Our case study on news has focused heavily on the decline of traditional brands and the rise of social media. But do these two competing platforms actually need each other to be successful?
News on the Tweet is a report from Newsworks (a marketing organisation representing newspapers) and Twitter designed to show the positive impact new and digital media can have on traditional media.
Read the report and answer the questions on your blog. Include the News on the Tweet infographic above in your blogpost.
1) Why are respected news brands good news for Twitter?
It is not surprising that
O More than one in 10 of the newsbrand followers on Twitter claim they were first introduced to it by a newspaper brand
O Newsbrands also increase
traffic. 4/10 say that they check twitter frequently to see what their chosen newsbrand(s) have posted.
O Newsbrand followers are three times more likely to retweet than non-followers;
four times more likely to post links to articles
three times more likely to tweet about trending news topics.
O They are also more interactive with the content.
2) Why in turn is Twitter good for respected news brands?
O Twitter is good for respected news brands as the newsbrands are more accessible and more interactive.
O Shared links/re tweets e.t.c can drive more traffic to newsbrands without costing them a thing.
3) The report suggests that old and new media “are not, in fact, in direct competition, but often work extremely well together to enhance both the media eco-system and the consumer experience”. What evidence do they provide to support this idea? Do you agree with it?
I do agree to a certain extent that old and new media are not in direct competition as I think that they both need each other to a degree in order to do their job. However, They are still in competition in the sense the new media is favoured over the old media particularly by the Millennials, this as a result means that there isn't as much support for the old media which will will ultimately result in them going out of business. So there is a definite competition, one that I believe the old media will lose simply because they are being replaced.
4) On page 24/25 of the report, the focus turns to 'gossip' or 'banter'. What example tweets from journalists are used to illustrate this?
5) Do you think the increasing amount of 'gossip' or 'banter' is harming the reputation of news and journalists?
I do think that the increasing amount of 'gossip' and 'banter' is harmful to the reputation of news and journalists because they will be viewed as people who only spread gossip and banter, not someone who will talk about serious/high brow news. When sites such as the Mail Online become more popular over other sites such as the Times and The Independant, the reputation of the news is harmed as there may seem to be a common trend that the news now focuses on more tabloid/low brow news.
6)What does the report say about trust in Twitter and journalists (look at pages 34-39)?
There is a great amount of trust in Twitter in terms of the verified people or brands, they are seen as more trustworthy than the unverified brands so if a news story was to break online, audiences will be more inclined to check a verified account such as BBC News to search for more content.
7)Do you think new and digital media developments such as Twitter have had a positive or negative impact on traditional newspapers?
I think that developments in new and traditional media has had a negative impact on traditional newspapers as I personally believe that it has caused a change where all news will soon be online, traditional newspapers will go out of business. However for the active audience, trusting that they make sure they use valid sites whom have the correct information, they have been impacted positively, They have access to more news that isn't singled out to fit the a certain time slot/ number of pages. They are also able to look at more views easily rather than just having what the newspapers (typically Murdoch owned/employed) are saying.
8) Finally, how can we link this report to the vital current debate regarding fake news and Facebook? Do traditional news brands need protecting to ensure there are sources we can trust?
Facebook was the main driver of traffic for fake news and their sites during the US Election. The traditional news brands were not at fault, their content was reliable and followed regulations. However due to the algorithms put in place on sites such as Facebook, their news showed up less frequently. Traditional news brands need protecting as they are the only reliable sources among a vast number of unreliable sources.
No comments:
Post a Comment