News Archives | Tiga Consultancy

Tag Archive for: News

Should my organisation leave Twitter/X – or stay on there?

13 August 2024

Recent events on Twitter – or X, as we should now call it – have left individuals and some organisations to consider quitting the platform.

Critics of Elon Musk have accused him of using Twitter/X to stoke hate, amplify disinformation and of prioritising profit over social responsibility, particularly over the riots in the UK.

Although emotions have been running high these past couple of weeks, don’t rush to delete your company’s Twitter account – take some time to reflect on whether it still helps to meet your strategic objectives and audience needs – and have a comms plan if you are going to announce you are going to deactivate it.

Twitter is not as popular as it was – but it is still ‘the go-to place for news on social media’

A lot has changed since companies set up their Twitter accounts, a decade or more ago.

From once being the place for firms to post their news and announcements on social media, and offer a new form of customer service, it’s been overtaken by Instagram and rivalled by TikTok in terms of popularity among UK adults, according to the latest Ofcom Online Nation report.

And according to the recent Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2024, it is further behind in terms of the top social, messaging and video networks in the UK:

And the same piece of research claims that globally, TikTok has now overtaken X/Twitter as a source of news:

Since Musk took over Twitter, he has declared “f–k business” over firms deciding not to buy ads on the platform, and created confusion and trust issues with the ability for anyone to buy a blue tick – once a clear symbol of authority and veracity.

But he has also kept with the pre-takeover implementation of Community Notes to challenge incorrect posts and tried to boost X’s finances with paid subscriptions offering popular features to users, like the ability to edit a tweet within an hour of posting it and tempting content creators with shares of ad revenue.

Despite these turbulant 18 months, a study from the Pew Research Center in the US appears to show that X is still more of a destination for news than other social platforms – by that, I mean most Twitter users go there specifically for news, although others also see news passively in their Instagram, TikTok, YouTube and Facebook feeds.

And judging by the US presidential race, the UK General Election, the Euros and Olympics, if you want the latest breaking news, analysis (and hot takes), the best memes and an ability to immediately react to live events, nowhere can quite rival Twitter.

Interestingly, the head of social media for BBC Radio and Sounds, Jem Stone, claims the most popular tweets over the attempted assassination of Donald Trump seemed to be from the mainstream media:

And today, the Premier League announced it had launched an account for refereeing and VAR updates – but only on X, not on any other platform.

However, for many of the public, they feel worn out by the sheer amount and depressing nature of the news, and prefer not to see it in their social feeds – and the data from the Reuters Institute report seems to back this up. And the sometime hostile nature of some users has made it an unwelcoming place.

Many companies’ have shifted their initial very public customer service accounts and conversations to DMs, their websites (for live chat or email), or even to WhatsApp business accounts.

Even for news organisations, including Sky News, Twitter had not been a big driver of referral traffic before the changes to links in posts:

What to do if you think your company should leave Twitter/X

1. Review how Twitter fits in with your comms strategy and business objectives

It’s good to have a regular social media review anyway, and this should always be part of your process when setting your next communications strategy.

Analyse the stats of your Twitter activity from the past year or so against previous reports. A significant decline in engagement could indicate that your target audience may not be on there anymore, or the shift to an algorithmic-focus has made it harder for people to see your posts – or that more effort is needed to improve their impact.

And check if your key stakeholders and individuals that you’re trying to influence are still actively on there. Check the replies tab to see if they are more of a replier/lurker than a poster (this used to be easier to check with the likes tab, before it was removed from public view.)

Do also compare it to your engagement performances on your other platforms. Don’t overfocus on followers – with the shift in prioritisation of algorithms over followers by most platforms, they aren’t as important as it once was.

Away from the numbers, reflect upon whether X is a channel that still aligns with your values as a company.

You may have seen the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust post last week that it was deleting its account as “X is no longer consistent with our Trust values” – which include “equality, for all” and “trust, honesty and respect, for each other”.

But it was also the case that it appeared that this account was getting little interaction and engagement for its tweets – and wasn’t necessarily the best communication channel to reach their generally older audience.

However, the head of NHS England, Amanda Pritchard, continues to be active on Twitter, posting messages for staff, stakeholders, and the media.

Assess the pros and cons of leaving and consider the other ways for your customers to get in touch, through social, your website and offline.

If your social team or colleagues with high profile Twitter presences have been affected by what they’ve experienced on there, think about ways to protect their mental health – either for others to temporarily take over or rotate their responsibilities, or suggesting breaks from posting on there.

2. Consult and inform internally and with key stakeholders

Talk and get approval from your wider comms team, senior leaders and executives before deciding to delete your Twitter account.

It is also worth considering whether to inform key external stakeholders of your decision before you communicate it publicly.

3. Communicate your decision clearly and link to other social accounts

If you do decide to leave Twitter, post and pin a tweet to users that includes an explanation (you don’t have to go into the details), and ideally link to your other social media accounts where they can follow you.

This is what BBC Radio 6 Music and Radio 2 did when they both left Twitter and Facebook earlier this year:

4. Leaving your Twitter account dormant may be better than deleting it

It can be confusing for followers who try to find your account on Twitter, only to find it has disappeared with no apparent notice. And by deleting your account, you open up the potential for the handle to be taken by people who may want to cause confusion, spread misinformation or cause harm.

Additionally, some very popular tweets can still provide invaluable advice, information or assistance to users.

Leaving your account dormant, with a pinned tweet explaining what has happened and links to other communication channels, is an alternative to deleting it.

If you do want to go ahead with deactivating your company’s account, make sure to download a copy of all your tweets, content and data – they are a really valuable resource of insight into what worked well for future social campaigns and you may want to reuse that image or video.

You do have 30 days to change your mind if you do want to restore a deactivated account, so note the date in your shared calendars, just in case.

5. Continue to monitor Twitter

Don’t just walk away, delete the app and never check Twitter again – keep a close eye on mentions of your company and your deactivated handle to monitor the response to your decision, but also whether a customer or stakeholder posts something that requires your attention.

There is no perfect social media platform

I’ve seen a lot of posts on Twitter and elsewhere about moving to Threads, Instagram, or Bluesky. That may be understandable, for personal reasons.

But all platforms have their faults and downsides – there is no one ideal social media platform! It all depends upon where your audiences are and their interests – your target groups may be more spread across different spaces than before. And sadly, there is some nastiness and trolling on all of them.

For authorities, X is still is important – we’ve seen how it has been used effectively to disseminate vital public information. But it’s also been a good wake-up call for them to think more about how to better use other social channels to engage sometimes hard to reach audiences, rather than rely on a tweet.

And for everyone, it’s been a timely reminder to build more direct relationships with their audiences, than relying on third-party apps and sites.

Finally, a reminder that there can still be nice things on Twitter:

If you need an expert hand in helping you to review your social media approach, or modernising your wider communications strategy, get in touch.

Google cracks down on affiliate marketing and voucher code pages

7 May 2024

Google’s recent core algorithmic changes have had a jaw-dropping impact on the rankings of some famous sites that use affiliate marketing – and now they’re manually going after news publishers’ voucher code pages too.

Google’s algorithm changes on site’s affiliate marketing pages

This list, compiled by SEO guru Lily Ray, is shocking. Some of the names at the top you may not recognise in the UK, but there are familiar names: Hello magazine has lost 79% of its search traffic, NME.com is down 73%, GQ is 70%.

Lily does point out this data from Sistrix only includes the top organic links – not Top Stories, News or Discover.

And according to Press Gazette analysis, some news brands have benefitted from the changes, especially the i.

But search referral traffic could be soon further impacted by SGE – Search Generative Experience – which is generative AI-driven search results displayed on the page. But the results so far have been hit and miss – and even dangerous.

Why is Google targeting the search ranking of affiliate marketing and voucher code pages?

Affiliate marketing is where there are links, often in product reviews, where the publisher gets a fee if you go on to purchase it. Some sites may highly rate a product because they are incentivised to do so.

And Google did warn that it was cracking down on ‘site reputation abuse’ or ‘spam’, such as where news publishers host low-quality, unchecked content from third parties to benefit from their ranking power – like voucher codes and affiliate reviews. This is not the same as syndicated news content, forums or native advertising with close involvement with host sites.

Google has indicated this downranking is being done manually at the moment – more sites will be impacted by the algorithmic changes.

Is this a bad thing? Well, Google see it as improving the experience for users – which is much needed. And I’m sure like me, you hate being tricked into trying to use an old voucher code or buying a product that appears to have a good review, only for it to be useless.

It’s a sign of how hard things are now for publishers, with sharp declines in social traffic and display ad revenue. It seems diversification of income streams and focusing on high quality, relevant content continues to be the best advice.

Read: How news publishers can compete with the threat of AI

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?

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.

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…

This Reuters digital news report can help to change your social media approach

14 June 2023

Today’s Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism digital news report provides some much needed-momentum to some media organisations, businesses and brands alike to rethink how they use digital and social media.

The report talks about how we face “a continual transformation of digital”. But far from being something that should terrify us, it’s a really exciting time to change things, become more insight-driven, experiment and innovate – and reap the benefits.

The old way of just posting the same series of article links on Twitter and Facebook, or the same video with the same post copy, isn’t as effective as it once was.

I’ve pulled out some of the most relevant findings and how they can be useful to your business.

Where do people get their news or information from?

The report notes that social is growing as the main way people get their news, and it claims there has been a steady decline in people accessing websites and apps directly.

Despite some of the headlines, Facebook is still the most important platform to share news – although this will likely decline as Meta shifts away from prioritising and investing in it. One of the country’s biggest digital publishers, LadBible, still enjoy huge success on there, using performance data to inform them what posts to put on there.

Twitter can still work for big events, newsworthy moments and particularly to appeal to those working or interested in the media, politics and finance. But I’m sure a lot of you have seen how news is not driving engagement as much, generally.

It’s interesting to see how ITV News has cut back on posting and being more focused on what they share, redirecting efforts to other platforms (more of which later.)

The report also shows increases in YouTube and WhatsApp, both of which generally have untapped potential for many organisations.

Getting your news into the WhatsApp ecosystem is key – that’s where people mostly talk, share their thoughts and forward on things to group chats of like-minded individuals, rather than be criticised or put down on public forums.

Think about how you use WhatsApp – personally, I use it the most of any channel to share and read stories that I exchange with family, mates and colleagues. I think there’s real opportunity there, especially with the community group function, for organisations.

YouTube is still generally underutilised, particularly by brands, who still see it as a dumping ground for TV ads and don’t maintain and grow it. Though it has proven fruitful, there is so much more opportunity than just putting clips of your output on there – smaller, digitally-savvy operations have been making some great and popular bespoke shows and content – some slick, others just two experts chatting about topics and answering viewers’ questions. The chance to monetise is probably the best of the platforms, too.

I’ve seen a lot of chatter today about the stats showing an increase in TikTok usage for news – but Instagram is still twice as big a source, including among 18-24 year olds. The visual element is crucial, but put effort into the post copy too – tell the story there. How many times have you really bothered to go to the link in the bio unless you’re really motivated?

Surprisingly, there was no mention of LinkedIn, which has increasingly become influential and a powerful tool to promote your work, engage and connect with people.

What I also felt was missing from the report was the importance of your own platforms (a view Thomas Baekdal is a big advocate of.) Social publishers can change your business model overnight and seriously affect your distribution. We’ve seen how BBC News under Naja Nielsen and ITV News under Stephen Hull and Matt Williams are investing in iPlayer and Sounds and ITVX, and it has paid off. And Global are providing news content from LBC in their app, which houses The News Agents. Live tweeting has been replaced by liveblogs on news sites – something ITV News was doing a decade ago, under Julian March and before that, Andrew Sparrow at the Guardian.

Also, and this seems to have been overlooked, all audiences – including 18-24 year olds – prefer to read text-based versions of news than listen or watch something. Future online news habits will evolve, with more audio and visual formats, but investing in your website is still a sensible move.

Who do people get their news and information from?

Mainstream outlets and journalists still are ahead on Twitter and Facebook, but that’s not so clear cut on other platforms where smaller and more niche media, and especially more personalities and ordinary people, are influential.So, it’s not just thinking about what your reporter or chief executive posts, but how you encourage people with an engaged following on a niche subject you’re talking about to share/post about what you are doing.

Unless it’s genuinely useful and informative to that audience, will trigger an emotional reaction, or is visually attractive enough for them to stop scrolling, it’ll be hard to get your followers to read the post, tap on the link – and you’ll be lucky to get them to share or like it.

Rather than pump out posts, think about why someone would want to share it: as Jeff Jarvis acutely observed a decade ago, primarily we share things as it reflects how we want to be seen by others, or a reflection of our beliefs.

Think before you post: what do I want someone to feel about this post? How can I encourage them to read/watch or share/like it?

Think about the messenger too – it’s often better to show the beneficiary or human side to the story, than a dry corporate voice. ‘Ordinary people’ as the Reuters Institute call them, can deliver your messages with greater success.

For ITV News, taking a ‘people like me’ approach to The Rundown series on Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok has really paid off, with a regular set of younger multiskilled producer/presenters selecting, presenting and editing the stories.

I’ve been doing a lot of experimentation with communities on Twitter and Facebook, setting up accounts on niche interests and cultivating and engaging a following on subjects from ‘on this day’ memories of WWF wrestling to non-alcoholic beer. If you share something that appeals to that audience, and appear genuine and credible in that sphere, it can fly. Think about how you can do that, or how you can tap into that community as a welcome addition, not an awkward outsider just pushing your links.

It’s been pleasing to see the evolution of how these groups are treated. Once dismissed as “echo chambers”, now they’re talked about more as “communities”, with a range of views on like-minded subjects.

Who chooses what news and information you see?

I was a bit surprised in the presentation of the report’s findings that the authors jokingly said: “Don’t worry, we won’t talk about AI!” Thanks to Dataminr’s Kirsten Dewar for raising it in the Q&A. Yes, there’s been a lot of attention on it recently, not helped by some alarmist or misleading stories, but it has the potential to be a gamechanger in terms of production and promotion.

TikTok has enjoyed huge popularity with its AI-backed For You Page, but many don’t regard it as machine-based as it is so accurate so quickly with identifying your interests. It’s notable that of the options given to people in the survey, they preferred the idea of having stories automatically selected based on what they’ve previously consumed, rather than by an editor, as they have been for decades in broadcasting, print and on websites.

Experimenting with AI, with human oversight, is not a new phenomenon. I read many years ago how PA news agency were experimenting with machines writing fact-based articles, including election results. With limited resources, focusing on the content that really serves your audience with machine-based pieces for the more low-level news could be the way forward.

But please, always check it with a human editor…

Here’s a fun challenge for Londoners… see how many bizarre errors you can find in MyLondon’s guide to London Bridge station. Written by an AI? https://t.co/44sjoYHQpR

— M@ (@mattfromlondon) June 13, 2023

In his excellent newsletter, James Ball talked about how at BuzzFeed he wrote four different headlines and after 15 minutes’ performance, the computer selected the one that was doing the best.

And LadBible revealed their ruthlessness when it comes to poor-performing content – if a post is not doing well within the first hour, it can be reworked – or removed completely.

I also wonder what the difference is between AI overseen by a person and data-based decision-making? I’ve had many experiences where senior figures want to go with their instinct of how to present or promote a story – but looking at what audiences actually have engaged with previously on the topic should play an equally strong role in informing what stories to cover.

The Telegraph, for example, has done a very good job in building their subscription business, serving stories that appeal to their audiences through their STARS audience metrics, which provide a far more sophisticated way of measuring success than the ‘most read’ stats. Dan Silver has talked about this in great depth.

Who recommends news to you goes back to my earlier point on influencers – not necessarily celebrities, but those with engaged audiences on specific topics. Those less trusting of the media are more likely to engage with stories shared by individuals they respect.

For example, at the Department for Education, we had great success with getting high-profile individuals to share our content, despite their regular criticism of the government, because it was designed to resonate with them on an issue they cared about.

This is great. Football is great. Jemima is great. https://t.co/DjIYpAubIV

— Gary Lineker (@GaryLineker) February 9, 2022

Are you turning people off your stories?

Who hasn’t got a news alert that startles you – only to find out it’s of no interest to you at all?

A one-sized approach to the news and audiences is in the past – appoint reinforced by the report’s findings. At least the BBC, to their credit, are testing the ability to personalise text alerts.

This quote from the report’s lead author Nic Newman stood out to me:

“It is clear that many websites and apps are optimised for those that are super-engaged with every twist and turn of today’s news (and politics) agenda. But these approaches also seem to be turning large sections of the public away – with potential long-term implications for civic and democratic engagement.”

It’s no surprise that national politics is one of the biggest news turn-offs for the less news-obsessed. Focusing on the beneficiaries of government policies, or those disadvantaged by them – real people – has been a far more effective way to tell these stories where needed.

And it’s not surprising that interest in news has sharply declined in recent years – I sometimes feel bombarded by content, posts that are not relevant to me. This goes back to my earlier points on insight-based decisions on what to cover and what to post.

Thankfully we’ve seen a decline in clickbait and more sensationalised social posts, reinforced by changes to Google’s search rankings system, and there’s been a flourish of new “varied ways of connecting with audiences”, as Kamal Ahmed put it: personality-led posts and content, explainers, data journalism, fact-checking.

This is an approach that companies can utilise too. There’s no one magic solution – it’s having a range of storytelling techniques and using your previous experience of these formats to judge which is the best one to use in that instance.

Talking of which, I really enjoyed BBC News’ TikTok explainers of key political and economic topics, like this chat with Faisal Islam, made by Jan Bruck

@bbcnews

No gobbledygook allowed. #dragraceuk #bagachipz #rupaulsdragrace #inflation #bbcnews

♬ original sound – BBC News

A quick word on podcasts – a hugely popular format, but one that still has a long way to go in news, with only 8% listening monthly. Looking at the top 10 suggests more creative ways to talk about the news (and please, less of a focus on Westminster!) Certainly making video versions and promoting clips on social can help drive traffic.

That’s all well and good, but how do you make money?

This has been the big dilemma for news organisations. I’m still surprised to hear some news chiefs talk about social media being a source of income – I think gone are the days of large financial support from platforms to do news on there. And apart from YouTube, monetisation is poor.

Publishers talk about a mixture of income revenues – for example, LadBible and The News Movement are tempting brands and businesses with their knowledge of audience insight, data and social storytelling.

That best data comes from owning your own platforms. As Naja pointed out, data from social channels is “a marketing ploy” – it’s not the same as your own stats.

I was editor on The Sun’s website during a difficult time as we were working out how best to work with a paywall. I was an advocate then – even if I didn’t have all the answers – and seeing how other news providers have successfully done so, I still believe it’s the only way forward now.

It will be a difficult conversation for audiences – the UK was the lowest of 20 major countries for paying for news – but declining ad revenue isn’t going to save your business. Portraying these reader revenue models as having greater benefits beyond just news could be one solution. The Telegraph has established an award-winning games and puzzles section, for example, along with high quality, distinctive journalism.

More and more of us supporting individuals and smaller teams on Patreon because we enjoy their podcasts, and to a lesser extent Substacks. What can we learn from those successes for more established outlets?

If you want to hear the news slightly differently…

Hannah Vaughan Jones and I have been experimenting with putting some of these ideas into action with a show called Sorry You Went Viral: all about the stories that people are sharing and enjoying on social media – and the human side of what it’s like to go viral.

Check the show out on YouTube and podcasting platforms – or search for the show name on your social platforms.

I’d love to know with you about what you’re finding is working successfully for you or your organisation, or if you want to chat about how you can put some of these changes in place.