Much is being made of my decision to ban bloggers from the locker room. To me its pretty amusing. In particular I find it amusing that there is a presumption that if a blogger works for a big company, they must be better. The logic extends to the conclusion that if only I would evaluate the different blogs and make a qualitative selection, then big newspaper bloggers would be chosen as among the best. Let me just say, that should I go that direction, that I find quite a few individual bloggers to be far better than those earning a salary to blog . In fact, some of those blogs are written anonymously.
Which leads to my firm belief that newspapers having "bloggers" is easily one of the many bad decisions that newspapers have made over the past 10 years.
Much of what I am about to say can be considered semantics, but guess what, marketing and branding are all about semantics and perception.
Consider this a rule in marketing that could be added to my Startup Rules.
Never, ever, ever consider something that any literate human being with Internet access can create in under 5 minutes to be a product or service that can in any way differentiate your business.
If you feel that you must offer this product or service as a means of "keeping up" or as a checklist item that you must have for competitive reasons, then do everything possible to brand the product or service in a manner that segregates it from the masses. Perception is reality. If you can leverage your existing brand to create the perception that yours is different from the masses in some meaningful way, then you must do everything you can to do so.
Creating a perceived differentiation can take the form of promoting better execution or quality of the product or service, or it may be something as simple as just branding it with a different name than the mass product or service.
Failure to do so will pull your brand down to that of the masses or elevate the masses to a position of being better able to compete with you.
A blog is a blog is a blog is a blog. The NY Times Blogs on their website are blogs. People who have blogs have a hard enough time coming up with a definition of what blog is. Potential or even current readers have no real idea of what the term blog reflect in terms of quality or content.
I'm sure the NY Times, like all major media outlets hopes that because it is branded a NY Times blog, that readers will have the perception and expectation that it will be of a higher quality than say, Blogmaverick.com .
That when readers actually read the blog, they will see that its of a higher quality than say, Blogmaverick.com. It may well be that some do. The marketing reality however is that there is a significant risk that they will not. That rather than assigning the brand equity of the NY Times to the blogs hosted, they will take the alternative path of assigning their perception of what a blog is to the NY Times, there by having a negative impact on the brand equity of the NY Times. That's an enormous risk for any mainstream brand to take.
If I worked for the NY Times, or any other media company with any level of brand equity, I would have done everything possible to define the section of our website that offers ongoing as anything other than a blog. I would make up a name. Call it say.....RealTime Reporting.
RealTime Yankees: Catch in depth, up to the minute reports on the Yankees as only the NY Times world re known staff of Sports Writers can bring up
RealTime City Hall: The NY Times has more journalists covering the action at City Hall than anyone else. Catch in depth, up to the minute reports on NYC politics as as only the NY Times can.
Brand it RealTime. Brand it anything. Make sure you market it as having the characteristics unique to your staff that NO ONE ELSE on the net can bring.
if I were marketing for them, I would be doing everything I could to send the message that "The NY Times does not have blogs, we have Real Time Reports from the most qualified reporters in the world. Like blogs we post continuously , 24x7x365 to keep you up to speed, unlike blogs, we have the highest level of journalistic standards that we adhere to. A copy of which is available at....." You get the picture.
I would also market it as an extension of the print version. All the news that cant fit in print. In the sports world, I think this is where main stream media really has dropped the ball. There is no shortage of speculation and opinions on the net. There is an incredible lack of depth when it comes to game and team coverage.
Maybe its my own prejudice as an insider. I would much rather read any article on 82games.com or even some of the stuff that John Hollinger writes (although I think that the PER stuff is meaningless, i like how he tries to go in depth to analyze performance) than the stream of consciousness riffs that we find on every blog, regardless of host.
When I see content branded as a blog, I'm probably not going there unless its via a link from some other source. If I happen to find my way to a given blog multiple times, Im probably going to subscribe to the RSS feed. Even the, I don't ever consider a blog an authoritative source. I don't ever expect that all sources were confirmed and facts were check. Regardless of who hosts it. That's not a good thing for newspapers. They still have a chance to assign some level of authority to what they produce for their websites and calling it a blog is a huge mistake
Remember, there is TV , and there is HBO. A blog is a blog is a blog
Blogging and Newspapers, a Lesson in How Not to Brand and Market
Reader Comments
(Page 2)22. as the first commenter said, very incitefull (sic).
you have great, innovative ideas. what would you do if you controlled a media company/newspaper or newspaper chain in a major market? maybe even the same major market where the top MLB team is for sale? You should really seriously consider purchasing Chicago's scrappy tabloid [and/or its affiliated papers]. I think you're one of only a few people in the whole country who could turn my, um, i mean that, company around.
Posted at 12:28AM on Mar 14th 2008 by james
23. I find this absolutely hysterical that people are so up in arms about a so-called "blogger" isn't gaining admittance into a locker room. No offense or anything, but as a mother of three truly great kids...what kids aren't...I spend most of my waking moments trying to make sure they do not turn into gang members that infest my neighborhood, teaching my children what the consequences of drugs really are, enlightening them on what actually could happen to them if they give in to peer pressure and have sex before they are ready. You'll have to forgive me if you think I am over the top. My children are my passion and nobody is going to take their opportunity to grow, live, learn and dream away from them.
There are far greater worries in the world today than to worry about one man not being allowed in a locker room of a basketball team while there are "real" reporters with credentials present. I have a friend who has battled cencer to the very edge of her life and come out of it all right. I know a woman who works two jobs because she wants to give her kids a chance to attend college. I see parents all over the world trying so hard to raise good kids and I see parents that gave birth to their kids and feel that they owe them nothing else...not even a self esteem. I watched in horror as my neighbor's son joined a gang and signed his life away while her other son is now wanted for murder.
Yes, I think the reporters of the world should really concentrate on the goings on in a locker room!!! Give me a break media!
25. I agree with Rebecca, blogging isn't true journalism. Everybody can start a blog and write their guts on the internet these days.
gr,
Remco
Posted at 4:48AM on Mar 14th 2008 by Afkicken
26. Mark,
A blog is not a blog -- except to the extent that it falls within the technical parameters of such. A blog, technically, is a series of postings (of any sort) presented in reverse chronological order. Usually (99 percent of the time), blogs are open to comments from the public or from a select group of individuals.
Nowhere in the definition of a blog are there references to editorial quality, accuracy or content.
You wrote earlier this week, "There are no editorial standards. There are no accuracy standards."
Not true for all blogs: Newspaper reporters who blog do have standards because they are blogging for the newspaper – which has strict standards on accuracy and editorial quality. Further, most reporters and editors who are blogging can write pretty well because of the nature of their job, and copy editors are generally available to look over blog entries for typos.
Newspaper-based bloggers are not taking on the standards (or lack thereof) in the blogosphere except for the aforementioned technical definition.
For newspapers, blogging is a well-guided effort to reach out to the community and connect with readers. My employer, the Newspaper Association of America, has case studies on this from the Spokesman-Review, The (Racine) Journal Times and more. In fact, several reporters have said they even get story ideas from the community participation that occurs on their blogs, which makes for better reporting.
Further, it’s just one way (of very many) that newspapers are smartly using the Web to communicate and connect with the community. Blogs are a good way for a newspaper to truly differentiate the online offerings from the print product.
Read more here:
http://www.naa.org/blog/digitaledge/index.cfm?mode=archive&year=2008&month=3&day=12
Posted at 8:29AM on Mar 14th 2008 by Beth Lawton
27. I blog to advertise my professional and consulting interests. I also read a lot of professional journalism and other blogs. I've come to be a sincere believer in Sturgeon's Law. Neither side has a monopoly on quality.
If you are telling me that I should pay more attention to, say, Robert Novak's column than an intelligently written blog because Robert Novak is a "professional journalist" and gets paid to write his drivel, and the intelligent blogger doesn't, you're ignoring reality.
I don't think that's what you're actually saying, but to suggest that all bloggers just spend five minutes on what they publish is ludicrous, too.
As this is the first time I've read any of your writings, I'll therefor cut you some slack. And since I don't follow sports, your discussion of locker room access by bloggers is totally lost on me.
There are situations, though, where people are wondering about how to legitimately manage blogger access to publicly important information. An example is deciding about what the appropriate "role" should be for bloggers and other "non-professional journalists" in communicating with the public during crisis or disaster situations. The reality is that when crises or emergencies occur that citizens will communicate among themselves using the tools available to them; for authorities to ignore this reality is to ignore a possible channel for important two-way communications that could save lives.
While I don't place "bloggers in locker rooms" on the same level as this, to dismiss bloggers or other social media related channels simply because they are not "professional journalists" would also be a mistake. (For more information on this topic see http://www.ddmcd.com/situation.html.)
Posted at 9:31AM on Mar 14th 2008 by Dennis McDonald
28. This is a great posting, and one that I have a few key views on. I went to a talk by Charles Gibson (World News with Charles Gibson on ABC) a few weeks ago (blog posting: http://adcomments.wordpress.com/2008/02/23/charles-gibson-and-abc/). My main takeaway from the talk (though he spent little time on th issue) was that traditional media really doesn't know what they're doing in the new media space... they're really trying, but they end up scrambling. Frankly, they would all benefit by not hiring bloggers to blog for ABC, but go out and cut a deal with one of the many great independent bloggers out there. Benefits are twofold: you get a "real" blogger, someone who has been blogging, without outside biases (one thing that would need to be addressed in terms of "partnership") and you also ideally partner with someone that already has thousands of readers. You get a loyal readership to start out with and an expert blogger... I'd say that's better than hiring some guy to write some stuff on your website and hope people come to you.
So I agree, until traditional media figure out what the heck they're doing with bloggers, don't waste the space.
29. Even more embarrassing is the use of the word "blogosphere" by respectable news organizations.
Imagine if the Times decided to start a " 'zine " in the 1970s. This is the same thing....
Posted at 11:37AM on Mar 14th 2008 by Joe
30. Mark,
"There is an incredible lack of depth when it comes to game and team coverage."
I couldn't agree more. I pick up the local paper and turn to the sports section and get 80% opinion. I turn on the local TV sporting news and I get opinion. I can give an opinion. I can hear an opinion from any sports fan on the street. Blogs are the same way. I want coverage. I want to read about something that I don't have access to as a fan.
Love the blog. Keep it going.
Regards,
Dan.
31. I think Mark is grasping on this one. I worked for a Large Newspaper company for 6 years that had many successful blogs, which were created on templates that literally took 5 minutes to design. One such example is Scott Wolf's USC blog (http://www.insidesocal.com/usc/). This particular blog has exploded in site traffic, and branding and an advanced design had nothing to do with it. People go to blogs because they are interested in a person's voice or personality regarding their expertise. It is why I have been visiting this blog for many years, even though I don’t agree 100% of the time!
32. Mr. Cuban,
As usual, you provide good food for thought. I'm still digesting your rationales and info, but a question did pop into my mind while reading, and am not sure if you answered it, even if indirectly.
Do you have plans to change the subhead or even name of your blog to something more brandable and tied to what you want to accomplish at this domain?
For the most part, blogs are opinion; not news. If they're news, they'll point/link to a traditional/legit *news* source.
Take care,
Mike
From MC: Mike, no plans to change anything. BlogMaverick is not a business. Its just something I do for the enjoyment. if you want to read, great. If not, great.
m
Posted at 12:54PM on Mar 14th 2008 by Mike Driehorst
33. Great post, I've been saying this to my company and other friends in the actual media who blog for their paper's site, we need to separate ourselves from the people who are not actual journalists.
I just wish Mark had bought the Tribune Company and instituted these rules on a major news org himself and the rest would have followed along. We could have used a 21st Century mind like his running the show for a major newspaper chain.
Posted at 1:03PM on Mar 14th 2008 by Erik Carlson
34. Mark,
The Dallas Morning News bloggers differentiate themselves by their accessibility to players/coaches/owners and their accountability to journalistic standards. (At least that's how they tried to differentiate themselves until your new ANTI-NEW MEDIA rule)
A college-trained, experienced, award-winning professional journalist like Tim MacMahon blogging is different from me blogging in my mom's basement in my underwear. There are professional bloggers (Tim MacMahon and amateur bloggers (me) just like there are professional basketball players (Dirk) and amateur basketball players (the middle-aged white guy, wearing a headband with a little beer belly and backhair sticking out the top of his tank top.) I am very disappointed you do not know the difference.
Posted at 1:04PM on Mar 14th 2008 by MikeMc
35. I had the same notion a few weeks ago -- tired of trying to navigate the maze of expectations people had when they found out you used a weblog script to publish articles to the internet.
http://occamsrazr.com/2008/01/30/im-no-longer-a-blogger/
36. Many newspaper "blogs" seems to be populated by rejected column ideas, like a cute story about the writer's cat that would never get approved by an editor for print.
Newspaper bloggers OUGHT to post what they know best: WHAT IT'S LIKE TO WORK AT A NEWSPAPER. Get journalists blogging about the stories behind their stories. How they got (or didn't get) the interviews and photos. How they decide what to publish - or not publish - and the consequences of those decisions.
Totally insider stuff, but who better to do it?
Posted at 1:38PM on Mar 14th 2008 by Atwater Village Newbie
37. Mark,
I normally agree with you--you truly have inordinate intelligence when it comes to marketing, and indeed being a "maverick"--and you've been around the block where it concerns those with an "insider" perspective.
However, in this case, I think many are missing the point. Blogs, except in certain cases, depending upon the source and context, often aren't meant to be hard news--they're meant to be editorial. Much in the same way there is (or should be) a distinction between hard news reports on television and often documentaries which stray into the realm of editorial--Michael Moore is a case in point. His films are editorial-often important editorial-but not documentary.
Blogs in their most powerful form, as editorial, should be meant to reflect the individual perspective of the writer--and if the writer is good, he or she will support his/her
perspective with facts--but it still is editorial, meant to reflect a particular view, and perhaps draw others in to a particular dialogue which the writer believes needs to be engaged--and certain issues addressed. And because of the technology, quickly and seamlessly posted with myriad technologies--computers, PDA's, cell phones, etc., where such posting is instantaneous.
In our case, and in dealing with areas of the world where there is NOT freedom of the press, or freedom of information--which is a privilege which I think we often take for granted in creating either hardcore journalism or editorials--blogs are a necessary means of expressing the freedom of thought--and expressing the kind of passion we take for granted. In this, I think blogs are necessary components of the human dialogue. Editorial or not, it is a means of expression which allows others to often express powerful necessary perspectives and experiences which may not be read or seen otherwise. Sometimes it is the sole contact some have with the rest of the world when their country's press is controlled by the government, and they're having to surreptitiously make a case for what is actually happening within that country's borders. And in this case, blogs include not just writing, but photographs and video clips which wouldn't be seen otherwise.
In these cases, blogging can be a powerful means--and ones many talented writers take seriously--in making a case for the rest of us getting our heads out of the sand and listening.
In terms of "hard news" sources blogging--I agree with several of the posters here that some of the most powerful voices can be found on those blogs--most top media, if they're doing their job correctly, will not allow journalists to impose their feelings on readers when they're supposed to be reporting the facts. Blogging allows them to express their opinions freely and powerfully, giving another nuance to the news reported. But again, I think we need to make sure that we make the distinction between fact and opinion. All too often, in this era of Derrida-like deconstruction, the lines are fully and often gleefully blurred. People are forgetting that in making the distinction, each is incredibly powerful, and in its own way.
And, too, I think we're in an important time in which we're being given an extraordinary opportunity to merge technology, creative capacity and thought--and not always for solipsistic reasons, though those can be interesting, too.
K.J. Wetherholt
Co-Founder / Board Chairman
The Humanitarian Media Foundation (HMF)
HMF Website: http://www.humanitarianmedia.org
RdS/HMF MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/repansedeschoye
RdS/HMF Blog: http://www.repansedeschoye.blogspot.com
Posted at 3:14PM on Mar 14th 2008 by KJ Wetherholt
38. Until Wetherholt and his ilk come up with a viable way to differentiate the professional credibility of one blogger from another, you folks will continue to be thrown together under the same umbrella.
Cuban is tying to draw a line and set a standard...what's wrong with that?
Posted at 4:42PM on Mar 14th 2008 by whatever
39. Mark
I think you are a smart guy - you have a gross misunderstanding of what a "blog" is. It's a content management system. A "blogger" is somebody who uses that content management system.
Granted: it's a cheap CMS - which means more people can use it - but it's still just a CMS.
Imagine there were no computers - people had to take notes on paper. In that mock world - what you effectively said was: Anybody who uses sticky notes can't come into my locker room, I only let people who use yellow legal pads in.
It just makes no sense.
40. Will you allow real time reporters into your dressing room?
Posted at 6:33PM on Mar 14th 2008 by Andrew Lockhart
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry: inappropriate or purely promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
21. But Mark, "real-time" reports are not in. Blogs are because of the buzz, right? Then of course the media has to have them so they have their hands in the "in" media.
Come on, if it is popular than it must be important, right?
Posted at 12:09AM on Mar 14th 2008 by Ken