If Clark Kent (Superman) tried to get a newspaper job today:
http://observationdeck.io9.com/if-clark-kent-tried-to-get-a-newspaper-job-today-1163162396
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Saturday, August 24, 2013
Bradley Manning Raises Style Questions on Gender References
From Poynter.org:
Bradley Manning news raises questions about how to refer to transgender people in stories
by Andrew Beaujon Published Aug. 22, 2013, The New York Times
Television reporters “weren’t immediately sure how to tell” the story of Bradley Manning’s announcement on “Today” that he identifies as a woman and will seek hormone therapy, Brian Stelter writes.
Savannah Guthrie, who broke the story, “used the pronoun ‘she’ to refer to Private Manning throughout most of the interview, but used ‘he’ when trying to emphasize the change had just been announced.”
Manning picked a bad time of the year to send journalists running to their stylebooks: The New York Times’ associate managing editor for standards, Phil Corbett? “[A]way until Tuesday, Aug. 27,” according to an auto-reply email. Washington Post standards editor Tracy Grant? “[O]ut of the office until Monday, August 26.” Los Angeles Times copy overlord Henry Fuhrmann? “I will be away from the office this week.”
“I think that’s being discussed,” says Washington Post copy editor Bill Walsh (who says he’s “away for a few days”) when asked about Post style. What’s a media reporter to do? In a later email, Grant confirmed the discussions: “We’re in the process of reviewing our style in light of the Manning situation,” she wrote.
Corbett’s email refers reporters to Greg Brock, the Times’ senior editor for standards, who sent Poynter the Times’ stylebook entry, which he says he’s sending “to those who might be working on the coverage.”
transgender (adj.) is an overall term for people whose current identity differs from their sex at birth, whether or not they have changed their biological characteristics. Cite a person’s transgender status only when it is pertinent and its pertinence is clear to the reader. Unless a former name is newsworthy or pertinent, use the name and pronouns (he, his, she, her, hers) preferred by the transgender person. If no preference is known, use the pronouns consistent with the way the subject lives publicly.{new 3/05}
A few minutes after that email, Corbett emailed to say pretty much the same thing: In general, he writes, “We use the names and pronouns preferred by the subject. And we would refer to someone’s transgender status only if it is relevant to the story.”
Here’s the Associated Press’ style:
transgender: Use the pronoun preferred by the individuals who have acquired the physical characteristics of the opposite sex or present themselves in a way that does not correspond with their sex at birth.
If that preference is not expressed, use the pronoun consistent with the way the individuals live publicly.
And here’s GLAAD’s style, from its media reference guide:
Transgender An umbrella term (adj.) for people whose gender identity and/or gender expression differs from the sex they were assigned at birth. The term may include but is not limited to: transsexuals, cross-dressers and other gender-variant people. Transgender people may identify as female-to-male (FTM) or male-to-female (MTF). Use the descriptive term (transgender, transsexual, cross-dresser, FTM or MTF) preferred by the individual. Transgender people may or may not decide to alter their bodies hormonally and/or surgically.
Some more from GLAAD:
Problematic: “transgenders,” “a transgender”
Preferred: “transgender people,” “a transgender person”
Transgender should be used as an adjective, not as a noun. Do not say, “Tony is a transgender,” or “The parade included many transgenders.” Instead say, “Tony is a transgender man,” or “The parade included many transgender people.”
Problematic: “transgendered”
Preferred: “transgender”
The adjective transgender should never have an extraneous “-ed” tacked onto the end. An “-ed” suffix adds unnecessary length to the word and can cause tense confusion and grammatical errors. For example, it is grammatically incorrect to turn transgender into a participle, as it is an adjective, not a verb, and only verbs can be used as participles by adding an “-ed” suffix.
Problematic: “sex change,” “pre-operative,” “post-operative”
Preferred: “transition”
Referring to a sex change operation, or using terms such as pre- or post-operative, inaccurately suggests that one must have surgery in order to transition. Avoid overemphasizing surgery when discussing transgender people or the process of transition.
Here’s the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association’s stylebook entry:
transgender: An umbrella term that refers to people whose biological and gender identity or expression may not be the same. This can but does not necessarily include preoperative, postoperative or nonoperative transsexuals, female and male cross-dressers, drag queens or kings, female or male impersonators, and intersex individuals. When writing about a transgender person, use the name and personal pronouns that are consistent with the way the individual lives publicly. When possible, ask which term the subject prefers.
Fuhrmann, who is attending the Asian American Journalists Association’s annual convention in New York City, emailed as this post was being published:
We’re in the process of drafting an update to our guidelines, which date to about 2003. Not having a copy of either version at hand, I can say generally that we refer to subjects by their chosen gender identification, in line with the guidelines recommended by GLAAD and NLGJA and with AP style. We use the name and personal pronoun that conform with how a person lives publicly.
Later in the afternoon, I heard from Valentina Djeljosevic, the Chicago Tribune’s deputy editor of Editing & Presentation. “The Chicago Tribune follows AP style,” she wrote in an email. “We’ll say Bradley Manning on first reference since that’s the name readers know. We’ll add that Manning identifies as Chelsea, and we’ll use ‘she’ when a pronoun is needed.”
Bradley Manning news raises questions about how to refer to transgender people in stories
by Andrew Beaujon Published Aug. 22, 2013, The New York Times
Television reporters “weren’t immediately sure how to tell” the story of Bradley Manning’s announcement on “Today” that he identifies as a woman and will seek hormone therapy, Brian Stelter writes.
Savannah Guthrie, who broke the story, “used the pronoun ‘she’ to refer to Private Manning throughout most of the interview, but used ‘he’ when trying to emphasize the change had just been announced.”
Manning picked a bad time of the year to send journalists running to their stylebooks: The New York Times’ associate managing editor for standards, Phil Corbett? “[A]way until Tuesday, Aug. 27,” according to an auto-reply email. Washington Post standards editor Tracy Grant? “[O]ut of the office until Monday, August 26.” Los Angeles Times copy overlord Henry Fuhrmann? “I will be away from the office this week.”
“I think that’s being discussed,” says Washington Post copy editor Bill Walsh (who says he’s “away for a few days”) when asked about Post style. What’s a media reporter to do? In a later email, Grant confirmed the discussions: “We’re in the process of reviewing our style in light of the Manning situation,” she wrote.
Corbett’s email refers reporters to Greg Brock, the Times’ senior editor for standards, who sent Poynter the Times’ stylebook entry, which he says he’s sending “to those who might be working on the coverage.”
transgender (adj.) is an overall term for people whose current identity differs from their sex at birth, whether or not they have changed their biological characteristics. Cite a person’s transgender status only when it is pertinent and its pertinence is clear to the reader. Unless a former name is newsworthy or pertinent, use the name and pronouns (he, his, she, her, hers) preferred by the transgender person. If no preference is known, use the pronouns consistent with the way the subject lives publicly.{new 3/05}
A few minutes after that email, Corbett emailed to say pretty much the same thing: In general, he writes, “We use the names and pronouns preferred by the subject. And we would refer to someone’s transgender status only if it is relevant to the story.”
Here’s the Associated Press’ style:
transgender: Use the pronoun preferred by the individuals who have acquired the physical characteristics of the opposite sex or present themselves in a way that does not correspond with their sex at birth.
If that preference is not expressed, use the pronoun consistent with the way the individuals live publicly.
And here’s GLAAD’s style, from its media reference guide:
Transgender An umbrella term (adj.) for people whose gender identity and/or gender expression differs from the sex they were assigned at birth. The term may include but is not limited to: transsexuals, cross-dressers and other gender-variant people. Transgender people may identify as female-to-male (FTM) or male-to-female (MTF). Use the descriptive term (transgender, transsexual, cross-dresser, FTM or MTF) preferred by the individual. Transgender people may or may not decide to alter their bodies hormonally and/or surgically.
Some more from GLAAD:
Problematic: “transgenders,” “a transgender”
Preferred: “transgender people,” “a transgender person”
Transgender should be used as an adjective, not as a noun. Do not say, “Tony is a transgender,” or “The parade included many transgenders.” Instead say, “Tony is a transgender man,” or “The parade included many transgender people.”
Problematic: “transgendered”
Preferred: “transgender”
The adjective transgender should never have an extraneous “-ed” tacked onto the end. An “-ed” suffix adds unnecessary length to the word and can cause tense confusion and grammatical errors. For example, it is grammatically incorrect to turn transgender into a participle, as it is an adjective, not a verb, and only verbs can be used as participles by adding an “-ed” suffix.
Problematic: “sex change,” “pre-operative,” “post-operative”
Preferred: “transition”
Referring to a sex change operation, or using terms such as pre- or post-operative, inaccurately suggests that one must have surgery in order to transition. Avoid overemphasizing surgery when discussing transgender people or the process of transition.
Here’s the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association’s stylebook entry:
transgender: An umbrella term that refers to people whose biological and gender identity or expression may not be the same. This can but does not necessarily include preoperative, postoperative or nonoperative transsexuals, female and male cross-dressers, drag queens or kings, female or male impersonators, and intersex individuals. When writing about a transgender person, use the name and personal pronouns that are consistent with the way the individual lives publicly. When possible, ask which term the subject prefers.
Fuhrmann, who is attending the Asian American Journalists Association’s annual convention in New York City, emailed as this post was being published:
We’re in the process of drafting an update to our guidelines, which date to about 2003. Not having a copy of either version at hand, I can say generally that we refer to subjects by their chosen gender identification, in line with the guidelines recommended by GLAAD and NLGJA and with AP style. We use the name and personal pronoun that conform with how a person lives publicly.
Later in the afternoon, I heard from Valentina Djeljosevic, the Chicago Tribune’s deputy editor of Editing & Presentation. “The Chicago Tribune follows AP style,” she wrote in an email. “We’ll say Bradley Manning on first reference since that’s the name readers know. We’ll add that Manning identifies as Chelsea, and we’ll use ‘she’ when a pronoun is needed.”
The Joy of Christian Journalism
Here's a little excerpt from an excellent column by Marvin Olasky of WORLD magazine. To read the entire article, click on this link: http://www.worldmag.com/2013/08/the_joy_of_christian_journalism/page1
Many media organizations, sadly, include journalists bored with life, which they see as purposeless. Not all secular journalists are that way: David Halberstam, who wrote about wars and politics but also baseball, said shortly before he died, “The legwork of reporting is critical and most of the fun. Think of it as part of a continuing education; we’re paid to learn. It isn’t just getting a byline that drives you; it isn’t just where the story lands in the paper. Fifty-two years later, I still like what I do.”
Christian journalists especially should have that attitude. We know human interest is important because every human is created in God’s image. Over 3,000 years ago the Egyptian Ptahotep gave career advice: “Be a scribe! You sit grandly in your house, beer is poured copiously. All who see you rejoice in good cheer. … Happy is the heart of him who writes; he is young each day.” How much more so should Christians relish the joy of journalism, making it part of a life’s goal: As the Westminster Catechism states, our chief end is “to glorify God and enjoy Him forever”—and forever begins right now.
To enjoy fully our craft, Christian journalists often need two crucial understandings. One is that the children’s song “It’s a Small World (After All)” is dumb. It’s not a small world: It’s a large one, with millions of nooks and crannies and opportunities for adventure. In Robert Boynton’s book, The New New Journalism, writer Susan Orlean recalls with excitement an article she wrote about a gospel singing group: “It was astonishing for me to glimpse a world that was so fully developed—with its own stars, sagas, myths, history, millions of devotees—that I, in my narrow life, I had no idea existed.”
The second necessary understanding comes from pastor Tim Keller’s analysis of the parable of the prodigal son. Keller argues (The Prodigal God, 2008) that the parable should have a plural in its name: sons. We remember that the younger brother, of course, takes his inheritance, runs, and eventually finds that that his existence is truly oppressive. But the elder brother also has a problem: He is self-righteous and lacks joy. He works by the sweat of his brow and is angry with the younger brother for not doing his share, and then angry with the father for celebrating the prodigal’s return
When Christian journalists become solemn like some full-of-themselves pundits, we are not truly following Jesus, who regularly in the gospels flashes His sense of humor.
Many media organizations, sadly, include journalists bored with life, which they see as purposeless. Not all secular journalists are that way: David Halberstam, who wrote about wars and politics but also baseball, said shortly before he died, “The legwork of reporting is critical and most of the fun. Think of it as part of a continuing education; we’re paid to learn. It isn’t just getting a byline that drives you; it isn’t just where the story lands in the paper. Fifty-two years later, I still like what I do.”
Christian journalists especially should have that attitude. We know human interest is important because every human is created in God’s image. Over 3,000 years ago the Egyptian Ptahotep gave career advice: “Be a scribe! You sit grandly in your house, beer is poured copiously. All who see you rejoice in good cheer. … Happy is the heart of him who writes; he is young each day.” How much more so should Christians relish the joy of journalism, making it part of a life’s goal: As the Westminster Catechism states, our chief end is “to glorify God and enjoy Him forever”—and forever begins right now.
To enjoy fully our craft, Christian journalists often need two crucial understandings. One is that the children’s song “It’s a Small World (After All)” is dumb. It’s not a small world: It’s a large one, with millions of nooks and crannies and opportunities for adventure. In Robert Boynton’s book, The New New Journalism, writer Susan Orlean recalls with excitement an article she wrote about a gospel singing group: “It was astonishing for me to glimpse a world that was so fully developed—with its own stars, sagas, myths, history, millions of devotees—that I, in my narrow life, I had no idea existed.”
The second necessary understanding comes from pastor Tim Keller’s analysis of the parable of the prodigal son. Keller argues (The Prodigal God, 2008) that the parable should have a plural in its name: sons. We remember that the younger brother, of course, takes his inheritance, runs, and eventually finds that that his existence is truly oppressive. But the elder brother also has a problem: He is self-righteous and lacks joy. He works by the sweat of his brow and is angry with the younger brother for not doing his share, and then angry with the father for celebrating the prodigal’s return
When Christian journalists become solemn like some full-of-themselves pundits, we are not truly following Jesus, who regularly in the gospels flashes His sense of humor.
Friday, August 23, 2013
Were You Thinking About Working in Television?
TV Guide‘s Stephen Battaglio and Michael Schneider tally up the highest-paid talent in television for this week’s magazine. The highest paid on-air individual in all of TV is syndicated judge “Judge Judy” Sheindlin, who rakes in an estimated $45 million a year for her eponymous program.
In the world of TV news, NBC “Today” co-anchor Matt Lauer leads the way, drawing an estimated $22-25 million every year. The highest-paid anchor on ABC News is “ABC World News” anchor Diane Sawyer, who pulls in an estimated $12 million a year, while “CBS Evening News” anchor Scott Pelley leads that network with $5 million a year.
On cable, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly is king, drawing an estimated $17 million a year, while MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow leads her channel with a $7 million a year deal. CNN’s Anderson Cooper tops that channel with an estimated $10 million a year deal.
Other notable names: Megyn Kelly‘s new deal is estimated to be worth $6 million a year, twice what Hoda Kotb draws, and more than three times as much as ABC’s Josh Elliott. Ann Curry is still one of the highest-paid reporters at NBC, drawing $5 million a year, while Sarah Palin‘s new FNC contract is believed to be in the $250,000 range.
In the world of TV news, NBC “Today” co-anchor Matt Lauer leads the way, drawing an estimated $22-25 million every year. The highest-paid anchor on ABC News is “ABC World News” anchor Diane Sawyer, who pulls in an estimated $12 million a year, while “CBS Evening News” anchor Scott Pelley leads that network with $5 million a year.
On cable, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly is king, drawing an estimated $17 million a year, while MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow leads her channel with a $7 million a year deal. CNN’s Anderson Cooper tops that channel with an estimated $10 million a year deal.
Other notable names: Megyn Kelly‘s new deal is estimated to be worth $6 million a year, twice what Hoda Kotb draws, and more than three times as much as ABC’s Josh Elliott. Ann Curry is still one of the highest-paid reporters at NBC, drawing $5 million a year, while Sarah Palin‘s new FNC contract is believed to be in the $250,000 range.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Barnes & Noble Chair Halts Plan to Buy Stores, Sales Slide
From Reuters:
Barnes & Noble chairman halts plan to buy stores as sales slide
By Jessica Wohl and Phil Wahba, Tue Aug 20, 2013 3:31pm EDT
(Reuters) - Barnes & Noble Inc's founder and largest shareholder on Tuesday suspended his plan to buy the bookseller's stores, dashing investor hopes for a deal as the company again reported poor quarterly results.
B&N shares fell 15 percent to $14.17, their lowest level since February, when Leonard Riggio, who is also chairman, said he planned to make an offer for B&N's retail business.
News of Riggio's change of heart came as the company reported a 10 percent decline in sales at its bookstores and bn.com website for the latest quarter, hurt by a drop in sales of Nook e-readers and tablets at its stores and the absence of a mega-bestseller like the "Fifty Shades of Grey" trilogy that boosted business last year.
A deal would have resulted in splitting stores off from B&N's Nook and college bookstore businesses.
Now, investors who were waiting for a deal are moving on.
"Right now, the issue is you've got a lot of short-term deal investors in the stock and there's no deal," said Maxim Group analyst John Tinker. Investors will now focus on business fundamentals instead, he said.
And those were weak - comparable sales fell at its college bookstore chain in the latest quarter, while the Nook unit's revenue fell 20 percent and Barnes & Noble's share of the U.S. ebooks market slipped.
Despite another quarter of losses, the company said its cash position was sound and its $1 billion credit facility nearly untouched. Its stores generate a lot of cash and are still very profitable.
The largest U.S. bookstore chain said it would still entertain offers for all or part of the company, and Riggio said he reserved the right to make another bid someday, but the focus now would be on a more "integrated" company.
"Nothing is taken off the table," B&N President Michael Huseby told Reuters. "We're at the point now where we're going to focus on operating the businesses to improve the value of each one."
This includes launching a new website next year with up-to-date technology to reverse an online sales slide and compete more forcefully with archrival Amazon.com Inc.
"Every publisher I've talked to fervently wants Barnes & Noble to retain its viability both at retail and in e-commerce," said Lorraine Shanley, co-founder of Market Partners International.
She said thousands of author readings the retailer hosts each year help lift book and author profiles.
B&N has said it still plans to close about 15 stores a year and could easily close more if needed: 442 leases out of 674 superstores are up for renewal within the next three years.
The company put itself up for sale in 2010, but the only offer came from Liberty Interactive. Liberty backed down from an initial $1 billion bid and instead bought $204 million of preferred shares convertible for $17 apiece in 2011.
Last year, Microsoft Corp took a 17.6 percent stake in Nook Media, and British publisher Pearson Plc bought 5 percent. Barnes & Noble owns the rest.
Riggio bought the original Barnes & Noble store in Manhattan in the 1970s and used it to launch a national chain of big-box stores. He holds nearly 30 percent of the company's stock.
FIRING ON NO CYLINDERS
The latest quarter was a tumultuous one.
William Lynch resigned as CEO on July 8, soon after the company announced a 34 percent quarterly revenue drop in its Nook digital business, a venture he spearheaded that has cost the company hundreds of millions of dollars. The company on Tuesday blamed those losses on overly optimistic projections in the past for the Nook.
Company executives said B&N has a 22 percent share of the U.S. e-books market, down from 27 percent in February.
B&N said in June it would no longer make new tablets unless it found a partner. An August Ipsos poll conducted for Reuters found that only 2 percent of those very or somewhat interested in purchasing a tablet in the upcoming holiday season were inclined toward a Nook, with Apple's Inc's iPad, Amazon's Kindle Fire and the Samsung Galaxy far ahead.
B&N hasn't given up on color and black-and-white e-readers: The company said on Tuesday it plans to release at least one new Nook device for the upcoming holiday season and that other products are in development.
Still, the chain has slashed prices on its Simple Touch e-readers, suggesting demand for the device was weak.
Sales of B&N's Nook device and e-books plunged 20.2 percent in the latest quarter, and same-store sales at its college chain fell 1.2 percent.
B&N reported a net loss of $87 million, or $1.56 per share, for the fiscal first quarter ended July 27, compared with a loss of $39.8 million, or 76 cents per share, a year earlier.
An adjusted loss of 86 cents per share, which excludes a valuation allowance against certain deferred tax assets, was narrower than the loss of 89 cents per share expected by analysts, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.
Revenue fell 8.5 percent to $1.33 billion, slightly better than the $1.32 billion analysts had expected.
B&N said it still expects retail comparable-store sales to be down by a high-single-digit percentage in the current fiscal year.
Barnes & Noble chairman halts plan to buy stores as sales slide
By Jessica Wohl and Phil Wahba, Tue Aug 20, 2013 3:31pm EDT
(Reuters) - Barnes & Noble Inc's founder and largest shareholder on Tuesday suspended his plan to buy the bookseller's stores, dashing investor hopes for a deal as the company again reported poor quarterly results.
B&N shares fell 15 percent to $14.17, their lowest level since February, when Leonard Riggio, who is also chairman, said he planned to make an offer for B&N's retail business.
News of Riggio's change of heart came as the company reported a 10 percent decline in sales at its bookstores and bn.com website for the latest quarter, hurt by a drop in sales of Nook e-readers and tablets at its stores and the absence of a mega-bestseller like the "Fifty Shades of Grey" trilogy that boosted business last year.
A deal would have resulted in splitting stores off from B&N's Nook and college bookstore businesses.
Now, investors who were waiting for a deal are moving on.
"Right now, the issue is you've got a lot of short-term deal investors in the stock and there's no deal," said Maxim Group analyst John Tinker. Investors will now focus on business fundamentals instead, he said.
And those were weak - comparable sales fell at its college bookstore chain in the latest quarter, while the Nook unit's revenue fell 20 percent and Barnes & Noble's share of the U.S. ebooks market slipped.
Despite another quarter of losses, the company said its cash position was sound and its $1 billion credit facility nearly untouched. Its stores generate a lot of cash and are still very profitable.
The largest U.S. bookstore chain said it would still entertain offers for all or part of the company, and Riggio said he reserved the right to make another bid someday, but the focus now would be on a more "integrated" company.
"Nothing is taken off the table," B&N President Michael Huseby told Reuters. "We're at the point now where we're going to focus on operating the businesses to improve the value of each one."
This includes launching a new website next year with up-to-date technology to reverse an online sales slide and compete more forcefully with archrival Amazon.com Inc.
"Every publisher I've talked to fervently wants Barnes & Noble to retain its viability both at retail and in e-commerce," said Lorraine Shanley, co-founder of Market Partners International.
She said thousands of author readings the retailer hosts each year help lift book and author profiles.
B&N has said it still plans to close about 15 stores a year and could easily close more if needed: 442 leases out of 674 superstores are up for renewal within the next three years.
The company put itself up for sale in 2010, but the only offer came from Liberty Interactive. Liberty backed down from an initial $1 billion bid and instead bought $204 million of preferred shares convertible for $17 apiece in 2011.
Last year, Microsoft Corp took a 17.6 percent stake in Nook Media, and British publisher Pearson Plc bought 5 percent. Barnes & Noble owns the rest.
Riggio bought the original Barnes & Noble store in Manhattan in the 1970s and used it to launch a national chain of big-box stores. He holds nearly 30 percent of the company's stock.
FIRING ON NO CYLINDERS
The latest quarter was a tumultuous one.
William Lynch resigned as CEO on July 8, soon after the company announced a 34 percent quarterly revenue drop in its Nook digital business, a venture he spearheaded that has cost the company hundreds of millions of dollars. The company on Tuesday blamed those losses on overly optimistic projections in the past for the Nook.
Company executives said B&N has a 22 percent share of the U.S. e-books market, down from 27 percent in February.
B&N said in June it would no longer make new tablets unless it found a partner. An August Ipsos poll conducted for Reuters found that only 2 percent of those very or somewhat interested in purchasing a tablet in the upcoming holiday season were inclined toward a Nook, with Apple's Inc's iPad, Amazon's Kindle Fire and the Samsung Galaxy far ahead.
B&N hasn't given up on color and black-and-white e-readers: The company said on Tuesday it plans to release at least one new Nook device for the upcoming holiday season and that other products are in development.
Still, the chain has slashed prices on its Simple Touch e-readers, suggesting demand for the device was weak.
Sales of B&N's Nook device and e-books plunged 20.2 percent in the latest quarter, and same-store sales at its college chain fell 1.2 percent.
B&N reported a net loss of $87 million, or $1.56 per share, for the fiscal first quarter ended July 27, compared with a loss of $39.8 million, or 76 cents per share, a year earlier.
An adjusted loss of 86 cents per share, which excludes a valuation allowance against certain deferred tax assets, was narrower than the loss of 89 cents per share expected by analysts, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.
Revenue fell 8.5 percent to $1.33 billion, slightly better than the $1.32 billion analysts had expected.
B&N said it still expects retail comparable-store sales to be down by a high-single-digit percentage in the current fiscal year.
Al Jazeera Has to Fix a Brand Problem
From Digiday.com:
Al Jazeera Has to Fix a Brand Problem
Josh Sternberg | August 20, 2013
Andre Agassi once told us that image is everything. Al Jazeera America, the newest entrant into the cable news fray, is learning this quite quickly.
Al Jazeera America goes live this afternoon, eight months after the Qatari government-funded media company bought Al Gore’s struggling network, Current TV, for $500 million. Its brand promise is a deeper dive into news and less shouting than other American cable networks like CNN, MSNBC and Fox News. A big hurdle: Some Americans associate its name, fairly or not, with terrorism. The bigger hurdle: Even more Americans have never heard of it and aren’t likely to trust it based on name alone.
“Perception of the company is absolutely their biggest obstacle; from the name, which is Arabic, to their competition,” said Christopher Penn, vp of marketing technology at Shift Communications. “It might actually be a positive for MSNBC and CNN, as Fox News will likely immediately brand it as the Terrorist News Network.”
Any entity entering the news category, which is so crowded now and undifferentiated, would have trouble, said Cohn & Wolfe’s North American president Jim Joseph. Al Jazeera America is at best an unknown brand, and Joseph believes since the average American doesn’t know it, she won’t trust it.
Joseph said that Al Jazeera America is going to have to deal with what might be perceived as a biased coverage coming from “a certain region of the world.” Any cable news watcher knows about bias. Political bias in the U.S. is a form of targeting. People watch voices they agree with. An Arab bias, he argued, won’t work.
“This kind of bias — it’s unknown, untrusted and scary — people won’t align with,” Joseph said. “They probably won’t touch it.”
The company’s negative image goes beyond potential viewers. Advertisers are also not completely on board. The NYT reports that Al Jazeera declined to mention major advertisers. Translation: We’re having troubles. Adweek also reports that buyers are having a difficult time getting their clients to lay their money down on the fledgling network.
In a conference call last week, Al Jazeera America’s CEO, Ehab Al Shihabi, emphasized its programming of “fact-based, unbiased and in-depth news,” as well as “less yelling and fewer celebrity sightings” as the way it will combat any negative perception and get people to tune in. But it’ll be a long slog.
In a 2009 study, Gallup found that 53 percent of respondents said their opinion of Islam was either “not too favorable” or “not favorable at all.” Americans are also twice as likely to express negative feelings about Muslims as they are about people who subscribe to other religions. Pew reported in May that post-September 11, 2001 attacks, Al Jazeera Arabic, the company’s flagship network, was seen as a mouthpiece for Al Qaeda. American attitudes towards Muslims are complicated.
Through this lens, Al Jazeera may have a difficult time getting Americans to watch. But there’s another issue Al Jazeera America faces. The cable network will start off in 48 million homes, or roughly half the number of households that CNN, Fox and MSNBC are in. This was the biggest problem Current TV had: People didn’t watch because it wasn’t offered to everyone (and it was hard to find on the dial).
“When the parent company created the Al Jazeera English satellite news channel seven years ago, most U.S. cable and satellite operators declined to carry it, and most American viewers could access it only online,” Pew reported.
Now that Al Jazeera America has its place on the TV spectrum it will no longer stream its services online because, as the New York Times reports, “distributors discourage their partners from giving programming away on the Internet.”
Other foreign TV networks, like the BBC, have made stronger footholds in America. This is not surprising given Americans’ fascination with all things British. Also, BBC America shows more than just news, airing popular shows like “Dr. Who” and “Top Gear.”
Al Jazeera America’s 900 staffers, including 400 in the newsroom (with names like former CNN’s Ali Velshi and Soledad O’Brien, former NBC News’ Mike Viqueira and John Seigenthaler and former MSNBC and Current TV’s David Shuster) and 12 bureaus across the country try to bolster its chances of adhering to American-centric programming.
Ultimately, according to Penn, Al Jazeera needs to determine what its brand wants to be in America.
“If they want to appeal to the mainstream, then they need to run news content that showcases exactly why they’re better than the alternatives,” Penn said. “They have to provide a compelling alternative to the existing mainstream news and establish a strong brand immediately, lest their competitors play dirty and marginalize them as nothing more than an ethnic news network.”
Al Jazeera Has to Fix a Brand Problem
Josh Sternberg | August 20, 2013
Andre Agassi once told us that image is everything. Al Jazeera America, the newest entrant into the cable news fray, is learning this quite quickly.
Al Jazeera America goes live this afternoon, eight months after the Qatari government-funded media company bought Al Gore’s struggling network, Current TV, for $500 million. Its brand promise is a deeper dive into news and less shouting than other American cable networks like CNN, MSNBC and Fox News. A big hurdle: Some Americans associate its name, fairly or not, with terrorism. The bigger hurdle: Even more Americans have never heard of it and aren’t likely to trust it based on name alone.
“Perception of the company is absolutely their biggest obstacle; from the name, which is Arabic, to their competition,” said Christopher Penn, vp of marketing technology at Shift Communications. “It might actually be a positive for MSNBC and CNN, as Fox News will likely immediately brand it as the Terrorist News Network.”
Any entity entering the news category, which is so crowded now and undifferentiated, would have trouble, said Cohn & Wolfe’s North American president Jim Joseph. Al Jazeera America is at best an unknown brand, and Joseph believes since the average American doesn’t know it, she won’t trust it.
Joseph said that Al Jazeera America is going to have to deal with what might be perceived as a biased coverage coming from “a certain region of the world.” Any cable news watcher knows about bias. Political bias in the U.S. is a form of targeting. People watch voices they agree with. An Arab bias, he argued, won’t work.
“This kind of bias — it’s unknown, untrusted and scary — people won’t align with,” Joseph said. “They probably won’t touch it.”
The company’s negative image goes beyond potential viewers. Advertisers are also not completely on board. The NYT reports that Al Jazeera declined to mention major advertisers. Translation: We’re having troubles. Adweek also reports that buyers are having a difficult time getting their clients to lay their money down on the fledgling network.
In a conference call last week, Al Jazeera America’s CEO, Ehab Al Shihabi, emphasized its programming of “fact-based, unbiased and in-depth news,” as well as “less yelling and fewer celebrity sightings” as the way it will combat any negative perception and get people to tune in. But it’ll be a long slog.
In a 2009 study, Gallup found that 53 percent of respondents said their opinion of Islam was either “not too favorable” or “not favorable at all.” Americans are also twice as likely to express negative feelings about Muslims as they are about people who subscribe to other religions. Pew reported in May that post-September 11, 2001 attacks, Al Jazeera Arabic, the company’s flagship network, was seen as a mouthpiece for Al Qaeda. American attitudes towards Muslims are complicated.
Through this lens, Al Jazeera may have a difficult time getting Americans to watch. But there’s another issue Al Jazeera America faces. The cable network will start off in 48 million homes, or roughly half the number of households that CNN, Fox and MSNBC are in. This was the biggest problem Current TV had: People didn’t watch because it wasn’t offered to everyone (and it was hard to find on the dial).
“When the parent company created the Al Jazeera English satellite news channel seven years ago, most U.S. cable and satellite operators declined to carry it, and most American viewers could access it only online,” Pew reported.
Now that Al Jazeera America has its place on the TV spectrum it will no longer stream its services online because, as the New York Times reports, “distributors discourage their partners from giving programming away on the Internet.”
Other foreign TV networks, like the BBC, have made stronger footholds in America. This is not surprising given Americans’ fascination with all things British. Also, BBC America shows more than just news, airing popular shows like “Dr. Who” and “Top Gear.”
Al Jazeera America’s 900 staffers, including 400 in the newsroom (with names like former CNN’s Ali Velshi and Soledad O’Brien, former NBC News’ Mike Viqueira and John Seigenthaler and former MSNBC and Current TV’s David Shuster) and 12 bureaus across the country try to bolster its chances of adhering to American-centric programming.
Ultimately, according to Penn, Al Jazeera needs to determine what its brand wants to be in America.
“If they want to appeal to the mainstream, then they need to run news content that showcases exactly why they’re better than the alternatives,” Penn said. “They have to provide a compelling alternative to the existing mainstream news and establish a strong brand immediately, lest their competitors play dirty and marginalize them as nothing more than an ethnic news network.”
Sunday, August 18, 2013
Despite Odds, Calif. City Becomes Two-Newspaper Town
Despite odds, Calif. city becomes 2 newspaper town
JUSTIN PRITCHARD, Associated Press
LONG BEACH, Calif. (AP) — The latest experiment in American journalism is a throwback: a new daily newspaper to compete against an established one in a big city.
With Monday's debut of the Long Beach Register, the ambitious owners of the Orange County Register are expanding their bet that consumers will reward an investment in news inked on paper and delivered to their doorsteps.
The competition is the Long Beach Press-Telegram, which was founded more than a century ago and maintains an average weekday circulation of about 55,000.
As a result of the budding newspaper battle, this city of 468,000 is joining the likes of Chicago, Philadelphia and Boston as what has become a rarity in 21st century America — the two newspaper town. Never mind shrinking circulations and online news migration.
"We believe that a city with the size and vibrancy of Long Beach should be happy to support a great newspaper of the variety we want to provide," said Aaron Kushner, who since buying the Orange County Register a year ago with a partner has surprised industry watchers by expanding reporting staff and page counts. "If it is, we'll make healthy money. If it's not, that'll be unfortunate for everyone. But we believe we'll be successful."
By launching the Long Beach Register, Kushner, publisher of the Register and CEO of Freedom Communications, is taking his contrarian instincts outside of Orange County.
Media business analyst Rick Edmonds said the last time he can recall a major U.S. city adding a new daily paper was around World War II, when Chicago got the Sun-Times and New York got Newsday. A brewing newspaper war in New Orleans between that city's Times-Picayune and a challenger based about 80 miles away in Baton Rouge, La., is the closest to what's unfolding in Long Beach.
"How will it play out?" asked Edmonds, of the Poynter Institute, a journalism foundation in St. Petersburg, Fla. "Don't really know until it happens."
Long Beach is a diverse city better known for its sprawling container ship port — one of the world's largest — than its beaches.
While its oceanfront drive features a large aquarium and the historic Queen Mary ocean liner, it also has big city problems including gangs. Bordering Orange County's urbanized north, it is in Los Angeles County, about 20 miles south of downtown LA.
In their small, sunlight-flooded newsroom, reporters for the new Register were greeted Thursday by two boxes of doughnuts and the kinds of issues that bedevil startups: who sits where, how come this outlet has no power, and how to get an Internet connection?
After a round of introductions, editor Paul Eakins told his staff that with at least 16 pages to fill each day, the paper would both cover "hyperlocal" news and welcome contributions from readers. In all, the paper has about 20 editorial employees.
Write about a boy becoming an Eagle Scout? Yes. Opening of the new dog park? You bet.
"I don't think they quite know what's coming," Eakins said of readers.
The plan Monday is to distribute 10,000 copies, publisher Ian Lamont said. It will be wrapped around the Orange County Register, so readers will get coverage of Long Beach's schools, sports, courts, happenings and City Hall — plus news from around the region and world. There will be no separate Long Beach paper on weekends.
Several reporters at the Long Beach Register are Press-Telegram alums, and though Eakins downplayed any rivalry, at the staff meeting there were gentle jabs about besting an old employer.
For their part, the Press-Telegram's bosses are giving no ground.
"We're not going to let a competitor come into our city and take it," said Michael A. Anastasi, vice president of news and executive editor of the Los Angeles News Group, which owns the Press-Telegram and eight other daily papers in the area.
The competition's certain winners, Anastasi said, will be local residents.
JUSTIN PRITCHARD, Associated Press
LONG BEACH, Calif. (AP) — The latest experiment in American journalism is a throwback: a new daily newspaper to compete against an established one in a big city.
With Monday's debut of the Long Beach Register, the ambitious owners of the Orange County Register are expanding their bet that consumers will reward an investment in news inked on paper and delivered to their doorsteps.
The competition is the Long Beach Press-Telegram, which was founded more than a century ago and maintains an average weekday circulation of about 55,000.
As a result of the budding newspaper battle, this city of 468,000 is joining the likes of Chicago, Philadelphia and Boston as what has become a rarity in 21st century America — the two newspaper town. Never mind shrinking circulations and online news migration.
"We believe that a city with the size and vibrancy of Long Beach should be happy to support a great newspaper of the variety we want to provide," said Aaron Kushner, who since buying the Orange County Register a year ago with a partner has surprised industry watchers by expanding reporting staff and page counts. "If it is, we'll make healthy money. If it's not, that'll be unfortunate for everyone. But we believe we'll be successful."
By launching the Long Beach Register, Kushner, publisher of the Register and CEO of Freedom Communications, is taking his contrarian instincts outside of Orange County.
Media business analyst Rick Edmonds said the last time he can recall a major U.S. city adding a new daily paper was around World War II, when Chicago got the Sun-Times and New York got Newsday. A brewing newspaper war in New Orleans between that city's Times-Picayune and a challenger based about 80 miles away in Baton Rouge, La., is the closest to what's unfolding in Long Beach.
"How will it play out?" asked Edmonds, of the Poynter Institute, a journalism foundation in St. Petersburg, Fla. "Don't really know until it happens."
Long Beach is a diverse city better known for its sprawling container ship port — one of the world's largest — than its beaches.
While its oceanfront drive features a large aquarium and the historic Queen Mary ocean liner, it also has big city problems including gangs. Bordering Orange County's urbanized north, it is in Los Angeles County, about 20 miles south of downtown LA.
In their small, sunlight-flooded newsroom, reporters for the new Register were greeted Thursday by two boxes of doughnuts and the kinds of issues that bedevil startups: who sits where, how come this outlet has no power, and how to get an Internet connection?
After a round of introductions, editor Paul Eakins told his staff that with at least 16 pages to fill each day, the paper would both cover "hyperlocal" news and welcome contributions from readers. In all, the paper has about 20 editorial employees.
Write about a boy becoming an Eagle Scout? Yes. Opening of the new dog park? You bet.
"I don't think they quite know what's coming," Eakins said of readers.
The plan Monday is to distribute 10,000 copies, publisher Ian Lamont said. It will be wrapped around the Orange County Register, so readers will get coverage of Long Beach's schools, sports, courts, happenings and City Hall — plus news from around the region and world. There will be no separate Long Beach paper on weekends.
Several reporters at the Long Beach Register are Press-Telegram alums, and though Eakins downplayed any rivalry, at the staff meeting there were gentle jabs about besting an old employer.
For their part, the Press-Telegram's bosses are giving no ground.
"We're not going to let a competitor come into our city and take it," said Michael A. Anastasi, vice president of news and executive editor of the Los Angeles News Group, which owns the Press-Telegram and eight other daily papers in the area.
The competition's certain winners, Anastasi said, will be local residents.
Friday, August 16, 2013
AOL's Patch Begins Massive Layoffs
AOL’s Patch Layoffs Coming Friday
August 15, 2013 at 8:49 pm PT
Tim_armstrong will begin laying off employees at its Patch unit on Friday, according to people familiar with the company’s plans.
Last week, AOL CEO Tim Armstrong announced that he would shutter or try to find partners for up to 400 of his 900 local news sites. I don’t know if Armstrong was able to find takers for any of the sites, but we should learn more about their status when the cuts begin today.
If I hear more about their scope, I’ll update this post. If you’re an AOL employee who would like to share your story, feel free to reach me at peter@allthingsd.com.
Armstrong co-founded Patch in 2007, when he was still running sales at Google. After taking the top job at AOL in 2009, he had the Web giant buy the local news startup, and since then has poured a lot of money into the venture, to the concern of AOL investors.
It’s relatively easy to understand Armstrong’s bet on Patch. No Internet company has truly cracked the local news and information business at scale. And if someone could do that, they could capture a huge pool of ad money that has yet to migrate to the Web.
But Patch hasn’t done that, either. Last year, it lost money on $35 million in revenue. Earlier this year, Armstrong promised that Patch would become profitable by the end of 2013.
But it’s hard to see how that would happen without significant cuts. As Bloomberg’s Ed Lee pointed out in June, even if Patch doubled its sales from last year, to $70 million, it would still be much less than its operating expenses of approximately $140 million.
Source: http://allthingsd.com/20130815/aols-patch-layoffs-coming-friday/
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Balow's Warning on 'Doomsday Words'
Industry veteran Dan Balow (whom I admire very much) has a good, reasonable perspective on the future of the industry in this blogpost from Steve Laube's blog:
Doomsday Words
by Dan Balow
“Nobody is buying print books anymore”
“Nobody is buying printed magazines or newspapers anymore”
“No one shops at bookstores anymore”
“No one is reading anymore”
“No one goes to the trade shows anymore”
“No one needs a traditional publisher anymore”
“Everyone should just self-publish”
When the speed of change is faster than we can easily comprehend, our language has a difficult time catching up with reality, so we have a tendency to use over-stated terms to describe what is happening. Our very choice of words open the door to making some very poor business decisions. How? Rather than seeking wise solutions by understanding the facts, we make fast decisions based on incomplete information. Simply…it’s faster.
Nobody, no one, everyone, always, never, etc.
Not limited to publishing, over-stated language fills our political process, the financial markets, our personal lives and even our churches.
Overall, eBooks represent about 25% of all book sales…so digital-only books miss 75% of the market.
Print magazines, newspapers and trade shows are a lot alike…they reach a point where the cost cannot justify continuing, even though hundreds of thousands of people still read them or thousands of people attend an exposition. Readers Digest declared chapter 11 bankruptcy but had millions of print subscribers.
Bookstores still sell half of all print editions of most books. Sure, it is less than it was years ago, but it is still significant.
Traditional publishers still publish hundreds of thousands of new titles every year and account for significant majority of all books sold. Alternative methods of publishing have surpassed the title output of traditional publishers, but hold a small % of the overall dollar and unit volume.
So why use the word “nobody” to describe 75% of the market or “no one” applied to something that still holds a majority of a segment’s business? Information and facts always make things complicated. Wise decision-making is harder to come by. Take time, see the truth, then make wise decisions and hold realistic opinions.
As the great social commentator and sage Yogi Berra once said, “Nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded.”
Doomsday Words
by Dan Balow
“Nobody is buying print books anymore”
“Nobody is buying printed magazines or newspapers anymore”
“No one shops at bookstores anymore”
“No one is reading anymore”
“No one goes to the trade shows anymore”
“No one needs a traditional publisher anymore”
“Everyone should just self-publish”
When the speed of change is faster than we can easily comprehend, our language has a difficult time catching up with reality, so we have a tendency to use over-stated terms to describe what is happening. Our very choice of words open the door to making some very poor business decisions. How? Rather than seeking wise solutions by understanding the facts, we make fast decisions based on incomplete information. Simply…it’s faster.
Nobody, no one, everyone, always, never, etc.
Not limited to publishing, over-stated language fills our political process, the financial markets, our personal lives and even our churches.
Overall, eBooks represent about 25% of all book sales…so digital-only books miss 75% of the market.
Print magazines, newspapers and trade shows are a lot alike…they reach a point where the cost cannot justify continuing, even though hundreds of thousands of people still read them or thousands of people attend an exposition. Readers Digest declared chapter 11 bankruptcy but had millions of print subscribers.
Bookstores still sell half of all print editions of most books. Sure, it is less than it was years ago, but it is still significant.
Traditional publishers still publish hundreds of thousands of new titles every year and account for significant majority of all books sold. Alternative methods of publishing have surpassed the title output of traditional publishers, but hold a small % of the overall dollar and unit volume.
So why use the word “nobody” to describe 75% of the market or “no one” applied to something that still holds a majority of a segment’s business? Information and facts always make things complicated. Wise decision-making is harder to come by. Take time, see the truth, then make wise decisions and hold realistic opinions.
As the great social commentator and sage Yogi Berra once said, “Nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
