Analysis Archives | Page 2 of 3

How news publishers can compete with the threat of AI

28 March 2024

It was interesting to read the thoughts of media and tech consultant Ian Betteridge on AI’s challenges and threats AI to news publishers, and what he thinks the solution are – and they are not as difficult as you may think.

“What’s your competitive advantage as a publishing business? It’s not the ability to churn out more articles than anybody else”

AI could mean a move away from cheap and easy SEO-friendly articles

In an interview with Media Voices, Ian rightly asserts that the low-hanging fruit of SEO-friendly ‘what time is kick-off’ and ‘when are the shops open over Easter?’ style-content “can be generated by anybody really cheaply, and got up online fast. They can milk whatever traffic’s there.”

And as we already see when we search for something, “a lot of that stuff is going to be answered directly by Google” on its search results page – and it’s only going to get better with Google Bard.

And the recent changes to Google’s search ranking algorithm are designed to downrank SEO-chasing, low-quality and spammy articles.

Focus on your USP to beat AI: authoritative, credible and distinctive content

Ian poses a good question to large publishers:

“You are a company with 1,000 employees. What’s your competitive advantage over the one person who can do that every week? If the answer is, you haven’t got any, then you need to rethink your content strategy. Because that’s not a viable business.”

In effect, you need to look back at what makes you stand out from your rivals and remember why you grew your audience initially: good, credible, authoritative journalism that your audience cares about.

Use your audience research and analyse your digital stats to see the content that is of interest to your readers. If you focus on that, you are likely to build a stronger following and be in a better position to transition some of those people to pay for your work.

As Ian says,

“The big advantage you’ve got as a human being is you’ve got experience, so you can go out and talk to people. AI can’t do that… And that’s quite old-school journalism in a sense, because it is about tapping into the emotions and the needs of your audience in a way that only a human can do with another human.”

If you think about AI videos, for example, we’ve seen a lot of poorly-made ones that illustrate what someone is talking about but lack human empathy and connection. Or remember when Microsoft used AI to write travel guides?

Ian also talks about the rise in affiliate content, which is often poorly produced and leaves you feeling that they’re selecting something for revenue over a proper, expert review – personally, I prefer to go a trusted, reputable site like Which? first, than rely on Google results.

It was interesting to read of Reach’s plans to centralise content production for certain types of articles, allowing regions to focus on more original articles. Whether this means these hub-produced pieces have the flair or personality on things like TV reviews, remains to be seen.

This doesn’t mean that AI is bad for publishers

There’s already been some great use of AI to automate some manual, time-consuming tasks, help optimise content such as selecting the best performing headline out of a handful written, and provide a more personalised experience for the user, from TikTok to Netflix.

To transition your news publishing business to succeed in the era of AI will take time – and as Ian says, “There’s going to be a whole world of pain to get to that point.” But if you keep focused on your audience and your data, you have a good chance of doing well and be rewarded for it by Google and others.

Ofcom admits it’s hard to regulate news on social media

25 March 2024

Ofcom seem to admit they’re unsure what they can do to improve the range and quality of news on social media:

“People have limited control over their social media newsfeeds and trying to design interventions to improve the breadth and quality of news consumed on social media is a complex task.”

Their Online News research update, published today, confirms a lot about what we know about how platforms serve the content they think the user would be most interested in.

We have already learned how Meta is now only behind the BBC and ITV in terms of sources of news and in terms of ‘sources of attention’, its even bigger than ITV.

Ofcom reveal its studies into improving what news people see on social media

Ofcom has carried out some trials and detailed some interesting academic studies, on trying to improve the breadth and balance of news in people’s feeds. These include getting people to follow public service broadcast accounts, follow counter-attitudinal news sources, asking them to review who they follow and adding a trust rating browser extension.

But in short, they say these interventions were complex, not user-friendly and that the algorithms still had a large say on what users saw.

Also complicating the issue is how nearly all social platforms, except for LinkedIn, have made it a lot harder for people to access news websites away from the platform by depriortising or not allowing the ability to add in links to posts.

And Sky News for example, has said how poor Twitter referral traffic had been even before the changes imposed by Elon Musk.

BBC promise more personalisation on iPlayer as it competes with Netflix

Is it too late to close the stable door after the horse has bolted?

Not for BBC Director-General Tim Davie, who will warn tomorrow about allowing “US and Chinese algorithms” to shape what we consume, pledging to invest and modernise all of its online products, including iPlayer, to provide a more personalised service.

Other PSBs are investing more time and effort in their own platforms, primarily for financial reasons, but does this mean our feeds will become even more like the Wild West, with For You pages prioritising poor quality, sensationalised content at the expense of an informed society?

TikTok ban ‘more about geopolitics than cyber security’ – ex-GCHQ cyber chief

21 March 2024

There’s been lots said in the threat of a TikTok ban in by politicians in the US, but I found the expert thoughts of Ciaran Martin, the former GCHQ cyber chief and ex-head of the National Cyber Security Centre, fascinating and really insightful.

He told the BBC’s Media Show that:

“This is mostly an issue both about geopolitics, and influence and control over the Internet, than strictly speaking a cybersecurity issue”

Here’s part of Ciaran’s points he made to Katie Razzall – it’s worth checking out the full discussion on BBC Sounds

What are the cyber security concerns driving calls for a TikTok ban?

Ciaran Martin says there are two “classic cyber security issues” behind calls for a ban on TikTok: the compelled handing over of data under Chinese law and the download of potential Chinese state malware through apps.

But he points out that “the data economy is so out of control that the idea that you can ban your way to data security on a country of origin basis is essentially nonsense”, pointing out cyber issues with Russian criminals in the US healthcare system.

He adds that to stop the Chinese government getting your personal data requires more than just banning TikTok.
Ciaran does raise the points about China banning Facebook, and concerns over whether the algorithm could be manipulated to seed misinformation and disinformation about Western countries – but given how particular TikTok’s For You page is to each user, I’m not sure how possible this is in reality. I didn’t agree with Ciaran’s dismissal of the app as merely “a service to frivolous videos”, as it is having a far greater impact on culture, news and entertainment.

So these concerns, coupled with how Chinese tech companies have become closer to Beijing authorities, make sense why Western governments treat TikTok as a ‘risk’ to national security.

As for banning TikTok on government phones, I agree with Ciaran about not having any social media apps on them, given the amount of data they gather (more on that in a minute.)

Should I, my children, or my organisation be on TikTok?

The answers depend on who you are.

18 months ago, the director of GCHQ, Jeremy Fleming, said if personal data is used proportionally and “we’re happy with the way that data is safeguarded”, then it should present no problem for any user.

He said, “Make the most of it, make those videos, use TikTok, but just think before you do.” He reminded us that “there is no free good here” with any apps, especially social media, as they store personal data.

Asked if he would stop his child using TikTok, he said, “No I wouldn’t,” but he would “speak to my child about the way in which they think about their personal data on their device.”

Both the British and Irish regulators have fined Bytedance for how it didn’t stop under-13s being on the platform, didn’t set under-16s’ accounts to private when created and other data protection issues.

On their website, TikTok says Americans’ personal data is stored on US cloud servers run by software firm Oracle, while European data will soon be held in Dublin. It adds that user data “is protected by strong physical and logical security controls, including gated entry points, firewalls, and intrusion detection technologies.”

For organisations, there are increasingly compelling reasons to be on there. If you’re targeting young adults, 18-24 year olds use it for an average of 55 minutes a day, according to Ofcom figures from last year, while the demographic of users is getting increasingly older. And another Ofcom study suggests as many as 1 in 10 of us use TikTok as a news source – more so than BBC Radio 1 and Channel 5.

And despite concerns about government departments having accounts, they have been happy to work with TikTok influencers to help reach target audiences in campaigns.

Will TikTok be banned?

We don’t know if a ban on TikTok will happen yet – there’s a long way to go. Even if the US President approves the decision, Bytedance has six months to sell its American arm. And the UK will likely follow what Washington does, rather than do their own thing.

Like using any social platform, you should be prepared that trends come and go, and any organisation’s social media or digital communications strategy shouldn’t be totally reliant on a social channel or service that you don’t own yourself.

The concerns over data gathered by Facebook and other Meta apps

Ciaran seemed more concerned by the investigation by Times reporter Matilda Davies into the “horrifying level of detail” that Facebook have on her, including 20,000 interactions over two years with websites and apps that were not connected to her Meta-owned accounts:

In fact, between December 2021 and December 2023, Meta — the company that owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp — tracked me an average of 33 times a day from websites and apps that aren’t connected to my social media accounts. Even when I wasn’t looking at them, they were looking at me.

Like TikTok, Meta says it processes the data safely, but Matilda says they are “very opaque” on how it uses it.

Ciaran said it was “a really concerning story” and how we “need a really, really serious conversation about the data economy more generally, and one that’s more better informed than just saying ‘it’s all based on the country of origin of a particular service provider’.”

I really recommend listening to the BBC Media Show discussion on TikTok, Meta and Twitter – and following Ciaran Martin on Twitter/X

If you want a chat about how your company could use TikTok, or issues raised in this article, get in touch.

Be careful! LinkedIn ‘rewrite with AI’ feature uses your expertise for free

19 March 2024

If you’ve tried out LinkedIn’s ‘rewrite with AI’ feature – even like me, just to see what it looks like – you may be surprised to learn this.

In its FAQs, LinkedIn say they keep the information and “seek to minimise personal data” entered to train its generative AI software – this is in keeping with other services like Chat GPT.

My former ITV News colleague, Suswati Basu points out that it also applies to the collaborative articles that you may see in your feed asking for your expert thoughts on a topic.

Some of you may be OK with that, but think about what you’re happy to give your expertise away for free – or include potentially sensitive information or names of people.

LinkedIn’s FAQs on its use of personal data and gen AI is here.

LinkedIn share algorithm tips on the best way to get engagement on posts

5 March 2024

LinkedIn has shared some really useful tips that could help your posts get better engagement. Here are three important, but really easy things, to know.

1. It’s all about how the algorithm perceives the relevancy of your content to your followers

The timing of the posting, post length and other ‘trends’ don’t matter that much.

For example, if you read a lot of posts from an individual, or like posts about a certain topic/niche, LinkedIn will show you that more often in your news feed – or even as a ‘suggested post.’

“If you can just share knowledge into the world, I guarantee you things are going to work out. They won’t always work out for every single post, but over the length of your posting, it is going to work out for you”

LinkedIn editor-in-chief Daniel Roth

“Right now, content lives and dies on the newsfeed very quickly. We’re trying to collect the sum total of professional knowledge on our platform, and make sure it surfaces whenever you need it”

Tim Jurka, senior director of engineering at LinkedIn

2. Don’t try to ‘game’ the system

I’m sure you’ve seen the post with the teasing/appealing first lines, then you expand the post and it’s something completely different. Or a post that resembles an essay (oh…)

LinkedIn say the algorithm will recognise if lots of people move on quickly from a post, even after tapping on ‘read more’.

3. It’s about targeted, focused reach, not mass reach

The pair say people have always been complaining about ‘reach’, but it’s all relative.

For them, they want to help users connect to a smaller group of people in their industry “who can make a meaningful difference”.

This is from a chat between Daniel, Tim and Jason Feifer of Entrepreneur magazine.

The key takeaways from the Charlesbye report into UK news habits

28 February 2024

“Twice as many young people get their news from TikTok than the BBC”, shout the BBC’s rivals today – it’s the headline from a report by Charlesbye into the nation’s news habits.

In fact, it has similar findings to the Ofcom news consumption report from 2 years ago: more people, especially younger people, are getting their ‘news’ from social media than, say, sitting to watch the Six.

I say ‘news’, as what is new, informative and interesting can vary upon personal interest – and it isn’t restricted anymore to a selection of stories delivered in a newspaper, homepage or TV bulletin.

The coverage of this report is slightly misleading too – Instagram is still the most popular platform for 18-24 year olds to get their ‘news’, despite Charlesbye branding one of their audience segments ‘Generation TikTok’. And Facebook is still king, overall.

Working with influencers: why authenticity and credibility are key

16 February 2024

Should the government be working with influencers on TikTok and other social platforms?Yes, of course – and they have been for years (but it’s all been going on behind the scenes, so you may not have noticed.)

I talked to ITV News about the topic for a report for their Evening News programme this week.

Go to where your audience is – and get help if it’s a hard to reach group

Gone are the days of posting and hoping on Twitter – you now need to go directly to where your target audience is, and for a lot of them, especially younger people, they’re on TikTok.

And they’re unlikely to want to hear from government ministers – but they’re more likely to stop scrolling if it’s something being said by someone they like watching videos of, or can relate to.

And with any contractual relationship with influencers or celebrities, the buyer retains control over the messaging and the finished product before it’s posted.

And the issue is more complicated by the government banning departments from being on TikTok, or having the app on HMG-issued devices.

So, in principle, it makes sense.

Some will take the money, regardless – but others will be more concerned if it fits their brand

The tricky part is whether these influencers want to work with them – particularly on the controversial issue of stopping migrants crossing the Channel in small boats.

The leak of government plans, including some names being considered, caused a backlash – on tricky topics, you prefer to do this enquiring privately – but I used to regularly target a range of big name influencers and opinion-formers on Twitter with posts from the Department for Education that I thought they’d be interested in and would possible engage with for free, not for payment.

The authenticity and credibility of what influencers are saying is vital

But crucially, you need to have confidence that the people you approach will be warm to the idea – is it something they believe in or have publicly supported?

And just as important: will their followers believe what they are saying in their content about your topic or campaign? Are they talking about an issue which they’ve talked about before, have credibility in and are people who are relatable to the target audience?

Already, a couple of names have distanced themselves from the Home Office plans.

Anyone can adopt an influencer strategy

Any organisation or campaigner can adopt this approach: it just needs a bit of careful thinking and planning, and putting yourself in the shoes of the influencer: why would they want to talk about this issue or story?

If you need some help and advice on how to work with influencers, especially on small or no budgets, get in touch!

Here’s what young people think of as ‘news’ on Instagram

19 January 2024

“That’s not news” is still a familiar reply under social posts from news organisations.

But what is ‘news’ nowadays? We know what it used to be – a selected series of stories to be printed in a newspaper once a day, or a handful handpicked for a 30 minute TV bulletin.

But the internet, and especially social media, has transformed our definitions of news, based on algorithms, personal interests and generally a shift in power away from traditional news sources and journalists.

And I’ve always been curious, if slightly wary, when reading reports and surveys about where young people ‘get their news’ from, when the term has evolved so much over recent years.

So I was fascinated by this research by a couple of Dutch academics into what 16-25 year olds in the Netherlands saw as news on Instagram.

We’ve seen how Instagram is now the top social platform for this age group in the UK for news.

Being an academic paper it’s a bit heavy going, but you can read it here. I’ve tried to distil and report the key findings below.

News feeds have greater importance in their lives than traditional news – but they can feel ‘bombarded by content’

We’ve read a lot about how news feeds across all platforms have gone from friends, family and those you follow to a more algorithmic-based approach. In Instagram’s case, it’s still a bit haphazard with the seemingly random posts inserted into my feed as I scroll – even more so with the Explore feature.

We know how it’s not in chronological order, or order of importance like a newspaper, TV bulletin or website/live blog.

As the academics call it, we’re bombarded with a “cacophony of content”, so we scroll quickly, giving most posts a very cursory glance. And we check it frequently through the day.

What is ‘the news’ on Instagram to young people, anyway?

The researchers also coined another useful phrase: “media hybridity” – it’s increasingly hard to distinguish news and information from other types of content on social media.

We now consume the widest ever range of sources of information through our feeds – for example, journalists and news organisations, friends and family, sports clubs, influencers, celebrities – or just random accounts we never knew of before popping up.

And we can treat these news sources differently, such as if we feel strong emotional reactions to them, or the content themes resonate with us, or if the algorithm shows them more prominently.

This is even more true for younger people, who aren’t so wedded to the same traditional news values that older generations or journalists have grown up on.

In this study, they generally regarded ‘news’ as new, relevant and trustworthy. But some had very narrow conceptualisations – a TV news bulletin or newspaper, but nothing else.

Instagram also encourages, directly and indirectly, a different way of creating and consuming information online. It’s more visual, vertical and imposes a limited ability for captions and links.

I still see many publishers keep their posts short and with little context, expecting users to ‘tap the link in the bio to find out more’, which seems to be a big ask unless you really feel compelled.

The way the platform allows you to more subtly indicate that a post is sponsored means that the blurring between editorial and commercial, particularly with newer publishers, can be very hard to distinguish.

Content that feels like ‘news’ is treated as such – be it the user it comes from, the traditional format and/or look or if it, or the themes.

Other factors are if it feels like it’s appealing to a very broad audience, or perceived to be of high importance. But increasingly news organisations are adapting their approach and range of stories to feel more native to the platform.

Some may explicitly announce something as NEW or NEWS to make their posts look more appealing – while politicians and those at the centre of a public storm may try to take advantage of this confusing state of ‘news’ by dismissing reports as ‘fake’ or pronouncing them as ‘not news’.

The bombardment of different types of information on Instagram, the platform’s characteristics and what young people feel and react to means that they don’t necessarily equate it to what they’ve been taught to regard as news or journalism.

It’s not a surprise that there’s been confusion over whether Instagram is a ‘news’ platform.

So how can you make your news appealing to young people on Instagram?

In short, make your story selection more relevant and appealing to your target audience. If you’re targeting young people, use your insight to focus on their interests and passion points.

Emotion, or stimulating a reaction of some kind, as we’ve seen across social media, is key. This younger audience felt that news needed to “be close emotionally” to them. It’s why subjective posts, such as activism and passion-based interests appeal, as they resonate more with them.

Also, avoid seeing it as a dumping ground for lighter and ‘celebrity’ news – of course there’s interest in those topics, but they still have to got to be relevant and connect with that audience.

And it’s not just relevance – trust is vital too. If a user sees you as a news organisation, they expect to believe what they read, and for it to have some journalism and authority behind it, rather than just speculation. If they lose that feeling, that could be damaging across all of your platforms.

As this study by NP Digital showed, captions and covers are key to making it clear to this audience why they should stop scrolling (you can read more about their analysis here.)

Use the native formats – it shouldn’t necessarily ‘feel’ like the news as we have seen over the past decades.

Don’t try to get users to go to the ‘link in the bio’ – tell them what it is there.

But of course there’s also the challenge on how you monetise being on Instagram, though…

Is more and more content really the answer to journalism’s problems?

9 January 2024

News publishers plan to post more video than any other type of content, according to a Reuters Institute survey

The respected Nic Newman spoke to hundreds of editors, CEOs, and digital executives for the new Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism report, ‘Journalism, media, and technology trends and predictions 2024’.

Understandably, they’re worried about the drop in referral traffic and are looking to whatever they can do to attract and retain audiences (and make money).

But I’m not sure the answer is committing to making even more videos, more podcasts and more newsletters than last year, as they reveal in the survey. I don’t know about you, but I’m reaching saturation point!

Most publishers are still focussing on maximising attention than being respectful of their audience's time, according to this Reuters Institute survey.

Even more worryingly, over half of respondents admit their companies “are mostly focused on maximising attention rather than being more respectful of their audience’s time (37%)”.

As the BBC’s Naja Nielsen recently said, “I think we’re competing with everything you can do on your mobile phone.” We’ve got to have smarter approaches, especially with the rise in news fatigue.

Hopefully we’ll see greater use of technology and data to produce more focused, relevant and engaging content, and organisations being inspired by some great native content creators on the different social platforms.

The study also notes the huge interest in the use of WhatsApp for distribution, but the efforts I’ve seen so far have mainly been link spamming, with little incentive to tap on the post, let alone forward it to friends and family.

The issues facing journalism could also be applied to organisations’ communications challenges too – make it worth your audience’s time to stop and read or watch what you’re sharing. If you don’t, the chances are that they’ll be less likely to do so again.

It’s worth reading the Reuters Institute report on ‘Journalism, media, and technology trends and predictions 2024’ in full – tap or click to go to it.

Why Channel 4 is changing to appeal more to younger audiences

7 December 2023

“I’ve maybe heard of E4 – that’s probably about it. I don’t really watch anything on it. I think there are comedies or something on it… Probably my mum watches”
Channel 4, the dramas. (Girl aged 14, England)

I’ve always thought that Channel 4 was a channel with attitude, an innovator and did well at appealing to their younger audiences. Hey, look at their funny Threads account! But I’m 41.

In some fascinating, but underreported, research carried out by STRAT7 Rainmakers for Ofcom, these more youthful target groups appear to not feel the same way.

It’s the same issue that all broadcasters – and organisations with communications strategies – are facing. It’s why Channel 4 is looking to make changes to its licence as it transitions from being mainly linear to more of a digital outlet.

Younger audiences are typically less engaged and aware of what Channel 4 does

Of the 18-24 year olds surveyed, it appears they didn’t tend to watch Channel 4 on TV, or check out its streaming platforms – preferring Netflix, Disney, YouTube and TikTok for their entertainment.

They were aware, when prompted, of some of the content on its platforms, but they didn’t clearly associate them with Channel 4, but accidentally with rival services instead.

Audiences expect a better quality streaming service

“40D is atrocious..honestly, it’s slow, you can’t fast forward from one segment to another, if you do then you’ve got to watch 3 minutes of adverts and if you want to watch a programme halfway through you’ve got to watch loads of adverts. It crashes, it’s not user friendly, you can’t look at recently released by category – It’s not user friendly it’s old… it’s like internet explorer before it was Edge.” (Female, London, 22-34, ABC1, medium C4C user)

Channel 4’s streaming services have undergone some transformations over the years, from 4OD, to All 4, to Channel4.com.

It’s no surprise that those surveyed are watching more of its content digitally, but they view it more of a catch-up service than a streaming service, where they would be ‘inspired’ by the selections on offer.

And the Channel 4 platforms were seen as “off-putting”: harder to browse, suffering from more glitches and too many ads, compared to its streaming rivals.

It’s a challenge to Channel 4, whose income solely comes from commercial revenues. Younger audiences are reported to find the ads repetitive, too frequent and the breaks too long. Being digitally native, they’re not brought up on ad breaks on commercial TV like us older lot have been.

They didn’t regard Channel 4 Entertainment as a go-to destination on YouTube as they prefer to consume content differently, through algorithms and recommendations. But they like to watch clips of popular shows.

Channel 4 appears less appealing for younger audiences

“Disney+ is where I watch most of my series and TikTok. If I ever have a free
minute that’s what I spend time scrolling on.” (Female, Belfast, 18-21, C2DE, light C4C user)

Like other Public Sector Broadcasters, it tries to appeal to all audiences, which is important from a regulation perspective, but tricky for a brand.

Although most of those surveyed saw its target audience as ‘younger’ (around mid-20s upwards), some of the youngest who took part in the study saw it as more for their parents’ generation.

A longer-term concern was that 10-15 year olds did not proactively consider Channel 4 to watch content.

A brand identity issue?

Of the PSBs, Channel 4 was traditionally seen as being more boundary-pushing, progressive, diverse and innovative. But that’s coming under threat from other streaming services pursuing similar values, particularly with the aim of appealing to younger people.

But the research said Channel 4 “would be missed if they no longer existed”, being seen as less establishment, championing diverse and challenging viewpoints, providing gritty and authentic news and documentaries, and offering a wide range of good quality, British-made programmes for free.

And there was particular support for, and brand association with, its Paralympics coverage, reflecting its values of diversity and inclusion.

And Channel 4 News was praised for how it connected with its viewers, holding power to account and the way it reported events in the UK and around the world. Although over-30s were more likely to watch its appointment to view shows, mainly the 7pm programme, it’s received acclaim (and awards) for its social and digital output, where younger generations are more likely to get their news.

It appears its request to remove its lunchtime bulletin and reduce TV commitment to current affairs would allow it to divert those resources into its digital content.

Not just a Channel 4 issue

“Channel 4 remains a key part of the UK’s broadcasting ecology”, notes Ofcom, being rated highly by audiences and “[continuing] to deliver content promoting new and diverse voices and perspectives and to play a crucial role in supporting the creative economy outside London.”

The issues the broadcaster faces are ones similar to the BBC, ITV and other brands and organisations – look at Ofcom’s report on the BBC needing to do more to appeal to working classes.

It’s why Channel 4 has asked for changes to some of its existing licence obligations to invest more in its digital growth and transformation (while also providing for those who still watch their programmes in the more ‘traditional’ TV way.)

You can take part in the consultation to its proposed changes on Ofcom’s website.

We’re all having to change the ways we reach and engage our audiences – for some target groups, it’s a matter of urgency. If you’d like to chat about how I can help you navigate through these unsettling times, get in touch.