Posts Tagged ‘media’

Some tips on using Pinterest

January 16, 2012

Pinterest is the latest darling of the social media world, with its pleasing focus on saving, organizing and sharing images. And a number of Canadian magazines have joined in, including House & Home, Canadian Living, Style at Home and Weddingbells.

Min Online has a new story on Pinterest, quoting Mashable as saying that the top (American) media brands on Pinterest include Martha Stewart, Better Homes & Gardens and Real Simple. Why?

Pinterest tells Mashable that good behavior on the site means posting items from many sources, not just one’s own. “Repinning” someone else’s image in your feed is a sort of visual retweet that is regarded well. And creating multiple themed boards on one’s page to categorize and segment different topics is considered good Pinterest form.

Do you use Pinterest? What do you like or dislike about the platform?

Canadian magazines and newspapers on Tumblr

November 10, 2011

As part of my experiments with Tumblr, I’ve been watching what media brands are doing in the space. Many American magazines are doing well on Tumblr – GQ, the New Yorker, Vogue and Glamour are just a few – but I haven’t seen a lot of Canadian brands experimenting in the space. (Related: Read more about Tumblr here.) Here’s a list of what I’ve come up with, and it’s pretty short so far. If you know of any more, please let me know and I’ll add them.

Magazines:

En Route
Flare
Maisonneuve
This
Worn

Newspapers:

The Globe and Mail
The National Post
National Post Sports
The Vancouver Sun

Should you be using Instagram?

June 30, 2011

Instagram is a social tool that has had steady rather than meteoric growth, probably because it’s only available for (and best suited for) iPhone. Its beauty is in its simplicity: It’s about sharing photos with your followers, who can then like or discuss them. Like Twitter with images instead of words. What makes Instagram special is the built-in effects (along the lines of Hipstamatic) and the forced square format that give images an old-fashioned feel, and make them look better than you’d expect from an iPhone camera (which is actually pretty good these days).

I really like Instagram for its culture, which, as with all social-media tools (and all societies in general), is still evolving. The bulk of the people I follow on Instagram share images because they’re interesting, or cool, or funny, or different, not as self-promotion like you’d see on Facebook. (At least, not as much.) The focus, I would say, is more on the photos than the subjects. That’s the niche they’ve found and they’re doing it well.

Which is why I had mixed feelings reading this story from 10,000 Words on four ways news media can use Instagram. They are:

1. Give Users A Behind-The-Scenes View

2. Display The Work Of Photographers

3. Share Breaking News

4. Crowdsource

I like all of these ideas, in the right context. But I think all of them need the caveat that it’s really all about the photography. If you have fantastic photos to share, Instagram could be the right social tool for your brand. If you’re more interested in sending out news, information and links, I don’t know that it’s the right fit.

Do you use Instagram? What do you think about its use for media?

(Pictured: Part of a wall of magazines at the Vancouver Anthropologie.)

5 questions: Athena Tsavliris of Vitamin Daily

November 1, 2010

One of the lesser-known winning sites at the COPAs on October 20 was Vitamin Daily, which took home awards for Best Online-Only Website and Best Website Design. I asked Vitamin Daily’s Toronto editor, Athena Tsavliris, to tell me more about the site and its readers.

Tell me about your site and its design

I like to think of Vitamin Daily as your fabulous, in-the-know girlfriend – just as comfortable slurping noodles in Chinatown as she is perusing vintage tiaras at a private auction. She’ ll share the details of her address book – the city’s best threader, a couture-trained seamstress, the in-a-pinch dog sitter – and beeline you to the best burgers, bookshops and designer discounts in town. You sign up (it’s free) and get a daily email that recommends things to do in your city. We have offices in Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal (French and English editions) and Calgary. A typical week could include a rising indie label, a family-run pierogi shop, deco-inspired chandeliers, a local letterpress and a cobbler to stretch your Louboutins. The Vitamin Daily writers share a style, but each edition reflects the tastes, personality and lifestyle of its editor. What sets us aside from other similar sites is that our suggestions are heartfelt. We don’t flip press releases or wax lyrical about mascara we’ve never tried. If we’ve eaten/watched/read/heard/done something and loved it, we’ll share it.

The design is clean and simple and feminine. It is easy to navigate (our readers are time pressed and don’t want to futz about searching for things) and clutter-free. We feature our ‘ambassadors’ at the top of our home page. These women were photographed as part of a contest we held over a year ago. They are dancers, teachers, designers, students, doctors – the quintessential Vitamin Daily reader.

What’s your average traffic, and what part of your site is the most popular?

We send out 25,000 newsletters per day. Our most popular page is the Editors’ Diary, where we post pics and coverage from parties, events, festivals and our travels in Canada and abroad. We have some talented bloggers on board who fill these pages with great images and witty reportage. Katherine Holland posted a great blog from this year’s Canadian Online Publishing Awards, where we took home two awards. Our most popular archive is Fashion and Shopping and our Who We Are page gets a lot of hits, which I’m delighted about. We write in the ‘royal we’ so it’s good to know that our readers are interested in the people behind the words.

What feature of your site are you proudest of and why?

I am proudest of the quality of our writing. I can’t write about politics, just as Salutin can’t write about stilettos. We all have our areas of expertise, and here at Vitamin Daily, we work hard to make frivolity fun, intelligent and engaging. You’d be amazed how long it can take to write 80 pithy words on retro bikinis.

What websites and social media tools can’t you live without?

India Knight is one my favourite journalists and her Posterous blog is funny, intelligent and filled with drool-worthy things like Liberty print pillows and rainbow sponge cake. We featured Pia Jane Bijkerk’s book Paris: Made By Hand a couple of years ago, and I’ve been hooked on her beautiful blog ever since. I also really like checking in with local stylist Arren Williams and I can’t resist trolling through the pages of vintage collectibles at Atelier Mayer.

I find Twitter invaluable in terms of generating ideas, connecting with story leads and generally keeping in tune with Toronto. I only follow local feeds because I want to stay focused. This is a city of communities, and Twitter helps us connect. I love that I know what Corey Mintz had for lunch today!

You suddenly have an unlimited budget. What’s the first thing you spend it on?

Birkins! One for each member of our team in her colour and skin of choice. I jest. The Toronto team has grown since the early days of me working away alone in my kitchen. But with bags of cash we would hire more people in the city to further round out our team and drive subscriptions.

An outsider’s look at Time’s tablet prototype

December 3, 2009

You may have seen the news that Time Inc. has launched a video of a potential digital edition for Sports Illustrated, for the tablet (laptop/iPhone hybrid) Apple is rumoured to be developing.

I, of course, am skeptical. When I’m online, I have no attention span and don’t want to browse through just one site/product. When I’m not online, I like to pick up paper magazines. That being said, it’s nice to see someone doing something innovative and exploring new formats.

I also have a few questions – feel free to pipe in with the answers:

• Given that the financial problems in the industry are due to declining ad revenue, and given that it’s unlikely that paid digital versions will increase a magazine’s subscriber base, how will developing a paid model for digital versions help the bottom line? Will the presumed reduction in printing and distribution costs really make that much of a difference?

• The same question, put a different way: this kind of product, especially for a weekly magazine, will involve a lot more complex work than ink on paper, and even than on a website – therefore more staff. How will that affect budgets?

• When you cut back on the words and fill in the blanks with videos of bikini-clad models, at what point is your product no longer a magazine?

But what I really find interesting here is that I pulled this from an Apple rumours site, macrumors.com, whose audience is quite different from the media types we’re all used to hearing from (although admittedly there’s probably a bit of overlap). So I recommend reading the comments, just to get a sense of what non-magazine people (but admittedly gadget geeks) think about the idea. Some highlights:

“It’s a decent mockup, but I don’t quite get the point of these digitized magazines. How are they any different from a well-designed website like Espn.com or NYT.com? Why would I pay another $30 a year for something I get free everyday RIGHT NOW?”

“The problem is people are use to getting stuff for free online already.. Magazines are gonna have to really up it to stay afloat. Interactive stuff with games could be the next thing. Live chat with friends, football pools. etc”

“Reading a magazine is hugely different from reading a website. Magazines generally have artistic full-color layouts, with incredibly designed content mixed in with gorgeous high-resolution photos. A website is a bit more of a cheap consumable that doesn’t have that sort of effort put into it. I’ve known for a long time that I would much prefer to read Wired on a device like this than I do trying to browse the same content on the Wired website.”

“This all looks very nice, but wait until they futz it all up with distracting pop-ads that you can’t skip through. We’ll be running back to paper…”

“These devices are not paper and it is critical that the reader has the ability to alter the layout to enlarge the text and reduce the size of the photos (or eliminate them). This will be hard for the magazines’ art directors to accept. The video (from the YouTube link) shows how the people responsible for creating it don’t yet have a clue about how to do this successfully.”

“Theoretically, the issues could be completely free of charge. If you look at most magazine subscriptions – e.g., Wired, at $10 per year(!) – that cost wouldn’t even handle the costs to print the issues, let alone deliver them to your home. Magazines make all their money on advertisements in the issue. If you remove the printing and delivery costs completely, we could see a library of every major magazine for free on iTunes. Personally I’d love this device in more ways than one. I’ve always much preferred reading magazines than having to see web banners or pop-up ads on a website. A magazine has lovely full page ads and I totally don’t mind them. In fact, I rather quite enjoy ads in magazines. If they keep the same ad system as in magazines (which I think they will), reading a magazine on a tablet will be much more enjoyable than websites.”

6 things every journalist should know about SEO

November 23, 2009

Today we’ve got a guest post from Rob Maurin of Toronto SEO Workshop. Enjoy!

Search engine optimization (SEO) sounds about as sexy as pocket protectors and Pentium chips. That’s unfortunate, because good SEO can be a game changer, for independent bloggers as well as newsroom editors, freelance writers and anyone who handles the words that end up on the screen.

SEO is the craft of playing Google’s game – writing your web copy in such a way that Google will like your story better, and place it higher on a search result page, than that of your competition.

Old-school editors and writers can get a little defensive about SEO. They feel it infringes on their own wordsmithery, or it strikes them as marketing or tech (i.e., “not my job”). But while they’re arguing, someone else’s web page is getting pageviews (and, yes, ad impressions), and that person is securing a career in the new media landscape.

The best news in all of this is that the fundamentals of SEO – and particularly the elements that lie within the control of an online editor or writer – can be easily taught, and using them doesn’t mean a compromise of your editing or writing. Here are 6 practical SEO lessons for writers and editors.

1. Keywords over cleverness
Nine times out of 10, writers and editors would rather be clever and creative than clear. Unfortunately, Google (though a brilliant piece of machinery) isn’t all that good at wordplay. Even common headlines that work well on magazine covers, like “10 ways to blast belly fat,” are lousy SEO headlines, because nobody goes to Google on the first day of their weight-loss resolution and punches the words “blast belly fat” into the search bar. Quite obviously, most people use keywords (i.e., search terms) like “weight loss tips,” “diet plans” or “lose weight.”

Your best ally in figuring out what terms to use in your writing is the Google Adwords Keyword Tool. For a screencast demo on how to use the Keyword tool, check out TorontoSEOworkshop.com, or visit our YouTube channel at youtube.com/TorontoSEOworkshop.

The Keyword Tool was built to help advertisers create better ads, but it also helps editors and writers discover what words real people around the world use when searching for certain kinds of stories online.

A quick look on the keyword tool shows that your pool of potential monthly readers is 5 million if you use the words “lose weight.” You can also see that it you choose “weight loss” instead, your pool grows to 16 million, and “diet” puts you in the running for 37 million searches. All else being equal, I’d rather get a slice of the “diet” group than the “lose weight” group, so I can now write my headlines and web copy accordingly.

You can use these heavy-hitting keywords in conjunction with your clever titles too. Just change “10 ways to blast belly fat” to “Diet Tips: 10 ways to blast belly fat” or something like that.

2. Know where to use keywords
It’s self-evident, but the best places to use keywords are in all the traditional display copy spots: headlines, subheads, captions – any place where you would normally have your print typeface differ from your body copy typeface. In our weight-loss example, weave the word “diet” into as many as those spots as you can, without it becoming obnoxious to your human reader. You’ll be giving Google clear signals that your story is a good one to serve when those 37 million people a month search for something with the word “diet.”

3. Links matter
Google cares a lot about the number of links around the web that point back to your website. (In SEO terms, those are called “inbound links.”) All else being equal, Google will give preference to a site with lots of inbound links over one with fewer links, with the pretty convincing rationale that lots of links means lots of people are recommending the story or the site. This is as good a reason as any to get on social media like Facebook and Twitter: when you spread your story, you’re doing more than encouraging readers to click today. You’re planting the seeds for inbound links that will boost your Google rankings.

4. Good stories get links
The same things that made stories great a decade or two ago are the  things that make people want to link to you now. Be interesting. Be scandalous. Be creative or funny. Be an expert, a news-breaker, an insider, a pest… All the same traits that have defined great writers and editors will make for the best stories, and the best stories get more links and better Google ranking. In this way, Google is very fair.

5. Good SEO is good for people
In a print world, art directors and editors work hard on packages that hang together as a whole, so even a story with an unclear headline will make sense to the reader who can pick up on visual clues like strategically positioned images. But when that story goes up online, the cleverness usually becomes a liability. Stripped of context, it’s just not as clear as it could be.  On top of that, the rumours are true: readers online don’t browse around the same way they do in print. It’s a results-oriented medium, and directness is a virtue.

These points go hand in hand with SEO: by making your display copy clear and direct, you overcome problems with clarity, you give the readers direct information to pull them into the story, and you play nice with Google. Win-win-win.

6. Throw SEO away in favour of the human user
This much has always been true in media and it continues to be true now: you can’t sell out your readers. Don’t cheat them for an advertising buck, and don’t cheat them for an extra bit of SEO traffic. For success in the long run, you need to make sure your user experience is a good one. Squeeze as much good SEO in as you can, but if SEO is truly at irreconcilable odds with the user experience, ditch the SEO.

Rob Maurin spent 15 years in magazine editorial before making the switch to online content and strategy. He’s currently running the Toronto SEO Workshop, and will be offering an “SEO for Writers and Editors” training session in December and January. Contact him at info@TorontoSEOworkshop.com.

How to tweet, part infinity

November 5, 2009

I know I talk about Twitter a lot, but I wanted to share a couple of cool Canadian media Twitterers.

First up – Lisa Tant of Flare. If you’re on Twitter, follow her and learn from her. Why? First of all, her posts are genuine – you really get a sense of the woman behind the magazine. And second, they’re an inside look at the most glamorous the Canadian magazine industry gets – and admit it, we all covet that at least a little bit. And third, it’s fun. Some samples, for instance:

January cover approved today – one of smoothest meetings ever. Normally we bicker over words and sometimes fight over image – not this one!

I think I’m one of the few who hates GLEE. Tried to watch an episode but erased it after 15 minutes – found it painful and mind-numbing.

Picked up my dress for Thursday night’s gala. Thank you Joeffer – simple, stunning, gorgeous & Canadian of course.

Keep in mind that this isn’t the official Flare account, but I love how it adds personality to the magazine.

Another quick hit I wanted to share is the background page for CBC Radio 3. They have multiple people tweeting so created a wallpaper that would show who they were – with initials for identification. Simple but effective.

Picture 1

How to make money online

July 12, 2009

The debate is still on (and for good reason) about how the media can make money with their online properties. Readership is certainly there, but display advertising isn’t bringing in enough revenue and most readers are unwilling to pay to read articles online. The New York Times is said to be about to charge a monthly fee of $5 for access, but whether the strategy will work is questionable. (They might suck me in, though – I’ve become extremely addicted to their excellent health section.)

The Guardian recently spoke with Chris Anderson of Wired on his thoughts on monetizing media websites. His ideal model, they write, is that we shouldn’t charge for everything, but for those things that people are really willing to pay for: “It’s not about whether to charge but choosing carefully which specialised content people will pay for and developing additional premium services.” Golf Digest, for example, is considering starting a branded club that will charge for membership in exchange for services, discounts or other premiums.

The million-dollar question, of course, is what will people pay for? Figure that out, price the model well, and you may just bring in profit from your brand in excess of advertising, using the “free” content on the website as a lure.

The golden rule of publishing online

February 10, 2009

It’s a question I’m sure all of us in the media industry have asked ourselves at some point: why are we doing this?

Despite common opinion, I don’t believe that making money should be the primary goal when publishing; really, you’d have better luck (and dividends) packaging food or (perhaps until recently) giving out mortgages. For most of us on the editorial side, I’d say, it’s the connection with readers that gets us up in the morning. Whether it’s providing them with entertainment, food for thought or essential information, creating quality editorial is the primary goal.

Online, more often than in print, this goal sometimes gets pushed aside for other goals, such as building traffic and selling ads. “Increase pages per visitor!” is something we often hear. “Ad sales has oversold – we need to boost impressions!”

I’m certainly not saying we shouldn’t be trying to make some money – I’m as fond of my paycheque as the next person – but I always try to keep one simple rule in mind when working on my site, above and beyond the two goals of creating good editorial and increasing traffic. That rule? Don’t annoy your readers. Keep it in mind while you work on your site (cross-stitch it on a pillow if you have to), just don’t forget it, whether you’re building slideshows for pageviews or selling and integrating vokens.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.