How Would You Create a Local News Source

[Erik Deckers]

Given Pat's latest discussion of whether Smaller Indiana could become a player in media, here's a hypothetical:

If the Indianapolis Star were to go away tomorrow, could the citizens of Indianapolis fill the news void that would be left behind? (If you live outside Indianapolis, insert the name of your favorite local paper. I don't want you to feel left out.)

Could we create a local news aggregator that would pull in all the blogs, TV news stories, public meeting minutes, special announcements, theatre and restaurant reviews, corporate press releases, and sporting news that the average Indianapolis news reader needed? It would be a truly democratic news source, but would it be successful?

Is that is how the citizenry of this city -- or any other -- could be a part of the news? Would anyone would make any money from it? How would you make it profitable?

Thoughts?

[Tino Marquez Jr.]

The only way it would be possible to fill the void, at least immediately and maybe even permanently is to be web based. It would probably be near impossible to acquire the revenue , especially in these times to secure the printing presses, equipment and supplies needed to make newspapers. Which in itself probably isn't a bad thing if it were all web based, but then there are still costs and processes that many probably do not consider.

There would certainly have to be some structure and organization, not just a bunch of people with opinions blogging away. Journalists, even the ones we hate or think or hacks, still have gone through the process of acquiring the skills and disciplines to be successful in their field. Assuming the citizens could hire these writers for the new outlet, that would be huge.

Would a site full or RSS feeds, boiler plate press releases from businesses, and opinioned bloggers really serve as a legitimate viable news source? While I do not think so, I bet it would probably be successful. All about the way you package it and of course advertising. Other costs to consider for a web based venture like this, is that in your scenario, the Star just goes away, and we are left scrambling to provide this online, central web based resource. There will be associated costs for hosting, bandwidth, multiple web servers to handle the load, developers, content and graphics, etc. While this ning.com platform that smaller Indiana is useful and fun, it may not meet those demands and the ability to customize, backup and retention would be a concern. The code may not be for sale or at least not a reasonable price, and you would have to start from scratch.

You would certainly want qualified people doing any type of reviews, investigative journalism, and even interviews. With that said I think there are various types of levels of news that can be successful, a few niches out there that can be filled by your hypothetical.

But to finish up, I can't think of any way to make it profitable other than making sure you have something people want to read and then the advertising. It is doubtful that it would survive being subscription based.

[Erik Deckers]

I agree that web-based is the way to go. In fact, I think that's going to become the direction a lot of newspapers take over the next 15 - 20 years.

Those associated costs for web hosting would be an important consideration, and could be addressed through inkind sponsorship arrangements. However, I didn't think of those when I first posed the question, so that's a good point.

Another option is a TV TEXT option. They have it in Europe. You can actually read news stories on a special channel reserved just for this. Of course, those things may end up dying out too, if the Internet continues to grow and proliferate.

These are good points you brought up. Thank you.

[PK Koduri]

Interesting enough here is one view via Twitter: What would happen if .....

[Erik Deckers]

Wow, that guy has already shown what I had envisioned. Thanks for the heads up on that one PK, I bookmarked it.

What the author in that article has done is shown there are already lots of people talking about the city of Baltimore. I know we have several who do that here in Indianapolis.

So my question is would an aggregator be successful? To piggyback on Tino's post, could we make it financially successful through advertising? Would subscriptions necessarily work? I can't see paying someone to just compile information that I could easily aggregate on My Yahoo, but I could see advertisers paying to be on a place where people congregate. (Of course, that same vision has been the downfall of a lot of companies in the past. . . )

[Mike Seidle]

Tino -

I think the printing presses, equipment, supplies, people and costs associated with running a big company are exactly why newspapers are struggling to transition online. A web based news site is a tiny company compared to a newspaper - so watching the Star struggle to survive is a lot like watching an elephant trying to fit inside a sardine can.

Could SI be a news source? It's possible.

[Steph Woodward]

First, I agree with everyone else in this thread on the fact that it would be inefficient and pointless to create a print-based media source… it would need to be entirely web-based.

As for the concern on the costs for hosting such a site, I also agree that a subscription based site would not survive. However, like with any other news source, advertising revenue could potentially make the venture self-sustaining and possibly even profitable. Also, the advantage of a web-based service would be that the advertising would be less relationship-based, and more about simple numbers (reach), allowing for more objectivity in reporting than local print media can afford at times.

As for the credibility of the news sources, I believe this topic was covered well in the other thread, but I’m curious to hear what other people think makes a journalist or a specific piece of journalism “credible”?

I mean, many of the news stories we read in the current newspapers are either a direct placement from the AP or from a Press Release, or inspired by something from one of these resources. I tend to be the type that prefers to hear something straight from the horse’s mouth anyway, so I’d just assume read the Press Release/AP Story itself than read the modified version presented by the journalist who took that information and localized it, or added some kind of human relations spin to it or whatever. That part is fluff to me, but I do understand that it makes the story more relevant and entertaining to most readers. The point, though, is that it all comes from the same source. So I guess I don’t see there being a significant credibility issue. A small website could have access to the same sources that most trusted journalists do.

[Cissi Sherlock]

The Star has a great add on pageA8 of the Sunday paper entitled The Reality About Newspapers.

[Sage McGreen]

I'd use the examiner as a model.