Scaling up can help hyperlocalists stay strong and sustainable. This can be found in a network, which Journal Local’s founder Philip John blogged about this week. Then he pointed out some of these networks existing in the UK, headlining that they showed “the US how it should be done”. I agree with quite a bit of what Philip writes; it’s the bit in quotations that I think misses the mark.
Look at the special report released this week on the Emerging Economics of Community News from Pew’s State of the Media 2011 (in the USA). The first paragraph is telling:
“It is easy to oversimplify what is happening in online news. Breathless headlines — from the $315 million sale of The Huffington Post to AOL, Patch’s march to 1,000 plus local sites, to the early dismantling of TBD.com in Washington, D.C. – tend to obscure other important efforts, especially on the local front.”
This puts Philip’s interesting, but limited, deconstruction of Patch and TBD (which by its own creator’s admission was never meant to be hyperlocal) in perspective.
Michele McLellan, the author of this report, points out a range of different hyperlocal sites and their business tactics. Next Door Media of Seattle gets a shout out for its economies-of-scale approach in building its network of neighbourhood blogs. But so does digital consultant Rusty Coats, who warns that connecting sites on different platforms and advertising formats doesn’t always make sense. Most striking are the go-it-alone success stories, such as The Batavian, BaristaNet, MyEdmondsNews, West Seattle Blog, plus a lot more.
I see striking differences between the US and UK hyperlocal scenes. One of them: The US has had a lot of “non-profit” and/or grant-funded new media startups.
First, “non-profit” in American basically equates to “charity” in British. It is a term that means something in the US tax code, making the business a “501(c)(3)”, or in normal-people speak, an educational or charitable organisation exempt from paying tax. Translation: It’s a lot like starting a social enterprise, or community interest company. “Non-profit” does not mean no profit.
This model has become rather fashionable in the past few years in America, as Michele notes in her report and can be seen in this 2007 Columbia Journalism Review article. The motives behind this don’t seem entirely dissimilar to what’s happening within the UK’s hyperlocal movement. What is striking are the grants available for new news start ups. Knight Citizen News Network funding database shows where a whole host of grant funding goes in the USA. As far as I know — and I look around often — there aren’t many grants for new media start ups in the UK. (There are some, though. Look at Blog Preston’s NESTA funding.) This, I think, has to do with the US ethos of using charities, like the Knight Foundation, rather than government, to fund a lot of things, one them being new journalism initiatives. (There are other reasons, too, but I’ll save them for another post.) Yet as Michele also notes, grants have problems — when they run out, what happens?
Thus, America’s new news startups have a “new black” in the shade of sustainability. Arguably, this was the UK’s only colour if a hyperlocal site was going to dress for survival. I think Philip rightfully notes that networks are a good way for some hyperlocal sites to survive and thrive. His own efforts in Litchfield and with Journal Local are definitely one’s to watch. But networks aren’t the only way.
The case Michele makes, and I tend to agree with, is that for hyperlocal to keep its editorial promise, it needs to define and know its community, and diversify its expenses and revenue. All this so it can generate cold, hard cash. (We all need to eat.) Networks are one of many ways for hyperlocal media to thrive. Not just editorial networks, but also advertising networks.
I would argue the UK has a lot to learn from the USA’s hyperlocal scene. (That’s why I’m so interested in Seattle’s hyperlocalists.) Martin Moore of Media Standards Trust sums up fairly succinctly how US local news experimentation is “leagues ahead” of the UK in this post published last month. So while the UK should be proud of its thriving grassroots hyperlocal media movement, it should also be keen to learn from people in other places “throwing spaghetti at the wall” to see which bits stick.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Thanks Joni, I was hoping someone would counter my post in this way
Part of the reason for my little spate of posts, including this one was to try and say “hey, don’t tar us all with the TBD/Patch brush”
I deliberately didn’t outright say TBD was never meant to be hyperlocal, despite knowing how true that is, because I wanted to make it clear just why it doesn’t work as a hyper local proposition. I wanted to try and stop people thinking of it that way.
I’m going to have a good browse through everything you’ve linked to though I’m sure if seen most before, just not in detail.
I’m hoping this may be the start of a bit more awareness between US & UK of what each side of the pond is doing. Maybe even some new networks
On the network by the way – I agree with what you’re saying. I’m envisaging editorial networks (Lichfield Community Media) technology networks (Journal Local) and communities of practice (wait and see…) of which hyperlocals may be members of none/some/all.
Thanks, Phil! I couldn’t agree more with this: “I’m hoping this may be the start of a bit more awareness between US & UK of what each side of the pond is doing. Maybe even some new networks.”
Keep up the prolific blogging!