English journalism blogger Adam Westbrook kindly gave me a sneak peak of his latest e-book that was released today and I was extremely impressed by both the creativity and depth he delivers about alternative business models for those within the journalism sector.
Titled “Next Generation Journalist,” Adam details 10 viable revenue streams along with complementary interviews, case studies, and resources for further reading. If you are tired of the doom and gloom talk and ready to take action, I would highly recommend reading Adam’s book for an inspirational jump start.
This book is definitely targeted towards both the journalistic intrapreneurs and entrepreneurs. He even warns his readers that this e-book is not for the cynical, “hardened journalists.”
“A lot of the ideas you’ll read in the coming pages are new; some have never been tried before. Try to read with an open mind, and imagine the possibilities of each idea before dismissing it. As unnatural as it may be for the hardened journalist, in this new age of ideas we need imagination not cynicism.”
As a budding entrepreneur myself, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thought-provoking and highly optimistic ideas. In 68 pages, he moves seamlessly from one idea to the next, describing how you can make each work for your personally and what small steps can be taken immediately.
Adam describes the ‘next generation journalist’ as the “multimedia storyteller who isn’t threatened by the decline in value of news, or the lack of jobs, or the slashing of budgets brought about by the digital revolution. Instead they seek out the opportunities: they choose to be the chess player, not the chess piece.”
He is even providing significant sneak peaks of each idea over at his blog and on Journalism.co.uk:
He also adds several bonus chapters, including insights on how to find clients to how to produce and sell a product. While the section on building apps wasn’t as technical as I had wanted it to be, each section provided a broad, conceptual overview of the concepts from which readers can then dig further using his recommended reading and “things you can do now” lists.
In my opinion, it is extremely worth the money, and even more so considering you can get your hands on a copy for less than $10 if you buy it before May 31st.
Phase 1: May 20th – May 31st: the book will be on an early bird discount (£6.50 / $9.50)
Phase 2: After June 1st: the book will be at full price (£9.99 / $14.99)
He is kidding right? I read each bullet point with bated breath—not a single original idea. To be unaware of any of these ideas means that you haven't had access to the internet, or in other words, you've been living under a rock. Without having to read 478 pages, it's clear that he's talking about doing PR work, and learning to accept that. Cynicism is a good thing, and I would encourage those who are cynical to remain so. Resist the temptation to work for your subject, but to work for Truth. If your subject is underwriting you, how can you possibly be critical–YOU CAN'T. This is a truly sad era we are entering. I wonder if Mr. Westerbrook addresses investigative journalism using this model.
http://www.tracynboyer.com Tracy Boyer
Mr. Tewksbury, While I am willing to acknowledge your comment I would encourage you to read the 68 pages, not 478, before making your argument. Here is one example of the many that he discusses regarding investigative journalism:
“… You're a hard nose investigator and you live for digging out secrets from reams of paper and exposing the truth. But newspapers can't afford investigative teams much any more. Are there other potential clients who could use your investigative noggin? Or can you set up your own online business to sell your skills and investigations to the media? Can you make money training others?”
I would also argue that it IS NOT a sad era we are entering, but rather an exciting time for entrepreneurs to build upon alternative methods to truly find innovative solutions. I strongly believe that it IS the cynicism that has largely prevented the print industry from being more agile and willing to try untested business models.
Anyone who is in media, reads Seth Godin and Jeff Jarvis, has read it. His book is a mashed up appropriation of ideas that have been circulating on the internet for years now–it's not new, it's not original. It's interesting, however, that you chose a passage in which he states “newspapers can't afford investigative teams much any more.”This is precisely the problem, yet he doesn't offer a viable solution, nor does he cite examples of businesses who've shown success in this area using any of his proposed methods. How can you report on an entity that is bankrolling you. If you are doing a story on an NGO, for example, and you see a problem with the way it's being run–will you be able to talk about that in your report? Are you FREE to be critical. Not if they are paying for it, you're not.
I wasn't talking about being cynical about the future. I agree with you that we are entering a very exciting era. Change is a great thing. However, I caution you to not be lulled into thinking it's all good. A little bit of cynicism is a good thing. Without being cynical, you don't question, and you except everything at face value. When a politician asks us for their vote and promises he/she is going to take a stand on an issue, do you question whether they will follow through on their word if elected? When a chemical company sets up next to a day care center, wouldn't you want to know if what they are making is safe to the surrounding areas? Journalists have to remain impartial, but can't do so if they start “collaborating” with their subjects to produce stories. There has to be another way, and I don't think Mr. Westerbrook has found it, except that he's been very good with an RSS feed, and keeping up with the various themes that have been bandied about now for a long, long time.
Adam Westbrook
Thanks for your comments, Cranston, but I have to disagree with you on some points.
Firstly, of course the book is influenced by a whole range of ideas and concepts from dozens of books and more than 100 blogs: it wasn't written in a vacuum. The book *is* unique though, because it is the first to put them together in such a way, with a focus on practical, tangible advice to make them happen. I have never seen that before, which is why I wrote it. It is also worth remembering that although some of us spend an inordinate amount of time reading and researching material like this, the average journalist or journalism student is too busy – Next Generation Journalist provides a much needed breakdown and summary. The book also contains more than a dozen interviews and conducted especially for the book.
Secondly, as Tracy says, the issue of investigative reporting is touched upon in the book, with a suggestion to make it a specialized skill in Chapter 6. Of course it doesn't provide the holy grail solution to what is a complicated funding problem, but I think you'll struggle to find that promised in any of the literature. However, what this book does do really well is encourage the journalists of the future to think more creatively about funding models, to be ambitious and creative in their ideas and – if investigative journalism is what they really want to do – work out how to wrap a business around it in their own way. If more of us think that way, I really believe the solutions to journalism's biggest problems will be found.
As journalists we're always going to be cynical, but as Tracy says, too much cynicism and nay-saying before ideas have even had a chance to breathe is only going to stifle the innovation we need to see so much in the industry. If you read the book, I'm sure you'll agree.
Anyone who is in media, reads Seth Godin and Jeff Jarvis, has read it. His book is a mashed up appropriation of ideas that have been circulating on the internet for years now–it's not new, it's not original. It's interesting, however, that you chose a passage in which he states “newspapers can't afford investigative teams much any more.”This is precisely the problem, yet he doesn't offer a viable solution, nor does he cite examples of businesses who've shown success in this area using any of his proposed methods. How can you report on an entity that is bankrolling you. If you are doing a story on an NGO, for example, and you see a problem with the way it's being run–will you be able to talk about that in your report? Are you FREE to be critical. Not if they are paying for it, you're not.
I wasn't talking about being cynical about the future. I agree with you that we are entering a very exciting era. Change is a great thing. However, I caution you to not be lulled into thinking it's all good. A little bit of cynicism is a good thing. Without being cynical, you don't question, and you except everything at face value. When a politician asks us for their vote and promises he/she is going to take a stand on an issue, do you question whether they will follow through on their word if elected? When a chemical company sets up next to a day care center, wouldn't you want to know if what they are making is safe to the surrounding areas? Journalists have to remain impartial, but can't do so if they start “collaborating” with their subjects to produce stories. There has to be another way, and I don't think Mr. Westerbrook has found it, except that he's been very good with an RSS feed, and keeping up with the various themes that have been bandied about now for a long, long time.
Thanks for your comments, Cranston, but I have to disagree with you on some points.
Firstly, of course the book is influenced by a whole range of ideas and concepts from dozens of books and more than 100 blogs: it wasn't written in a vacuum. The book *is* unique though, because it is the first to put them together in such a way, with a focus on practical, tangible advice to make them happen. I have never seen that before, which is why I wrote it. It is also worth remembering that although some of us spend an inordinate amount of time reading and researching material like this, the average journalist or journalism student is too busy – Next Generation Journalist provides a much needed breakdown and summary. The book also contains more than a dozen interviews and conducted especially for the book.
Secondly, as Tracy says, the issue of investigative reporting is touched upon in the book, with a suggestion to make it a specialized skill in Chapter 6. Of course it doesn't provide the holy grail solution to what is a complicated funding problem, but I think you'll struggle to find that promised in any of the literature. However, what this book does do really well is encourage the journalists of the future to think more creatively about funding models, to be ambitious and creative in their ideas and – if investigative journalism is what they really want to do – work out how to wrap a business around it in their own way. If more of us think that way, I really believe the solutions to journalism's biggest problems will be found.
As journalists we're always going to be cynical, but as Tracy says, too much cynicism and nay-saying before ideas have even had a chance to breathe is only going to stifle the innovation we need to see so much in the industry. If you read the book, I'm sure you'll agree.
Pingback: Brian Manzullo
Pingback: Gerardo Albarrán
Pingback: Federico Porras
Pingback: NABJDigital
Pingback: edmadison
Pingback: engagingmedia
Pingback: Ed Madison
Pingback: Joanne Berry
Pingback: Mark Mayhew
Pingback: Tracy Boyer Clark
Pingback: Next Generation Journalist: what you’ve been saying « Adam Westbrook