Too many of the sites I visited looked as if they’re frozen in time or, at the very least, not working with any sense of urgency. When I tweeted my observation:

“Where’s the innovation? Where’s the experimentation? Don’t see most newspaper sites doing anything different or new. What happened?”

Steve Yelvington came back with this on-point response:

“Biggest risk of organizational (i.e., newsroom) convergence is a loss of imagination and innovative spirit.”

While I agree with his comment, I just don’t feel like any of these sites can afford to rest on their laurels or to be stuck in neutral. With marketing budgets at many newspapers shrinking or disappearing altogether, for the most part, it’s up to the individual web staffs to increase metrics such as page views, time or site and return visitors (for example).

What concerns me even more is that I’m not sure the people at any of these sites realize that they have a problem. On too many occasions I’ve heard the cliché “if it ain’t broke, why fix it?”.

I once worked for a VP who said something along the lines of “if you’ve been doing it for the past 20 years, then it’s time to change what you’ve been doing.” With that in mind, I’ve got a suggestion for all the online staffers out there – consider this a low tech intervention. Take a piece of paper, or create a document and number the lines 1 through 10. Then, on each line, list something that you have done in the past three to six months at your site that you consider innovative or experimental.

For example:

1. Experimented with commenting
2. Incorporated user generated galleries
3. Staffed the site overnight, etc.

Now if you don’t want to do this brief exercise or if your list contains only one or two items, then I would suggest that you have a problem. I would even go so far as to predict that your site (barring the occasional Druge or Fark) is seeing traffic hold steady. While that might seem like a good thing, it really, really isn’t.

With print products struggling just to maintain their depleted numbers, online growth must occur and innovation and experimentation, I believe, is key to that growth.

Now before you run off and put floating eyeballs on your site, I would suggest first of all setting, at the very least, a monthly traffic goal. This will help you gauge the effectiveness of what you attempt and justify those changes or alterations to those you work with.

Once you have that done, try something. It doesn’t have to cost money even, as there is plenty of free tech that you can leverage. Want chats? Try CoveritLive. Want widgets that you can centrally update? Try SproutBuilder. The list goes on and on.

And as you go, share your successes and your stumbles. Just like we’re seeing more cooperation on the content side between news outlets, we need to see more cooperation on the tech side (more on this another time).

Now lets get down to innovating and experimenting and be sure to let me know how it goes.

Popeil claimed that it was so easy to cook whole chickens in the Showtime Rotisserie Oven that all you had to do was “set it and forget it.” This phrase popped into my head recently while I was trying to explain my approach to website management.

Too many online staffs treat their websites like the Showtime Rotisserie Oven. They, say it with me, “Set it and Forget it.” Enamored with automation, they design sites that is chock full of headline pulls, RSS feeds and automated dayparting, Flash galleries, etc.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a technophobe, but the problem I have is that all the automation becomes an excuse to not deal with their site unless there is a problem or special project. They never stop to ask, are the right stories are being presented at the right time? Is the best photo being featured? Are our visitors being best served? They never ask because well, it’s all automated.

To me, that just spells missed opportunities.

I believe that the pages on your site should showcase not just the best, but the most appropriate and appealing content that your visitors would want at a given moment. And yes, that means change comes often.

My approach is to use metrics to help plot a roadmap and then use your journalistic sense, your common sense to make the right choices. Are there places for automation? Of course, but your site won’t grow automatically it requires your constant attention.

So if you want to cook a chicken follow Popeil’s advice. But if you want to grow your site, take my advice and do the work yourself.

————————————————–

Bi-Co Boot Camp, September 13, 2008, By: Yoni Greenbaum ©2008

Thanks, Andrea for that introduction and thank you all for this opportunity to speak with you today.

Now some of you might laugh, especially since we just met, but the truth is I already owe you an apology. I know that may be hard to believe, but it actually gets worse, because not only do I owe you one but so do my colleagues at newspapers throughout the country.

As you all know the newspaper industry is in horrible shape. Circulation is declining, advertising is disappearing, revenue is shrinking, the news just isn’t good. But all of this didn’t just suddenly – happen. These problems didn’t just materialize overnight. Frankly, some of them didn’t have to occur at all.

Somewhere along the way we dropped the ball, we screwed the pooch, we lost sight of the goal line, hell, we just blew it.

As publishers, editors and department heads, many of us were arrogant, ignorant or just plain lazy. We thought that we knew what was best for our readers and, all too often, ignored their complaints, their requests, their suggestions and even their compliments. We thought we were immune to the economic problems that were sweeping the country and failed to adjust our spending and our budgets. We thought technology such as the Internet, Mobile and Digital Media were niches and not areas we needed to address. When it came to too many issues we were content to say not us. And, as a result, we individually and cumulatively allowed these problems to develop and grow.

And to make matters worse, reporters, copy editors and other employees sat by and watched. Sure they grumbled, they might have even complained to their co-workers, but too few took a stand, too few tried to do anything so they too share some of responsibility.

So while you might not hear it from the likes of Gary Pruitt or Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., and I can’t promise anything for certain from my colleagues, let me, Yoni Greenbaum, apologize for everything that I did do and, more importantly, everything that I didn’t do. I am truly sorry, you deserved better.

Thanks. Thanks for letting me say that. I meant it, I am sorry. I am not however one of those who believe that as an industry we are doomed that our institutions are lost and that it is only a matter of time before I and thousands of others are out of work. Actually I think this is an extremely exciting time to be working in newspapers. And to be honest, I think that the answers we need will come from people like you. Not that I’m trying to put any pressure on you, but I really believe that you can save this industry and skills and drive that you will need you are getting by working at your campus publication.

I’m not kidding and I’m getting paid by Dave for saying that.

Throughout my career I’ve been fortunate to have worked at some great newspapers and to have learned from some really talented people. Sure those experiences have helped to shape the type of journalist that I am today. But you know, when I think about it, it was not the Pulitzer Prize-winning writers, the reporting abroad opportunities or the awards that have had the biggest, longest-lasting impact on me. Actually, the experience I find myself most often reflecting on was the years that I spent at my college newspaper.

See, in 1992 I was making my second go at college and was working at my campus’s newspaper. The Beacon at William Paterson University, one of New Jersey’s state schools, was, at the time, your typical student-run weekly newspaper. We had about a dozen students who served as editors, reporters and photographers and who handled ad sales, billing and receiving. Production was a cut and paste operation involving lots of razor blades and hot wax – I’ll skip the S&M jokes. We typically started assembling an issue at 5 p.m. and ended in the wee hours of the next morning at which point a staff member would drive the boards over to the printer and everyone would head over to the local diner for coffee and disco fries.

We were a passionate and dedicated bunch. A mix of stoners, skaters, geeks and outcasts. None of us were making any real money – certainly not the student government association which technically oversaw the operation of the paper. With very little guidance or support from our school we tried our best to improve and grow. We read the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal and dreamed of the big leagues. We looked at our local newspapers and said “if they could do it, why can’t we.” So we decided to evolve.

We used some of the money that was in our club account and purchased new computers, a server and best of all, a large format printer. Suddenly, production went from pasting together multiple pieces to hitting print. Instead of taking all night, production now took a few hours. We purchased newspaper boxes and placed them not just on campus, but in the surrounding communities. We created a media kit to get better advertising and redesigned the office, even going as far as to hire a receptionist. Suddenly we were feeling like a “real” weekly newspaper. Now in hindsight I’ll admit that the writing sucked and the layout was boring and for some of us, working at the paper was more of an excuse to miss class then to develop our journalism skills. But at that time, we thought we were cutting edge.

I remember at one point we tried to sell our newspaper to one of the local newspaper companies that at the time was owned by Dean Singleton, CEO of Media General. I know, we didn’t even technically own the newspaper to be able to sell it, but our thinking was that the daily could use it like their minor league team and as a result, how a steady flow of reporters, photographers and copy editors to hire upon graduation.

Long story short, the sale didn’t happen, but what I remember from those meetings is that we were paginated and they weren’t. We had new distribution boxes and a circulation strategy based on census data and they didn’t. At that moment, we sure as heck didn’t feel like your typical student newspaper. I think that experience made us all believe that we could do anything. So we tried many things and in the end some failed but others worked. We made money, actually a lot of money. We got taken seriously by the local press and, in the end I made connections that resulted in first job at a daily.

In the years that have passed since my college days, I have relied on that “do anything” or “try anything” spirit at each job I’ve had. It was behind my decision to try the Nextel two-way radios that enabled my staff to effectively report from ground zero when the cell networks went down; it provided me with the confidence to ask for cell cards and laptops longs before they were popular; and it gave me the guts to send reporters to a variety of locals including Baghdad right after the U.S. led invasion.

I share those examples with you knowing full well that they pale in comparison to what each of you would offer a newspaper or media company given the chance.

For example raise your hand if you send text messages.

As I thought.

Would you believe that I’ve encountered editors who won’t let their staff’s use text messaging because they don’t like it?

There are editors and publishers who still don’t have broadband Internet access in their homes; who don’t know how to setup voicemail and who can’t even open email attachments. And we wonder why they can’t get us out of the mess that we’re in.

But as I said previously, I don’t believe all is lost. There are newspaper companies where the staffs are fighting for a future. Places that “get it.” Places where people with your skills would be welcomed.

I think Philly.com is one of those places and, not just because I work there.

Before joining the philly.com team some six months ago, I had a choice, go back to the newsroom and lead the fight for survival or join an outfit that was taking an ambitious and decidedly different approach. Having always straddled the online and the print worlds I saw philly.com’s graying of that line as exciting, as a chance for me to combine my two passions and skill sets and, frankly, an opportunity for me to help create a model for the rest of the industry.

Philly.com is more then just a website for the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News. We are not, like you see at so many newspapers, an adjunct to the newsroom – a group of poorly dressed people sequestered in a corner of the newsroom or holed-up in a former janitor’s closet.

If anything, we are more dot com.

Our offices are not even in the same building as the two newspapers, but on the 35^th floor of a Center City building that features panoramic views. In moving to our new location, something that we did bout four months ago, we combined an operation that was stretched out among eight different floors. Now, content, tech, sales, and biz dev can all work together and that is important because our job, the job of philly.com is not to right wrongs or win awards, but to grow as a website and, most of all, to make money.

So, we consider anything. We don’t believe we have all the answers. We pay an ever increasing amount attention to our visitors and advertisers. We frequently ask them how we are doing and what can we do different, what can we do better?

All of our employees have a say. And by all I really mean all even interns. We explore new technologies and new approaches. We try something and if it works, we stick with it and if it doesn’t we move on.

Additionally, we believe in a personal touch. While you can look at the homepage of nytimes.com and washingtonpost.com and see lots of automated headline lists, at philly.com nearly everything that appears on our homepage is there because a member of my team has chosen it to be there.

And as part of that, metrics rule. At least every 30 minutes we are looking at our stats and seeing what is doing well, what is doing poorly. What is rising and what is falling. And we use that data along with our journalistic sense to then power our decisions.

In addition we’ve embraced video and not just news video. Philly.com now produces three daily shows and half a dozen weekly shows. Our videos are viewed nearly 300,000 times a month.

We’re launching new products including a new music site, a site for sports fans, others online products.

I think we have a good strategy. Our traffic is growing, this month alone we’re looking at more then 40 million page views and 4.2 million unique visitors and online revenue is up.

But the truth is we can’t do it alone. Those companies that are going to survive this period, including philly.com, who have embraced the Internet and who see technology as a salvation and not a distraction need individuals like yourselves. I hope you recognize how much we look forward to working with you. Ultimately, the future of our industry rests in your hands.

So please, don’t believe the naysayers and continue the fight to help newspapers survive and thrive. And check out philly.com and let me know what you think my email is on the site, I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Thank you.

The Carnival gets underway with a post from John Hassell of the exploding newsroom fame. For those of you who don’t know, John is the online editor at the Star-Ledger of Newark, NJ. He enters the carnival with “A day in the life of a big local story.” Want to see how a major daily fires all guns at a story? Then check out his post.

Not wanting there to be only one John at the Carnival, John Ndege offers “Out Scooping the Wire News Services.” John Ndege is a great blogger whose insights go beyond journalism. If you are earching for some guidance in this crazy journalism/Internet world, take a stroll through his blog. For the Carnival, he ponders the future of news wire services and the impact of services like Twitter.

Soon to graduate from the University of South Florida, Wendy Withers offers the Carnival a post with some great “Advice for college journalists: Online portfolios.” Wendy has always offered some great insights (it has a spot in my reader) and this post is no different. Her tips could be the difference between a graduate moving into their own pad and starting a job or moving into their parents attic and looking for work.

Think we’re done? Wait! There’s more to come so keep checking back as more posts will continue to go up. Have your own thoughts? Drop a comment below and let people know what you are thinking.

See, I told you we weren’t done yet.

Charlie Beckett, someone who seemingly wears more hats then I can capture in a few witty words, reminds us that sometimes there is good writing beyond the blogosphere with his book review of Can You Trust The Media? by Adrian Monck. Full disclosure, Adrian also participates in the Carnival of Journalism (see below). Read the review and, dare I say, buy the book.

Moving back across the pond, Jack Lail, managing editor/multimedia for The Knoxville News-Sentinel (someone who always manages to be blogging — how he pulls that off I’ll never understand) offers “The ‘Golden Age’ of Web news.” His posts always give me something to chew on for a few days and this one isn’t any different:

All-media-meets on the Web has created a local news and advertising battlezone in market-after-market the likes of which I’ve never seen in a 30-plus-year career.

The author himself, Adrian Monck, takes a moment to address some of the observations about his book in “Can You Trust The Media? – Review.”

Think the Carnival’s done? Not quiet, check back later for more.

And before I could hit “Save,” along comes Andy Dickinson, faculty member at the University of Central Lancashire and prolific blogger (and apparently wine drinker) offers “What is a picture worth?” Although he describes it as a “bit of a ramble of nice words and tricky pictures,” I don’t think I’d be that harsh. Give it a read and let Andy know what you think.

So consider these points as either observations or, if you’re looking for a job, words of caution:

1. No One is Perfect

I don’t care if you really believe that you have never missed a deadline or that your work has never needed to be edited; don’t highlight those points. When I come across a cover letter or resume that emphasizes perfection, it’s typically a bee line to the reject pile. In my eyes, there’s no such thing as a perfect performance and that view just indicates a dangerous detachment.

2. I’ll Do Anything For You

Even if the song lyrics are stuck in your head, I wouldn’t recommend offering the phrase during an interview. I understand that the job market is tough and I can appreciate that you may be working at a job that you just can’t wait to leave. But when you come in for an interview, it is for a specific job and offering to do anything can raise questions about your suitability for the job in question.

3. Listen to Yourself

All too often, I come across candidates who get so relaxed during interviews that they drop their guard and say things that they SHOULD regret, like: I don’t read newspapers; I don’t have Internet access at home; or this is a dying industry. Remember, it is an interview and not a friendly chat, watch your words.

4. Done It All

Even if you have “done it all” give yourself a focus. Organize your experience to reflect the job you’re applying for. You want the interviewer to picture you in the job and not floating from position to position.

5. Ban the smileys and hearts

Thank you notes following an interview are definitely appropriate and are an easy way to keep the interviewer thinking about you, but remember to keep it professional. I don’t find sentences that end with smiley faces or heart-dotted letter I’s letters funny.

I’m sure there are lots of other tips that either you might have or candidate-related snafus that you have come across, if so, please do share.

NOTE: I’m proud to be participating, along with fellow journalism bloggers from around the world in the Carnival of Journalism. In addition to reading my post please visit the Carnival host site and see what my colleagues are writing about. Not sure what a blog carnival is? Check out this entry on Wikipedia.

As I wrote in a previous post, there is a growing sentiment at many papers that there are just too few people to tackle what seems like ever-growing to-do lists. What concerns me about that reaction is that I fear it reflects organizations who are only considering the first “no one can do it all” part of the above phrase.

While organizations can keep on increasing the responsibilities for their reporters, editors, photographers or producers, the reality is quality will suffer and morale will decline. In my mind, it should not be a case of simply adding, but of adding and subtracting. I would encourage you to look for redundancies or places where you can leverage either your existing print or online operation.

For example:

• Is the same content being entered twice, once for print and once for online?
• Is there work that either readers can do or that technology can assist with? For example can letter to the editor be scanned rather then manually entered in your editorial system or can readers be encouraged to complete an online form?
• Could reporters provide a list of the websites they used to research a story to help enhance it when it appears online?
• Can copy editors provide a web headline when they come up with the print headline?

I know these are rather basic suggestions, but my point is — if you look at your process before you simply start handing out new responsibilities, you might find that either you can replace existing duties or that someone is already doing it, but in a way you didn’t see. In a time when being efficient is key, it’s inefficient to blindly hand out new tasks.