Try this on as a new rule for newspapers: Cover what you do best. Link to the rest.
That’s not how newspapers work now. They try to cover everything because they used to have to be all things to all people in their markets. So they had their own reporters replicate the work of other reporters elsewhere so they could say that they did it under their own bylines as a matter of pride and propriety. It’s the way things were done. They also took wire-service copy and reedited it so they could give their audiences the world. But in the age of the link, this is clearly inefficient and unnecessary. You can link to the stories that someone else did and to the rest of the world. And if you do that, it allows you to reallocate your dwindling resources to what matters, which in most cases should be local coverage.
This changes the dynamic of editorial decisions. Instead of saying, “we should have that” (and replicating what is already out there) you say, “what do we do best?” That is, “what is our unique value?” It means that when you sit down to see a story that others have worked on, you should ask, “can we do it better?” If not, then link. And devote your time to what you can do better.
In the rearchitecture of news, what needs to happen is that people are driven to the best coverage, not the 87th version of the same coverage. This will work for publications and news organizations. It will also work for individuals; this is how a lone reporter’s work (and reputation) can surface. We saw that happening with the Libby trial and Firedoglake’s liveblogging of it. As Jay Rosen said at our NPR confab last week — and I’ve heard this elsewhere — theirs became the best source for keeping up on the trial. Reporters and editors knew it and were using it. So those same reporters and editors should have been sending their readers to the blog as a service: ‘We’re not liveblogging it, but they are. We’ll give you our analysis and reporting later. Enjoy.’ That is where the architecture of news must go because links enable it and economics demand it.
There’s another angle to this: News is not one-size-fits-all. We don’t get all our news from one source anymore. We get bombarded with news all around us. So we all knew that Anna Nicole Smith was dead (or, in Jack Cafferty’s immortal words, still dead). So that means that not every newspaper needs to cover that story in depth.
It certainly means that The New York Times needn’t. So why did the Times devote considerable space and reporting and editing talent to the Anna Nicole story this week? They added nothing more to the story. It’s not what they do best. At the least, if they felt they really needed to cover it, they should have used the AP. Online, they certainly should have just linked to the many, many other sources that are covering it. And then the paper could have used its resources for news that matters and news that they can do uniquely well.
So why did they do it? They didn’t want to be left behind. They perhaps even didn’t want to seem snotting (as if the Anna Nicole story were below them and their readers). But that’s not the issue. Making the best use of their resources and talent it. They need to take advantage of the link.
Newspapers are getting more comfortable with linking out even to competitors. This takes it farther. It says that the best service you can perform for yourself and your readers is to link instead of trying to do everything.
And once you really open yourself up to this, then it also means that you can link to more people gathering more coverage of news: ‘We didn’t cover that school board meeting today, but here’s a link to somebody who recorded it.’ That’s really no different from saying after a big news event, ‘We weren’t there to take pictures, but lots of our readers were and here they are.’
So you do what you do best. And you link to the rest.
That is the new architecture of news.
LATER: But this is the kind of red-herring arguments we still hear in this discussion. Al Eisele, editor-at-large for The Hill, complains about criticism of MSM and points to the Washington Post’s excellent investigation of the conditions at the Walter Reade Army Medical Center.
This Jurassic journalist is tired of all the bitching and moaning by denizens of the blogosphere about the deficiencies of the Mainstream Media (MSM in the snarky parlance of blognoscenti). Out of touch, corrupted by proximity to power, dinosaur media, inside gasbaggery of the Beltway — these are some of the kinder descriptions of those of us who believe that traditional journalism is still a necessary and honorable trade, like garbage collection or undertaking. . . .Citizen journalism is fine, and it’s great that vigilant readers are keeping journalist, and politicians, on their toes. But when’s the last time it prodded the bureaucracy into action to fix a problem or correct an injustice? That’s what watchdog journalism, with the veteran reporters and vast resources like that of the Washington Post, does so well. And that’s why the Mainstream Media is still an essential part of the brave new world of journalism in the Internet age.
I haven’t seen a single blogger say that they could do this or that they don’t want MSM to do this. Shoot down that canard. Pickle that herring. What I’m saying above is that we want MSM to do more of this. Instead of covering Anna Nicole and Britney.
: Jeffrey Dvorkin, ex of NPR and now of the Center for Concerned Journalists, echoes my view from above in relation to foreign reporting. As summarized by Romenesko:
* There are local, foreign reporters who are knowledgeable and whose English is excellent. They need to be identified and trained.
* The role of the blogger in foreign reporting needs to be rethought. It is just possible that a blogger-correspondent might be the next phase of reporting.
* The BBC may be a model where eager and often young journalists are given the basics of news gathering then sent overseas to act as one-person bureaus. These journalists may not have all of the experience that old hands may have, but they are willing and adept.
: Richard Sambrook reminds me of a report (PDF) on use of wires vs. original reporting. The Associated Press has been the center of this architecture for years: if you don’t do it, get it off the wire. Only now, there are more ways to follow that same model.
So, Mr. Eisele, rather than whining about bloggers, it would be better to find more ways to work with them — and to link to competitors — so you can concentrate on just the reporting you and I admire.
: SEE ALSO: This earlier post: Nobody wants less reporting.
: LATER STILL: Cory Bergman makes a great point about the parallel world of TV:
There’s an interesting implication here for TV news, as well. The majority of stories in local TV newscasts (and the networks, too) are exactly the same. This sameness is not a detractor in a linear world: most people who watch TV don’t turn off a newscast if they’ve already read or seen a story somewhere else. But on the web, sameness is a drawback: people who have already read or seen a story somewhere else aren’t going to click on it to read it again. Posting the same stories as everyone else has a more tangible impact on pageviews than airing the same stories has an impact on ratings. This becomes even a bigger drawback when you consider all the stories TV newsrooms get from newspapers, which have already been online for most the day before they end up on the TV websites. In the end, covering unique, original stories is a must for TV sites — resources willing — even if it means diverging from TV’s daily coverage. Or better yet, TV newsrooms should cover more enterprise stories as a percentage of daily assignments.
Yes, and then TV news might actually be valuable. Like newspapers, the have resources. It’s a question of priorities.
When I read the title of this post, professor, I thought you were referring to bloggers, not newspapers. What you stated is a rule that most serious bloggers learn pretty early in the process (or at least learn the first part of it); focus on that which is your added value and forget about everything else. Don’t bother to link to irrelevant items because because they will be linked by others who find it relevant.
Focus only on the mission.
[...] Jeff Jarvis makes an excellent point in this blog post that urges news organizations — especially newspapers — to focus their dwindling resources on their strengths instead of trying to duplicate coverage that’s widely available. Newspaper sites are already posting more national wire and syndicated stories to free up their reporters to cover more local news. But Jarvis goes a step further to suggest they link to sites that are doing a better job covering a story. [...]
[...] Jeff Jarvis makes an excellent point in this blog post that urges news organizations — especially newspapers — to focus their dwindling resources on their strengths instead of trying to duplicate coverage that’s widely available elsewhere. Newspaper sites are already posting more national wire and syndicated stories to free up their reporters to cover more local news. But Jarvis goes a step further to suggest they link to sites that are doing a better job covering a story. [...]
Hmm… So are you proposing a new era in which every newspaper is really a highly targeted niche publication? It seems that was once the case, but that megapapers like the NYT have grown to become purported catch-alls for every news item under the sun.
What happens if the NYT becomes a strictly New York-based publication and drops anything not within its immediate geography? Is there still room for a newspaper as umbrella news aggregator? Is there still a need for such a thing?
(My two cents: yes, there still is. Just as there are too many blogs to sift through without a filter, so too is there a need for an aggregator of hyperlocal news, or hyper-niche news. The revolution is not in the restructuring of information; it’s in the reimagining of information search.)
As a former newspaper reporter and editor and current hyper-local blogger, this post really made sense to me. It made me think that perhaps news research could take a page from scientific research where discovery comes from the work of many building off one another to lead to a great breakthrough. The method has brought us lots of scientific discovery. What if it could bring us ground-breaking journalistic discovery — the kind that’s so hard to get in an era of newspaper cutbacks and diminished resources?
Good observation and good post. I find most of us who blog and get into discussions of news events are getting our info from online newspapers on an equal footing with news services, and tend to go to, say, a local source when the news is from there. Like al Jazeera for the M.E.
And recently I and blogmate at http://www.cabdrollery.blogspot.com were invited to post on a high traffic blog, because we had shown expertise in our areas. Hmmmm.
One of the things that I love about your blog, Jeff, is that people come on just to agree with you and say how right you are. And you certainly talk a lot of sense here. We (MediaGuadian.co.uk) hired Roy Greenslade a year or so ago. He was a former national newspaper editor, but has swiftly become an uber-blogger. He writes about the subjects that he knows best. He links to the things that his readers would be most interested in. And his aggregating and commenting interacts with our news coverage.
However I think newspapers (or should we just call them traditional news organisations) should continue to compete. This competition is part of what brings out the best in our journalism.
And as for your point about Anna Nicole Smith. Aside from a long argument about whether this is proper news that should be covered by serious news organisations, the fact is that this sort of news is “popular”. It sells newspapers. It attracts viewers. And to take the approach that so many other people are doing it that we don’t need to, is just not a ratings/circulation option for major media organisations.
Steve,
Agree completely (see, now I come to you to say I agree) about competition. If you can do the story better, do it! If not, link and do something else great.
I’m the last to argue against any coverage of Anna Nicole; I used to work at People magazine. But theTimes didn’t do it to sell papers; it was inside. And they didn’t add anything to the story. And they wasted resources trying to be popular even though anyone who cared about the story certainly got more — much more — elsewhere.
Jeff:
Your new rule is absolutely right, and I would suggest that this is what has allowed small local newspapers to flourish for the last decade. They have relied on trusted wires sources for national and international news and focused solely on adding value through local reporting (what they do best).
In my discussions with newspaper executives, the central questions seem to be (1.) Can we trust the source? (2.) Will we give the impression to readers that we are not doing our job? and (3.) Readers want “our” take on the story. As you correctly point out, when a newspaper’s take is simply a rewrite of an AP story–it’s hard to say #3 matters. Newspapers must similarly start to realize that concerns #1 and #2 are not the central issues in the evolving era.
In my larger work on the implications of the evolvint Web, the subtitle of my award winning book Go It Alone! is Do WhatYou Do Best Let Other’s Do the Rest. Now, media companies must figure out how to make the same evolution that is striking other industries: You have absolutely put your finger on the key rule for survival. To help companies and individuals find the tools they need to “Do What They Best” I have followed up on Go It Alone! with Ventures Without Capital, a blog recommending the best low-cost services that let any business leverage what they do best.
Once again, your insights are right on the money!
Bruce Judson
It would be easier for a newspaper to start from scratch as a small focused publication that doesn’t try to do it all. It would win admirers that way. But as the traditional full-service newspaper tries to become that, all it does is lose readers a handful at a time. A hundred people might miss the stock listings and not care about the TV listings. A hundred others might miss the TV listings and not care about the stocks. When they get together, they’ll complain that “there’s nothing in the paper anymore.”
It will be interesting to see if a sizeable metropolitan newspaper gets rid of its wire services and becomes like the country weekly that won’t have anything about 9/11, the tsunami, Katrina or the Iraq war unless a local person is involved. Maybe a metro tabloid that covers its home turf fiercely is the way to go. Maybe the Christian Science Monitor can become a Parade magazine-like insert for newspapers that have gotten rid of their wires. No more West Coast scores.
I wouldn’t be surprised if, after all this happens, the publisher of a local shopper starts running wire news for that smaller and older group of readers who still aren’t at the same place as the future-of-media thinkers.
as a former news person, I asked and sought out the “best” info on the Libby trial, and wound up at firedoglake.com.
I’ve been saying this for years in response to some lame-o coverage of some stories. Now, it’s very easy to say, it’s up to the reader:
“New Rule: Your Own Best Editor”
[...] New rule: Cover what you do best. Link to the rest. Jeff Jarvis has a suggestion for newspapers and the headline pretty much says it all. Not sure, in an age of media messiness, we need more “rules,” but the idea seems sound. [...]
Jeff;
I think you are reading way too much into how a general daily paper like the Times decides what to cover. The Anna Nicole Smith story meets the first criterion of any news source that is serving what is, by definition, a general readership: it’s bloody interesting. Why should we media workers – be you an old-school reporter, blogger, editor, photographer – try to impose some technocratic limitations on that cardinal rule between journalist and news consumer…If it’s interesting and worth analyzing, then cover it.
I’ve worked in every old-school medium going – in the UK and now here in the US – and I remember well the days when BBC senior news managers threatened to start establishing corporation-wide rules for what was “worth” throwing reporter-power at. Ultimately, you have to allow individual programmes, or sites, or papers, who aim at a GENERAL audience, to edit their own product. Falling into some trendy zeitgeist would be a disaster for reporting everywhere.
[...] Jeff Jarvis propone como nueva regla para los cibermedios concentrarse en la cobertura de aquellos temas para los que cada medio está mejor preparado y enlazar el resto: New rule: Cover what you do best. Link to the rest. [...]
Very good advice. As I work in news, I am currently transferring our internet site to a new direction, the advice was quite helpful.
[...] in Tom Foremski’s NewRulesCommunications. Tom references BuzzMachine.com’s story New rule: Cover what you do best. Link to the rest about how local papers might do better by covering their community and taking wire/Internet [...]
… and when you can’t do anything at all… just link to it! like the daily free newspapers that you get everyday delivered to your hand on subways and trains.
[...] I noodle around with the notion of a new architecture of news, I wonder whether news organizations start to look more like platforms and less like closed content [...]
[...] way it is: Newspapers try to cover all the news themselves. The way it will be: “Cover what you do best. Link to the rest.†— Jeff Jarvis [...]
Keskity siihen minkä osaat – ja linkitä loput…
Olen viime aikoina ihmetellyt pitkän linjan journalistien marmatusta siitä kammottavasta tosiasiasta, että heidän on täytynyt raahautua Susan Kurosen kirjan julkistustilaisuuteen. Mistä moinen käytös johtuu? Oma arvaukseni on, että journalisti…
[...] You can’t do it all yourself. The story gets better when the story can get bigger. Do what you do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] * Report, damnit, report. The most important thing we can do is, of course, bring journalism to the community: report. We need to become known as the indispensable sources of local help and information and I’d argue — contrary to the Shorenstein report — that this comes not from trying to compete with the big guys in national, commodity news but by putting all our resources behind what we do best and what no one else — including, ferchrissakes, local TV — can afford to do: report. We have to make our value absolutely clear and we need to increase that value even as our resources are diminished. How? Do what you do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] New Rule: Cover what you do better, link to the rest! –> Sobre uma tendência identificada pelo autor na qual seria mais produtivo se os agentes de mÃdia fizessem somente o que é de sua máxima expertise e linkassem o resto (e aà teriam também que ser bons para linkar com a coisa certa!) [...]
[...] too (the Glam model). Then I’d still have the benefit of his best-of-breed coverage — doing what I did best while linking to the rest — with less expense — none, really, because I’m just sharing revenue for sold [...]
[...] Within the post he links to an earlier post which really struck a cord with me. Jeff asserts that a key principle of blogging is to “Cover what you do best, and link to the rest.” [...]
[...] curate more as we create less. That’s another way to say what I’ve said other ways: Do what we do best and link to the rest. Also: We need to gather more and produce less, so we also need to encourage others to produce more [...]
[...] which is also engaging in layoffs, can’t afford to do everything anymore and so it has to do what it does best and link to the rest. Granted that the ad revenue on a Baghdad story won’t be great but added traffic would add [...]
[...] we should curate more as we create less. That’s another way to say what I’ve said other ways: Do what we do best and link to the rest. Also: We need to gather more and produce less, so we also need to encourage others to produce more [...]
[...] When we first started Daylife, we were unsure whether traditional news companies would be receptive to the notion of linking to their competitors and the wider web. After all, this was an industry which not too long ago was worried about deep linking. But news companies are rapidly realizing that to best serve their readers’ news needs, publishers can’t rely just on their own original content. They have to show their readers what’s out there on the web. Or, as Jeff Jarvis says, do what you do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] This ethic of the link will become all the more important as news organizations pare down to their essence. I’ve said often that they will have to do what they do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] they can shift resources towards the more scalable model of aggregating and adding value on top. Jeff Jarvis says “Cover what you do best. Link to the rest.” We agree. Interested in hearing your comments on this story and the ongoing debate of hyperlocal [...]
[...] for running the awards should go to the editors of a trade paper that practices Jeff Jarvis’s maxim: “Cover what you do best and link to the [...]
[...] discussing online news, Jarvis says it best: Cover what you do best. Link to the [...]
[...] goes back to Jeff Jarvis’ maxim: do what you do best, link to the [...]
[...] copyediting to staff and citizens for awhile. * National and international are handled via links. Do what you do best and link to the rest. * Photographers are still important so I didn’t cut their ranks much. But note that I did [...]
[...] the solution – also from Jeff Jarvis: Cover what you do best. Link to the [...]
[...] 3. Links are a key to efficiency. In other words: Do what you do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] 3. Links are a key to efficiency. In other words: Do what you do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] course Jeff “Link To The Rest” Jarvis would love it. Indeed, looking at Future’s deal, the big, fat, obvious question [...]
[...] by Scott Karpf of Publishing 2.0 on how online journalists should use linking to create context. Jeff Jarvis argues that new media journalists should specialise in their news niche and link to the rest. But [...]
[...] Vin Crosbie’s series on the fate of American newspapers explain that the bundle of news and entertainment that defines a traditional media brand is not replicable on the web. Once unbundled, each bit of content competes in its own vertical. That’s why it’s useless to put a regional paper’s op-ed on international politics online. [...]
[...] http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/02/22/new-rule-cover-what-you-do-best-link-to-the-rest/ [...]
[...] una buena manera de descubrir qué fantástico debe ser tener un buen editor 58. Haz lo que hagas mejor y enlaza el resto 59. Por los blogs no vale la pena matarse. Para eso está el alcohol. 60. Marcarte un [...]
[...] faut compter avec un journalisme de liens (Cover what you do best. Link to the rest), je signale le compte-rendu d’Eric Scherer de l’AFP après la conférence annuelle de [...]
[...] efficiencies by saving resources long spent on commodity news so they could concentrate on their real mission — local — did you grab the opportunity by the horns and beg to cover the hell out of [...]
[...] Jarvis Einen radikalen (und vielfach zitierten) Ansatz verfolgt Buzzmachine-Autor Jeff Jarvis: Cover what you do best. And link to the rest. Jarvis adressiert diese Handlungsempfehlung insbesondere an (Regional-)Zeitungen, die sich im [...]
[...] But don’t see just the danger in that; see the opportunity. If we could build this tower of bullshit in derivatives through connections, what of worth can be built? Knowledge, wisdom (about, say, medicine), new understanding of the world (through data about our behavior)? And what efficiencies can be found because we can do what we do best and link to the rest? [...]
[...] This ethic of the link will become all the more important as news organizations pare down to their essence. I’ve said often that they will have to do what they do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] meant they were unable to report in full – to some extent fulfilling Jeff Jarvis’s rule (2007) of “Cover what you do best and link to the [...]
[...] I am not going to join the online battles about what newspapers do best (exemplified by Jeff Jarvis’s post last year) except in this one area: people still read their local newspapers to find out who died — [...]
[...] I am not going to join the online battles about what newspapers do best (exemplified by Jeff Jarvis’s post last year) except in this one area: people still read their local newspapers to find out who died — [...]
[...] te linken naar externe nieuwsbronnen – ook als die van de concurrent zijn! De link verandert alles! Cover what you do best, link to the rest lijkt de nieuwe regel. Sites als Digg, Yahoo (met Yahoo Buzz) implementeren deze regel al met zeer [...]
[...] has two options: to raise its game and start covering those niches better; or it can get out and as Jeff Jarvis says, ‘do what you do best, and link to the rest’,” said [...]
[...] an important part of class readings, so you will often see their work linked or, as Jarvis call it, curated on this [...]
[...] just said in Der Westen, “Do the fucking links.” Yes, I’m gratified at the spread of that meme. It’s not just advice. It’s a recognition of the new architecture of news and [...]
[...] Hell Not?” attitude is what originally moved me to blog, but in keeping with Jarvis’ “Cover what you do best and link to the rest” philosophy, I’ll let Mr. Romenesko do the blogging. Possibly related posts: (automatically [...]
[...] in the importance of what has been called link journalism. (Read more about link journalism from Jeff Jarvis, Scott [...]
[...] Do what you do best and link to the rest will be a foundation of the future architecture of news. This is a necessity of efficiency – no one [...]
[...] quote Jeff Jarvis – cover what you do best – link the rest. Media sales teams now have to look beyond the limited scale of a brand site approach to [...]
[...] Do what you do best and link to the rest will be a foundation of the future architecture of news. This is a necessity of efficiency – no one [...]
[...] Hvorfor skal jeg vælge det ene medie frem for det andet? De bringer den samme historie, og benytter samme ordlyd. Ingen af dem bidrager med noget. New rule: Cover what you do best. Link to the rest. [...]
[...] – Haz lo que se te da mejor y enlaza hacia lo demás será un pilar de la futura arquitectura de la información. Es necesario por una cuestión de eficacia (nadie puede permitirse el lujo de gastar recursos en noticias generales) y también por la economía del enlace, puesto que a través de los enlaces de otros el periodismo genuino logrará atención y audiencia, así como la oportunidad de conseguir beneficios a través de la publicidad. Enlazar hacia las fuentes periodísticas originales (en lugar de copiarlo o reescribirlo, como hemos venido haciendo) se convertirá en algo ético, un imperativo moral del nuevo periodismo. [...]
[...] do that voodoo Jump to Comments As Jeff Jarvis wrote on BuzzMachine, “[News duplication was] the way things were done. [Newspapers] also took wire-service copy [...]
[...] of days ago outlining a new business model for news, based on Jeff Jarvis’ concepts of “doing what you do best and linking to the rest” and reverse syndication, I now present a list of best practices. Mindy McAdams has a list of [...]
[...] News becomes a network of links made by those who do what they do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] He makes 10 strong suggestions (my links added): 1. Narrow the focus. “…[M]edia companies need to invest more money in their premium content—editorial that is unavailable elsewhere but that is highly valued by readers. Go deep, not wide.” [...]
[...] De link-economie, ofwel: de wegwijzers van internet. Kort gezegd is het de volgende slogan: “Cover what you do best, link to the rest” (lees ook deze twee artikelen van Jeff [...]
[...] Jeff Jarvis macht Medienhäusern klar, wie sie zukünftig arbeiten sollen: “Cover what you do [...]
[...] does journalism react? Well, as Jeff says, by doing what we do best and linking to the rest – find the best experts and link to them. But it would also be very limiting to reduce journalists [...]
[...] are immersed in your beat, instead of viewing other news outlets as competition, he suggests you do what you do best, then link to the rest. If your beat has an online presence (like those at BeatBlogging.org), reference as much [...]
[...] But don’t see just the danger in that; see the opportunity. If we could build this tower of bullshit in derivatives through connections, what of worth can be built? Knowledge, wisdom (about, say, medicine), new understanding of the world (through data about our behavior)? And what efficiencies can be found because we can do what we do best and link to the rest? [...]
[...] is the role of the web designer. News sites need to be clear, concise displays of information. Jeff Jarvis suggests, “What you can’t do best link to the rest,” maybe that is an effective [...]
[...] 3. Links are a key to efficiency. In other words: Do what you do best and link to the rest. [...]
[...] my New Business Models for News Summit, Telegraph digital head Edward Roussel rephrased my admonition and told the room to do what you do best and outsource the rest. Guess they mean [...]
[...] assorted commentary, open-ended questioning and provocation. I’m following Jeff Jarvis’ guideline – cover what you do best and link to the [...]
[...] you do best and link to the rest “The internet brings tremendous efficiencies to journalism. Do what you do best and link to the rest means any news entity can save a fortune on eliminating commodity news [zie ook eerdere discussies [...]
[...] with many other ideas Jarvis lays out, now has a catchier title then when it was a blog post titled Cover what you do best. Link to the rest. The general point is the same – in the age where everyone is a critic, why does every paper need a [...]
[...] than anyone else—cover California. New media expert Jeff Jarvis once wrote that papers should “cover what they do best and link to the rest.” (insert mandatory journalist groans and eye rolls here.) But the man has a [...]
[...] what you do best and link to the rest! Category : Business / [...]
[...] than anyone else—cover California. New media expert Jeff Jarvis once wrote that papers should “cover what they do best and link to the rest.” (insert mandatory journalist groans and eye rolls here.) But the man has a [...]
[...] oppure per andare meglio a fondo solo di alcuni aspetti di una storia, semplicemente linkando gli aspetti che sono già stati approfonditi egregiamente da altri. I link servono agli utenti per comprendere il contesto in cui una storia si colloca, le [...]
[...] Be sure that all your relevant content reposts to your Facebook Page. This includes blog posts, videos and news articles. It’s also a good idea to link to content that you don’t generate. (Do what you do best, link to the rest.) [...]
[...] In Jeff Jarvis’ words, “do what you do best and link to the rest”. The Telegraph has been a leader on new technology-driven production practices. It hosted blogs and created a ‘360 degree’ newsroom and last month announced it was ‘outsourcing’ sub-editing. [...]
[...] Publié le 12 février 2009 par LDelory Fidèle à la devise des blogueurs “Cover what you do best. Link to the rest“, je ne vais pas m’épancher sur le vote négatif de l’assemblée générale des [...]
[...] In Jeff Jarvis’ words, “do what you do best and link to the rest”. The Telegraph has been a leader on new technology-driven production practices. It hosted blogs and created a ‘360 degree’ newsroom and last month announced it was ‘outsourcing’ sub-editing. [...]
[...] link to someone who does. It’s all about what serves your audience best. Restated, this is Jarvis’ New Rule: Cover what you do best. Link to the rest. Scott Karp calls this link journalism. If you focus on [...]
[...] how should a news organization use links? Liberally. Read Jeff Jarvis’s on the power of linking. It’s not about losing readers–it’s about giving them the news they want, whether [...]
[...] moto d’un des gourous du web, Jeff Jarvis. Mais est-ce si simple ? Jeff Jarvis sur son blog buzzmachine, tient le raisonnement suivant : les ressources (en personnel, en encombrement, etc.) [...]
[...] blogueur américain Jeff Jarvis, qui s’intéresse aux médias et à leur avenir, en écrivant : « Cover what you do best. Link to the rest. [...]
[...] 8. Do not attempt to do everything yourselves – “do what you do best and then link to the rest“ [...]
[...] with many other ideas Jarvis lays out, now has a catchier title then when it was a blog post titled Cover what you do best. Link to the rest. The general point is the same – in the age where everyone is a critic, why does every paper need a [...]
[...] Do what you do best and link to the rest [...]
[...] the words of Jeff Jarvis, “do what you do best and link to the [...]
[...] Publication B does not try to half-ass the news. It doesn’t offer “containables.” Because of its relatively small base of readers and funding, it can offer a deep relationship between reporters and readers/users (which can foster trust, also a good thing.) But publication A references publication B, saying “hey, someone wrote about this.” One line, one link to better coverage for people who want to know (do what you do best and link to the rest, right?). [...]
This premise is giving rise to a more and more popular form of media, such as news sites that only offer links, like drudgereport.com, and topical news aggregating websites, such as FreedomWatcher.com. Certainly, the appeal of this type of news platform is the content base achieved by sourcing so broadly and it achieves success without such an extensive staff.
[...] Jarvis says to “cover what you do best and link to the rest” and the new model for news will involve lots of linking to other sources — but there will be [...]
[...] and Monash does a great job of playing by the rules of the link economy (the one time I agree with Jeff Jarvis) and bringing together thinking from around the [...]
[...] "oldalra", a rokon blogokra való linkeléssel. Rosszul teszik. Javaslom, hogy kövesd Jeff Jarvis elvét: Írja arról, amit te tudsz a legjobban, a többire meg hivatkozz [...]
[...] all boils down to the new rule for journalism: “Cover what you do best. Link to the [...]
[...] importantly though, was my fear that the proposed budget didn’t follow the ‘do what you do best, link to the rest’ rule. So much of the content was general, and not even timely. I’ll share my the gist of my [...]
[...] den Mitgliedern der Community Auf Nischen konzentrieren Investigativer Journalismus ist möglich „Do what you do best and link to the rest“ Die Zukunft liegt im Verlinken und Teilen von [...]
[...] to no longer display links to my favorite resources. Jeff Jarvis says that in our new link economy, do what you do best and link to the rest. He expands on this idea in the exceptional book What Would Google [...]
[...] mine) did it more often. Chen’s point about linking to the enemy is very similar to Jeff Jarvis’ mantra to “cover what you do best, and link to the rest.” Getting personal or inserting opinion just makes bloggers a bit more like columnists, who [...]
[...] mine) did it more often. Chen’s point about linking to the enemy is very similar to Jeff Jarvis’ mantra to “cover what you do best, and link to the rest.” Getting personal or inserting opinion just makes bloggers a bit more like columnists, who [...]
[...] nicht jedes komplexe Thema passt in 140 Zeichen. Wenn Du mehr zu sagen hast: Tu es anderswo und link drauf. Ganz oder gar nicht. Wer zulässt, dass auf seinem Twitterkanal wochenlang Funkstille [...]
[...] j-schools should apply the basic theory behind link journalism — do what you know best, and link to the rest — to structuring their own programs. In other words, focus on teaching the craft of [...]
[...] see Jarvis’s “Cover what you do best. Link to the rest.“ Published: May 1, 2009 Filed Under: media Leave a Comment Name: [...]
[...] “Cover what you do best. Link to the rest.“ This changes the dynamic of editorial decisions. Instead of saying, “we should have that” (and replicating what is already out there) you say, “what do we do best?” That is, “what is our unique value?” It means that when you sit down to see a story that others have worked on, you should ask, “can we do it better?” If not, then link. And devote your time to what you can do better. [...]
[...] link to Capitol news as it’s distributed by others. (This is what media critic Jeff Jarvis refers to as the “link based economy,” in which publishers do what they specialize in and then link to the rest.That’s pretty much [...]
[...] waar je goed en bent en link naar de rest” is misschien wel de beste oneliner van Jeff Jarvis in What Would Google Do? Journalisten moeten zich beperken, zegt mediablogger en [...]
[...] waar je goed en bent en link naar de rest” is misschien wel de beste oneliner van Jeff Jarvis in What Would Google Do? Journalisten moeten zich beperken, zegt mediablogger en [...]
[...] Do what you do best and link to the rest: the site is networked – we’re not trying to be or host all things but will be pointing elsewhere more often than not [...]
[...] Cohn of Spot.Us offered up the now-classic Jeff Jarvis line in my tip form: “Do what you do best, and link to the rest.” 5. Because it will make [...]
[...] Cohn of Spot.Us offered up the now-classic Jeff Jarvis line in my tip form: “Do what you do best, and link to the rest.” 5. Because it will make your job [...]
[...] Cohn of Spot.Us offered up the now-classic Jeff Jarvis line in my tip form: “Do what you do best, and link to the rest.” 5. Because it will make your job [...]
[...] fare informazione di un certo livello oggi. Sono un convinto seguace della teoria di Jeff Jarvis Cover what you do best. Link to the rest, un principio che ancora pochi media applicano affannandosi in una corsa sfiancante cercando di [...]
[...] Second, as Masnick points out, Posner assumes that jouranlism as it was done is journalism as it should be done: that the goal is to protect newsrooms, unchanged. But there are tremendous savings to be had thanks to the link economy: do what you do best, link to the rest. [...]