Mon, 06 Sep 2010

Pandering to the Popular

Here is article an about the New York Times use of analytics to drive their news stories. The use of analytics can help the bottom line at a news organization, but is this the only measure of the value of news? Here's an interesting quote from the article:

He said the data has proved highly useful in today’s world of shrinking newsroom budgets. Mr. Narisetti said that when he had to reduce his staff last year, he looked at what kind of content was not performing well with readers. He discovered that long-form video had a low audience, so he reduced that department by a couple of people.

It's interesting because it removes the detail from the information leaving the general public with a sound bite on which to base their opinions. A sound bite leave the news organization with the ability to form opinion simply by the information that they choose to leave out, let alone the way that they present the information that they choose to include.

And does the mere fact that X-thousand people view something mean that it's important? Millions watch reality television and, although it's good for the advertisers, it isn't important. Millions hang on every nuance of their favorite actors' lives, but that definitely isn't important. Few really follow the important things in the world, and it's sad -- except, of course, for the advertisers.

It would be a shame to see the NYT or other major news organizations choose their content based on popularity. Otherwise, we would all be stuck with nothing but some meaningless drivel about people who have accomplished nothing more in life except being lucky enough to be born into rich families.

posted 08:23 [/Media] permanent link