadliest aspect was where they (claimed to have) felt more comfortable handling the design and development themselves rather than working with any partner. "Healthy" as they rightly felt they could self-implement and wondered at motivations behind partners' help offers. "Deadliest" as there was a track record of "needing to do it in-house" and yet not doing it at all. Our motivation to help was straightforward: we'd been partnering with hundreds of newspapers for decades. Their vitality - circulation, reach, revenue - directly effected same for our products. We had the resources and incentive to build and "give away" products and services to our partners as it was clearly in our interest. Lessons learned included 1) even gratis is not sufficient positioning for adoption. "Gratis with guaranteed revenue generation" wasn't either: high-touch execution support and hand-holding through the process is what made it work where it did. 2) just because people are smart and capable of executing doesn't mean they will; if they were capable and still hadn't yet executed, they almost certainly would not without some fundamental shift. Illogical, IMO, but those realizations have made other opportunities recognizable.
mgkimsal 15y ago
No one is saying a news organization couldn't also have automated systems. It's not an either/or situation. The local newspaper site doesn't have to be the only place where ads are shown, just like google.com isn't the only place where google ads are shown. Google has a large network, and newspapers could have a similar network. They had a great position 10 years ago, but I think it's still tenable now for some news organizations in many markets to be an information hub for that region, and some of that would/should involve becoming an information network, which includes an ad network. Sites all over SE Michigan should have the option of running ads from an ad network managed by the Detroit Free Press, for example.
- larrys 15y ago
  Excellent points. And while I did state that "feet on the street" are very expensive one thing that small business people definitely need is hand holding with respect to placing advertising. And I agree with what you are saying about assembling the network of sites. The idea then would be to assembling a group of sites where the ads could run (similar to what google has done) and have the local sales force which knows the market offering the ad inventory. Hard to believe this isn't being done already.
  - mgkimsal 15y ago
    The 'assembling of sites' - those are the businesses that the salespeople are visiting every day - at least one level. The 'link exchange' idea for newspapers and their advertisers could be implemented quickly in many regions. But... it's not that hard to believe it's not being done. This requires foresight and effort and some hard work that's outside the core competency of most media outlets. It requires a shift/pivot that most didn't see coming. Everyone wants the easy way out - just let google handle ours ads, and we get a check every month! Then one day you realize google controls a significant portion of your revenue, controls the relationships with the companies advertising on your site, and doesn't feel it needs you around anymore. Rude awakenings to be sure. Additionally, most tech savvy people migrated to SV or NYC, leaving much of the rest of the country with less forward-thinking/visionary/tech-hungry people to drive this sort of thing. And if other papers aren't doing it, why should we? We might make a mistake! There is a business model here to be developed, but it's also not one which is going to be a multibillion $ homerun overnight. At the same time this sort of idea is being ignored by major papers/newsoutlets, larger companies like AOL were/are buzzing about "hyperlocal" and trying to get volunteers to write about local soccer games. Why? To have the content to drive hyper-local ads. At least, that was my understanding. But who's going to sell those ads? It should be newspapers, but they should be controlling local new media networks, instead of rolling over and playing dead (quite convincingly, imo).