(This is my contribution to the Tomorrow’s News, Tomorrow’s Journalists blogring of young journalists. Our topic this month was to review our local newspaper’s Web site — but seeing as I work for the local newspaper and I am not dumb, I decided to switch papers with Meranda Watling, who has the same problem and suggested the switch.) Though I’ve only been to the Journal and Courier site when linked there by Watling, the design is already known to me. Since it’s a Gannett paper, it looks just like other Gannett news sites I’ve recently visited such as The Des Moines Register, Cherry Hill Courier-Post or the Wilmington News-Journal. – First things first: I really like the front page design. A lot. It crams an impressive amount of headlines on the front page, even “above the fold,” without feeling overwhelming. It simultaneously promotes the staff’s breaking news online and their work for the print edition. It doesn’t take a lot of hunting to get all the headlines I would need. My favorite feature is the scrollable “Breaking News” box. A bit misnamed, yes, but effective in that you can scroll down at 11 p.m. and see headlines all the way back to early that morning. That works around the problem many other news sites have of listing only five or so headlines on the front page, which means the reporter who hustled to get an important story online at 10 a.m. might have her work buried by noon. No such problem here. – Now, to an annoyance. After I clicked on a few stories, I got this dreaded screen that I mistakenly thought was left in the yesteryear of news sites: Had I not been on a quest, I likely would have A) indignantly closed out the window, or B) Made up a bunch of stuff. But I work for a newspaper company, so I would never do such a thing. Everyone else, though, would just be highly annoyed by this extra gateway. I’m very skeptical that it would provide any significant, reliable information, anyway. That’s what analytics are for. Also, an interesting wording in that description you probably skipped over: “To help us keep jconline.com available to all users free of charge, please answer the following questions.” Really? Gannett is openly suggesting charging for content is an option? And “free of charge” is redundant. It’s just “free.” – Now, as part of the media elite, I have a lot of dispensable income that I’d like to spend somewhere in Lafayette. If only I could find a business somewhere trying to grab my attention. I should be able to check the front page of the biggest online news source in town and find someone who wants my ridiculous amount of extra money, right? Nope. No ads. “Hey, maybe we should have ads on the front page of the site” strikes me as the 2008 version of the “Hey, maybe we should have a blog or two on the site” insight of yesteryear. – One feature of the site that I’m very impressed by: The user profile. Take Jack Lahrman, apparently an active user of the site. Through that one link, you can learn a bit about who he is, see all of his blog posts and comments or leave him messages. Doesn’t look like the community has really caught on to its usefulness, but as I’ve written before, it’s important to develop these profile pages. They’re going to be a key part of the future. – Unfortunately, a big demerit: The site doesn’t promote its blogging very well. At first, I didn’t see any blogs linked on the front page, but I eventually found them by hovering over a far-down, small icon that I guess looks like a pen over a sheet of paper. If I didn’t happen to be specifically searching for blogs, I would have never found them. I don’t even get a link to the Purdue football blog on the Sports front — I have to actually go to the Purdue page for that. Once I find the Purdue football blog, I’m disappointed to see the design has made it very difficult to enjoy. I need to scroll past the author’s biography to get to his content, meaning I’ll notice one of his favorite movies before I notice his insight on the football program. That content is awkwardly teased by just two sentences, which often isn’t enough to draw readers into an entry. And once I click on his entry, I again have to scroll past his who-cares bio to get to the meat. That’s a lot of work this Web site is expecting of me, especially when some of the blogs are updated just once per week. Or if it’s the publisher and editor’s blog, once a month. That’s a shame, because I love reading blogs from editors and I think the readers would enjoy reading it more often. – Other quick-hits: Once logged in, it’s nice and easy to leave comments at the bottom of articles, and even easier to read other comments. I don’t really understand why the second and third graf of each story is slightly indented. Kinda distracting and confusing. The mobile site, as accessed from my Blackberry Pearl is simple and quick. I’m encouraged by a few podcasts that are evidently produced by the staff. Like the blogs, videos are hard to find if you’re not looking for them. However, a video about a motorcycle was nicely attached to the story about it. I can easily find a form to submit a story tip, or contact a specific person in the newsroom. VERDICT: I give it a B-. If your priority is to quickly scan and access the news of the day, this site does it better than most out there. What it lacks, though, is the kind of innovation that will push the newspaper’s brand forward. It has to better package its Web-only content and show why the site can become more than a place to stop for news.

Someone recently asked me if I’ve come across any future business models for journalism that I felt passionate about. My response: Hmm. Hmmmmmm. Um. Let me think here. Uh…Uh….No, I guess not. I could talk or blog up a storm about the innovative new content that news organizations need to provide, or the innovative ways to gather that content. I am, after all, a reporter, so it’d make sense for me to offer more insight there. I have no business training. But that elusive business model remains the elephant in the room. And many a reporter have joined me in putting our heads down, figuring out the content end of the equation, and hoping the folks with business degrees will figure out how we’ll continue to earn paychecks for creating that content. Basically, Web-savvy reporters right now are the Underpant Gnomes. We’re getting better at gathering the underpants, but we don’t know how to turn them into profit yet. That Web content is providing very little revenue now, and we don’t know how it’ll produce more revenue in the future. So at what point do those Web-savvy reporters take it upon ourselves to brainstorm some solutions? When do we expand our expertise to the business side? I say “Now” sounds about right. I don’t have any answers, but I’d love to dedicate some energy toward finding some. And the journalists who have already immersed themselves in the online culture are the ones best fit to see where it’s going.  The content-providers ought to be readying ourselves for that responsibility. When the so-called curmudgeons ask why we spend our time on our Web site, I tell them we need to lay the foundation for the future. That even if we’re not making money on it now, we’ll quickly be thrust into deeper irrelevancy if we don’t maintain and even advance our brand as a news organization. It sure would be nice to say “…and here’s how we’re soon going to make money off of it.” That would be a discussion-ender for just about any so-called curmudgeon. I might not come up with any answers anytime soon — no one really has, so that’s nothing to be ashamed of — but I’m no longer going to consider it someone else’s problem.

I’ve been struck by an idea, and I hate keeping ideas to myself. Especially with fun communication toys like blogs and Twitter so easily available. But I’m very enthusiastic about this idea, and I think it might be best presented through the Knight News Challenge, which offers moola to ideas that will push journalism forward. I believe this one will — and I believe it might need the funding the challenge’s grants would provide. I know my idea will be better once it’s tossed around in more brains than my own. But since we’re talking about a competition, I truly don’t know if it’s better to throw it into the Knight News Challenge garage or just pass it through some people I trust. That’s where I’m hoping you come in. I’d like to set up a small circle of trusted friends, colleagues, bloggers and Twitter users to whom I could, in confidence, present my idea. I’m looking for journalists specifically, and would be extra grateful for college students or recent graduates in particular. All I ask is that you’re willing to get an e-mail or two from me. Send feedback if you have it, or you can ignore it if you don’t. Mostly, I just want to have a few people to tell me whether or not I’m nuts. Doesn’t that sound fun? E-mail me or leave me your address if you’d be willing to help. Thanks.

As much as I want to write more about journalism and less about journalism bloggers, Journalism.me deserves some attention. It’s a simple blog aggregator that takes most of my favorite journalism bloggers and condenses them into a single RSS feed. And yes, it is a full feed, not a partial feed. The true brilliance of the aggregator didn’t reveal itself until after I plopped it in my Google Reader. At first, I was annoyed to see that the author of each post wouldn’t show up. Then I thought: Wow, I love that the author of each post doesn’t show up. I love that a journalism student will have the exact same amount of preset clout as someone who’s been writing about online journalism since he first dialed up on Prodigy. I love that good ideas will rise to the top on their own, and no one will have to achieve any kind of status to have those ideas considered. That was my main contention with the original incarnation of Dave Lee’s bashing together of young journalism heads, when he wrote that a proposed ring of twenty-something bloggers would be invitation only. No me gusta. Barriers to entry will only turn up the volume on the echo chamber. Journalism.me chops out the promotion and personal branding and leaves only the idea. What a wonderful way to be objectively exposed to as many ideas as possible. UPDATE 10:30 a.m.: I should have more clearly mentioned that Dave Lee has since decided to nix the invite-only idea. See the comments on this entry for details.

I have to admit that it’s going to take me a little while to get used to blogging. My background is in journalism, and in fact, this is my first professional job outside of the biz. That’s not to say that I haven’t enjoyed the switch. I was a sportswriter, and sportswriters almost inevitably begin hating sports. Trust me, I was well on my way. As a sportswriter, you constantly find yourself trying to talk to people that have no interest in talking to you. You also work lousy hours and have to spend a lot of time with other sportswriters, many of whom smell strongly of coffee and press food and love to talk about sportswriting. It’s not as glamorous as it seems.

I’m well aware that there are journalists who simply don’t want to understand the Web and why it’s important. But I believe there are a lot of journalists who are perfectly willing to learn more Web skills, if only the pitch was made to them in the right way. They don’t want to be forced into extra duties without any explanation, they don’t want to be looked down upon by some snotty recent graduate, and they don’t want editors talking over their head with tech jargon. So what’s the right approach when trying to nudge your fellow journalists into trying new things online? I’d love to hear some success stories, because this is becoming a bigger focus for me in my newsroom. A few of my initial thoughts:

• Ditch the editors and outsiders. The training should come from previously capable reporters who can talk to the less-Web-savvy reporters on their own level.
• Allow newsroom-wide access to the Web site’s statistics. Anyone who has written their own blog knows how intoxicating it is to see how many visitors you’re getting to your site, and where they’re coming from. It becomes more of a game with a quantifiable payoff.
• Create incentives to learn new skills. If I ruled the world it would come in the form of bonuses.

Any more ideas, or techniques that have worked?