World newsmedia innovation study shows CEOs have work to do to gain the confidence of their staff - including their executive teams

As we get set to collect data for the sixth edition of the annual World Newsmedia Innovation Study, it seems prudent to reflect again on last year’s findings which showed that change is on the agenda for the vast majority of organisations (82.4 percent) - but that the fire is not burning as hot as it might.

WNIS Study participants receive the full report.

Less than one in four of the survey participants from 49 countries strongly agreed that there is urgency within their organisations that they must do so (23.2 percent).

Responses to the 2013-14 survey also suggested that the senior management teams in media organisations have work to do to convince their colleagues that they are up to the challenge of successfully managing their companies, and many seem to doubt it themselves. 

When ask to indicate to what extent they had confidence in the senior executive team – including top managers (owners, CEOs), along with senior editorial, commercial and IT managers – less than a quarter of respondents strongly agreed that they are able to deliver what is required to ensure their business enjoy future success. Top managers had the full confidence of just 21.7 percent of respondents, followed by editorial, 18.6 percent; IT, 14.3 percent; and commercial, 11.2 percent.  

More than a third of all respondents either disagree or are neutral about the capacity of senior executives. Some may put this down to the nature of the organisations themselves, but  there may well be more to it.

Of course, there’s the view that the arrival of any new boss will be met by a third of the staff who will support them, a third who will doubt them and a third who need to be convinced. But these findings may indicate something more profound. After all, the respondents to this study are themselves decision makers. 

While it’s important for leaders to be self-reflective and questioning, when that tips over into crippling self-doubt it paralyses organisations. And this much is clear: at times like these, the industry does not need to keep drifting down the same river with an executive team too afraid to chart a new course.

Respondents are generally positive that the culture in their organisations encourage innovation, but only 14.2 percent strongly agree with that view. 

The starting point for overcoming doubt and fostering a culture of innovation is much the same. The leadership must have clarity about the purpose of their organisation and be able to articulate a compelling - and convincing - vision of the direction of travel.

News International CEO Mark Darcey spoke at the Times CEO summit in June 2013 shortly after taking over the reigns of what he had previously described as a “refreshed executive team” at News UK in the wake of the closing of the News of World, the Leveson Inquiry and the reorganisation of News Corporation. 

In times of profound change when change is the only constant, everything is up for grabs, Darcey observed. Then he paused. “Well, everything?” he asked quizzically. “Surely there must be some limits, some essential elements that must be preserved or the business has lost track of what it’s about at a fundamental level, perhaps even lost its soul,” he said. 

“Some businesses do seem to be happy to transform themselves utterly, even finding themselves in quite a different sector. But many others ask themselves a simple, but important, question: Deep down what am I in business for? What is the thing that if it were lost in the pursuit of survival in success it would all have become a little bit pointless?”  

Whatever else senior executives need to do to transform their businesses, findings from the last World Newsmedia Innovation Study highlighted that they should not lose track of this: As a matter of urgency, the newsmedia leaders worldwide need to reaffirm their visions of what future success will look like and articulate it in ways that convince not only their staffs, investors and other stakeholders, but also themselves. Or else, as Darcy observed, the pursuit of survival and success may all be a little pointless.

Over the next 10 weeks we’ll again be surveying news media decision makers, which we define as those with executive control of resources, to find out how they have been navigating change inside and outside of their organizations. And, again, participants can choose to receive a summary of  both the current 2014 report as well as the full 2015 report when they complete the 22-question survey, which is available in 11 languages until 30 June 2015.

1.    English: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015English
2.    Spanish: https://es.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015Spanish
3.    Finnish: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015Finnish
4.    Chinese: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015Chinese
5.    Arabic: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015Arabic
6.    German: https://de.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015German
7.    Russian: https://ru.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015Russian
8.    Portuguese: https://pt.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015Portuguese
9.    French: https://fr.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015French
10.  Turkish: https://tr.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015Turkish
11.   Persian: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WNMIS2015Persian 

Of course, we welcome any questions about the study and am particularly keen to hear from academic researchers, industry associations and sponsors who are keen to help support the project.

Why the idea that content is free isn't only wrong, but rude.

After becoming the only UK winner of the International Press Institute's inaugural News Innovation Contest sponsored by Google, I have spent time (and the prize money) working to help news media startups in the UK and Turkey stay up. 

 

Three years on, Javier Luque of the IPI asked me to reflect on the experience of the MADE Project and to flag some of the key issues facing new entrepreneurs. 

Here's what I said. 

 

 

Out now: 'Pressed to Change: Business model innovation and integration in the British local newspaper industry'

A NEMODE case study

For much of the last decade, industry insiders and commentators have pointed out the need for newspapers innovate their  business models devised in the Industrial Age in order to ensure success in the Digital Age.

Thanks to funding from Nemode, an initiative of the Research Councils Digital Economy theme, I have recently been able to take a closer at just how British local newspaper publishers have responded to the challenges - on industry-wide, organizational and operational levels - through cases drawn from amongst the sector’s largest companies, Johnston Press and Trinity Mirror.

A few of the findings:

On industry level: Integration has been a theme from the start. The industry's initial business model was established through vertical integration with expansion (and increased profits) coming from horizontal integration.

On organisational level: While operational integration has enabled companies to continue to squeeze profits from newspapers, lateral integration with the digital economy has been slow, although under their new CEO Ashley Highfield (dismissed by one indutry commentator as a 'digital airhead') Johnston Press seems to be (finally) recognising that it doesn't help to paddle harder if you're rowing in the wrong direction. The market seems to share my cautious optimism.

Operational level: A close look at newsroom integration at Trinity Mirror's Liverpool Daily Post shows, amongst other things, the journey the company has taken to its latest 'One Trinity Mirror' strategy, which will see the companies newsrooms effectively operating as centres in a news wireservice. Yes, there have been many attempts to do that before, but with TM backing their policies with the IT infrastructure and with the inclusion of the (national) Mirror's archives in the mix, this will be one to watch. Local World (and others) may have similar ambitions, but they'll have a job to do culturally and technically to achieve that. (Aside: the varying fortunes of the 'sub-editor' in all this has been particularly fascinating to see. The TM Newsoom 3.0  positions the production desk as the key custodians of the brands. But I digress...).

This much is clear: Local newspaper publishers have been busy. But, through whichever lens one chooses to look, the results have been uneven. And formidable challenges remain - particularly as audiences shift their access to digital media from PCs to mobiles (Echoing my advice to publishers: 'Get your app in gear!').

 Asked to reflect on her company’s mixed success on the day Trinity Mirror announced its 2012 financial results – which included not only a 75 per cent drop in pre-tax profits, but also a 7.3 per cent slump in digital advertising revenues, Daily Post, Wales editor  Alison Gow (and JLeaders grad), who was also recently included on a global list of 50 ‘female innovators of digital journalism’, noted, ‘You’ve not only got to arrive at the right party, but at the right time.’

And, to continue the metaphor, this study concludes that if the British regional newspapers companies are to survive and thrive, they will need to have the energy and skill to ‘dance’ – and enough willing partners to join them. That is likely to require not only deeper horizontal and vertical integration of organizations and operations (read: more cuts), but also strategies that demonstrate greater lateral integration with the digital economy.

• The full 16-page report, 'Pressed to Change: Business model innovation and integration in the British local newspaper industry',can be downloaded here - and, of course, I'd welcome any feedback and further discussions on the theme. 

Three words that will loom large in 2013: reponsibility, responsiveness, talent

When Journalism.co.uk technology editor Sarah Marshall called me (along with seven others from both sides of the Atlantic) to discuss my predictions for digital journalism in 2013, three words came to mind.

 

The first was a word that loomed large in 2012 and will definitely feature prominently in journalism circles next year too: Responsibility.

Yes, there’s been a lot of talk lately about the responsibilities and irresponsibility­­ of news organisations. And that will no doubt continue, but I believe we will also see more discussion about the responsibilities of digital news users.

As I've said at both News:Rewired in London and  11th International Newsroom Summit in 2012 in Hamburg, it’s clearly not responsible - or sustainable - for users of any goods or services to expect something for nothing. 

So, as we see traditional media’s share of advertising spend remain under pressure, responsible digital news consumers increasingly understand that contributing directly towards the costs of  the  news and information they rely on is simply right thing to do.

Another word I believe will be widely used is Responsiveness.

It’s likely to be widely predicted that, for news organisations, 2013 will be the year that they ramp up their mobile activities.  In recent months, we’ve already seen occasions when news sites like the Guardian’s got more traffic via mobile devices than desktops.

With Santa likely to be stuffing thousands of tablets and smartphones into Christmas stocking this year, that’s likely to become the rule rather than the exception. Of course, for news organisations, the challenges are not only how to shift their content onto the increasing variety of mobile devices, but also how to take advantage of commercial opportunities that high-speed, affordable, mobile connectivity brings. 

Finally, I think that there will also be a lot more talk about Talent.

After several years of re-organisation and rightsizing of news operations, news executives are increasingly recognising that that their futures depend not only cutting costs and investing in new digital technologies,  but also on attracting and nurturing talent.

Forward- thinking executives will not only be focussing on how to work smarter, but how to get the smartest people to work for or with them.  

Others who contributed to the podcast are: Alison Gow, editor of the Daily Post and DailyPost.co.uk, North Wales (and recent alumnus of the Journalism Leaders Programme) ; Aron Pilhofer, editor of interactive news, New York Times; John Barnes, managing director of digital and tech at Incisive Media and chair of the AOP (Association of Online Publishers);  Mark Little, founder and chief executive of social news agency Storyful;  Raju Narisetti, managing editor, WSJ Digital Network,  Wall Street Journal ; and Stephen Pinches, group product manager for FT.com .

Updates on news innovation research, funding and projects

It’s been a hectic few months. And, it seems, there’s more to come in 2012.

• Today, it was announced that I’ve been selected from amongst more than 300 entries as one of three winners of the inaugural International Press Institute’s News Innovation Contest, funded from a grant by Google. (More about the Media And Digital Enterprise or  MADE project here. Also, please add your contact details here, if you want to be kept in the loop or work with me on this one. Follow the Twitter conversation at #MADEproject ).


• I've also recently learned that the research paper, “The 4Cs of Mobile News”, which my research partner Oscar Westlund and I presented at the (always excellent) Future of Journalism conference in Cardiff in September, has been selected for a special issue of the prestigious Journalism Practice journal due out in 2012.


• Earlier this month, Martha Stone and I also wrapped up the data collection for World Newsmedia Innovation Study (formerly the World News Future & Change Study) and plan to issue our third annual report early in the new year.


• Also coming soon (I hope) is the final report of the #journopay study into how UK journalists are rewarded, which was launched with the help of Sarah Bould and the team at Hold the Front Page . Roy Greenslade previewed the interim results in the Guardian.

• Haven't finalised my conference schedule for next year, but looking forward to speaking more about how UK regional news publishers are mobilising (or not) at News: Rewired in London on February 3rd. Also hope to be able to share more details about the #MADEproject by that stage, too.

Then there's also my continuing work with the inspiring editors on the Journalism Leaders Programme, helping Nick Turner out with the Digital Editors Network (diary note: next meetup on 23 Feb), a new Fundamentals of Business for Media Entrepreneurs module for MA magazine and publishing students at UCLAN, planning for the journalism division's 50th anniversary (yes, we're not only one of the best journalism programmes in the UK, we're also the oldest), two book chapters and the final stretch of my doctoral thesis at City University with Prof Howard Tumber.  No doubt, 2012 is going to be a busy one.


Updates along the way on Twitter @francoisnel and academia.edu.

And, of course, always keen to meet up  with kindred spirits f2f. So be in touch if you think our paths might cross in (or near) one of the following cities in 2012 - Manchester, Preston, London, Winchester, Cape Town, Johannesburg, Istanbul.

#ukjournopay New study: How are journalists being rewarded?

There's been a lot of talk about the financial health of the journalism industry (Summary: diagnosis - poor; prognosis -mixed). And there's been quite a bit of discussion (and some research ) about the experiences of journalists who have left or been forced out of their jobs.

But what about those staying behind? Just how are UK journalists, who face increasing demands, being rewarded?

After Jim Oldfied, the striking editor of the South Yorkshire Times, revealed in an NUJ meeting reported on by Jon Slattery & HTFP, that his annual pay after 37 years in journalism is £25,500, I figured it's time to take a closer look.

To that end, I'm conducting an online survey of the pay of UK journalists. If you're a fulltime, part-time, contract or freelance journalist working for a UK newspaper, magazine, broadcaster or online news site, please take 10 minutes to complete this survey.

While all answers will remain anonymous, I will be happy to send you a copy of the report if you add contact details, which will be held separately and never passed on.

Of course, if you have any questions or suggestions for this study, please don't hesitate to be in touch. And any efforts to spread the word about the #ukjournopay research would be very much appreciated.

Related: In case you're interested, my 2010 report, Laidoff: What do UK journalists do next?, is available here.

Top 3 findings from the World News Future & Change Study 2010

The World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers this month published our annual survey of senior news executives  - and the findings show there's some reason to be festive this Season.

The study, which I conduct in collaboration with Martha Stone of the Shaping the Future of the Newspaper project and Erik Wilberg of the Norwegian Management School, is the largest of its kind and in 2010 had responses from nearly 500 newspaper owners, publishers, editors and senior commercial managers from 78 countries on all five continents.

Not surprisingly, the 128-page report is packed with great information and selecting my top 3 findings wasn't straightforward. But here's what I think and why I think there's some reason for cheer as we wrap up the first decade of this Millennium and gear up for 2011:

1. The impact of the global economy recession is easing. No, we're not out of the woods yet. Far from it. But a third fewer publishers (18.5 % in 2010 vs 28% in 2009) reported severe revenue declines – that is more 20 per cent. Declining print advertising revenue was the biggest driver of overall revenue decline, with more than 80% of the respondents saying they lost between 1% and more than 20% of their print ad revenue, with the most pronounced declines happening in Northern Europe and North America regions. Meanwhile online advertising revenue and content revenue did not take the same hit as print revenues, with half of the respondents reporting growth, many reporting no change, and a handful, less than one-­quarter, reporting a decline in the last fiscal year.
   
   
2. Advertising-supported print products are no longer enough. The vast the vast majority of the world's news publishers recognise their traditional revenue sources of print advertising and newspaper subscriptions will no longer provide the financial returns of years past and, in response, the publishers are making it a top priority to diversify their revenue streams and to development new products and new channels.
   

   
   

   

   Publishers are bullish about mobile.

   
   

3. Innovation - and mobile - are keys to future success. One question summed up the publishers’ collective desire for the future of their business, and that is, new business growth. Respondents in both 2009 and 2010 spoke loudly and clearly: the way forward is through investment in new product development for new revenues. We consider this to be one of the most important findings of the study. . Other clear investments for newspaper companies were marketing and branding for newspapers, increased audience research and investment in customer relationship management. In 2009, investment in new product development was followed by marketing and branding for the newspaper, increased audience research, investment in customer relationship management and investment in editorial technologies. This year, investment in new product development was followed by marketing and branding for the newspaper, and then "mobile platforms."  When asked, “Please consider which of the following platforms could be opportunities for your organisation over the next three years,” the top choices were mobile phones (58%), followed by Websites (54%) and e-readers, such as Kindle and iPad (53%.). Clearly the emerging importance of mobile is an important take-away from this year’s study and, of course, we’ll be investigating this in some greater depth in 2011.

A  free summary of the study is available for download on the WAN-IFRA site. And, of course, I'd be happy to answer any questions [Twitter @francoisnel / FPNel @ uclan . ac . uk ] .

We’re already working on the 2011 survey and planning to expand the study to 10 languages by including Arabic, along with (in alphabetical order) Chinese, English, French, German, Greek, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish.

For academic citations of the report, please use: STONE, Martha, NEL, François and WILBERG, Erik. (2010) World News Future and Change Study 2010. Paris, France: World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA).

Still no industry consensus: To integrate your print and online newsrooms, or not to....

That has been one of the hottest questions in news organisation for more than a decade. And, despite much, much discussion - and many examples from the UK and elsewhere - there's still no industry consensus.

Just this week, Robert Andrews of PaidContentUK reported that Trinity Mirror chief Sly Bailey, whose Regionals division's integration efforts have been held up as best practice examples internationally, said operations at the national Daily Mirror, for one, would remain separate:

Bailey said Trinity Mirror’s recent national digital executive-level digital reshuffle was about creating a digital division “separate” from print, allowing each to focus on their respective areas.

“It was just too difficult to ask the editor of the Daily Mirror, who has six newspapers to get out every week, (to run the website as well),” Bailey said.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the Atlantic, there are also divergent operational strategies aimed at achieving a similar result: maximising online opportunities [read: revenue].

Five years after America's second largest paper, USA Today, announced that a merger print and online operations "will improve our report to readers both in print and online", the company has had a "radical" rethink.

By contrast, The Cutline reports that a recent reorganisation at the New York Times, that country's largest paper, is aimed at bringing online and print operations even closer together.

What ever else this means (and I look forward to discussing this further), it suggests how you answer the integration questions depends in no small part on how you answer the key question that every business should answer:

What's the most efficient way to sustainably deliver customer value?

Why Rupert Murdoch's 'paywall' strategy might indeed be adding up

[Update: Many thanks for all the feedback on the calculations, which have now been revised]

Next week, I’m slated to speak at WAN-IFRA’s 9th International Newsroom Summit in London about my research into how publishers can boost their online revenues, so after reading today’s piece in The Independent by Ian Burrell, I thought I’d do some back-of-the envelope calculations to see if Rupert Murdoch’s paywall strategy might indeed be adding up.

Warning: I’m not privy to the online traffic figures of The Times or The Sunday Times, which are no longer ABCe registered, nor do I know their ARPU or Average Revenue Per User rates, so this is just conjecture using figures I have discussed before.

Times' 20,406,420 monthly unique users in May 2009, according to ABCe figures quoted in Press Gazette. Say they were making £0.20p £0.10p per user per month, mostly from advertising.

That would be 20,406,420 X £0.10p = £2,040,642 per month.

So, say they lost 90 per cent of their users and, say, 50 per cent of their advertisers got cold feet, too:

20,040,642 X 0.10 = 2,040,642 users x (£0.10/ 2) £0.05 = £102,032.10 per month, mostly from advertising.

And say half those users cross the TimesPlus ‘paywall’ by through the £1 daily access fee and the other half opt for the £2 weekly access.

Income from daily access users: 1,020,321 X £1 x 30 days per month = £33,060, 963£1,020,32 per month.

Income from weekly access users: 1,020,321 X £2 X 4 weeks per month= £8,165, 136£2,040,642 per month

Total income would be £102,032.10 + £1,020,321.00 + £2,040,642.00 would be : £3,162,995.10, which is still be up 55% on what the income may have been before the paywall.

And say I’m only half right?

Well, then The Times' online income would be down about a quarter.

So, if you’re looking at Rupert Murdoch’s paywall model from a financial perspective, the strategy looks like it may just be adding up. But, of course, one would have to be privy to the actual numbers to really know for sure.

[Addendum: Robert Andrews alerted me to the uncanny similarity between my calculations and those he did earlier for PaidContentUK ]

How does your Annual Revenue Per User (ARPU) compare with the Guardian and Media Norge?

Recently Schibsted‘s Norwegian publisher Media Norge outlined to investors the key challenge they face in building their digital business: “Overall traffic levels may be reaching saturation and online ad prices are stagnating.”

As PaidContent reported, the company also disclosed its average revenue per user (ARPU) rate, giving us a rare look under the bonnet of one of the world’s most successful digital publisher. The company , acknowledged that average income per monthly unique visitor of two Norwegian krona (that’s $0.32 or £0.21) is now less than it was back in 2006.

That’s still more than double the Guardian Media Group’s 2007 rate of 10p (that’s $0.16 or 0.97 Norwegian krona), if my back-of-the-envelope calculations based on figures in their 2008 Annual Report are correct.

To double check, take a look at these slides which I used for a presentation for the Digital Editors' Network earlier this year.

Compare you digital revenues with The Guardian's?

View more presentations from Francois Nel.

How much is each of your users worth? And how do those figures compare?

Building a Tip Sheet for Laid Off Journalists (and others)

As part of the report on the #laidoff study, we’re compiling a list of online resources where you can find guides and advice about how to get back into the work force, re-tool your career and shift directions, or keep your current journalism jobs.

If you have suggestions for other sites or links we should include, please add those below or send them to me a FPNel @ uclan.ac.uk . Thanks.

Job Search Engines, Articles & Guides:

• Journalism.co.uk – tips on CV writing, preparing for an interview and more – as well as daily updates on jobs across the broader communications sector
• HoldtheFrontPage – jobs listings in the local and regional press.
• Jobs4journalists.co.uk – journalism jobs across the sector, across the UK
• Guardian Media Jobs - national and even international jobs
• How-Do – creative industry jobs in the Northwest
• UCLAN’s Andy Dickinson’s guide to digital job hunting.

What support is on offer for graduates of the University of Central Lancashire, home to the UK's oldest journalism programme?

• Careers advice and guidance by email, telephone or face-to-face
• Search for job opportunities and internships at 'myfutures'
• Careers resources to download
• Help with gaining relevant work-experience
• Events & workshops to help develop your skills
• Business start-up, freelance and self-employment advice , including office space

Training Sessions:

• Vision + Media - provide a range of activities to support media professionals in the Northwest.
• News University - training and courses for journalists, many of them free (project by the Poynter Institute)

How to Keep Your Job if You Still Have One:

• Keeping your Job in Journalism (from the Knight Digital Media Center)
• Tips on Keeping Your Print Journalism Job – some sober advice from a politically-incorrect hack.

Updated: How many journalists are there in the UK? This is why I guestimate around 40,000 (that's more than a third less than the number often quoted)

[Update 14/08/2010: My guestimate has been revised to "around 40,000" following input from John Thompson at Journalism.co.uk, Carolyn Werry at Meltwater Press and Sabina Rosander of Cision Research.]

I'm spending some of my summer writing up my #laidoff study- conducted in collaboration with Journalism.co.uk - which explores what UK journalists do next.

It got me wondering: Just how many journalists are there in the mainstream media?

A straightforward question, yes. But, unfortunately, there is no straightforward answer. I've discovered that the most widely quoted figures on the size of the industry comes from the Journalists at Work study published in 2002 by the Journalism Training Forum, which was set up in 2001 to advise the Publishing National Training Organisation and Skillset.

Based on a self-completion survey completed by 1,238 journalists “and other data”, Spilsbury (2002), estimates that there are approximately 70,000 journalists in the UK. Of these, roughly 60,000 journalists work in publishing and 10,000 in broadcasting.

The study’s author is upfront about the difficulty of coming to that conclusion: “Estimating the number of journalists in the UK using national data sources is problematic, as these are very limited and subject to a wide margin of error” (Spillsbury 2002: 17). The main data source of occupational employment is the Labour Force Survey 2001 (which was last conducted in 2004). Even then, that study grouped together people who stated they worked as “authors, writers and journalists,” which is not the most useful for the purposes of industry-specific studies like these.

While Spilsbury attempts to be conservative in his estimates, saying “it would be better to work with a ‘safe’ estimate that may under-estimate the total number rather than make exaggerated claims that cannot later be substantiated,” there is some evidence that suggest the figures might still be exceedingly generous.

Consider, for example, this examination of the editorial employment figures in the local and regional newspapers: The Journalists at Work (JAW) study says that the Local and Regional Press comprise 30% of the estimated 60,000 print journalists, which would be around 18,000 journalists. However, the following year, the body representing that sector, the Newspaper Society (NS), started issuing reports based on an annual survey of their members and put the total number of editorial staff in 2002 at 13,020, which is almost 28% less than the JAW study.

So, even if all the other estimates were accurate, it would still bring the total number of journalists down by 5,000 or almost 10% of the lowest range of the estimated number of print journalists.

It is not only the baseline figures from that study that should be re-examined, but also some of its key conclusions: “Whatever the current number of journalists, it seems clear that the numbers will continue to grow in the future” (Spilsbury, p. 17). Drawing on general employment forecasts that put UK employment growth at 2.5%, the authors conclude that “by 2010, industry forecasts suggest that there will be an additional 20,000 journalists”” and then add “ pointing to significant demand upon the industry’s training, education and recruitment infrastructure” (p.

7).

What a difference a decade makes. With the benefit of hindsight, we can point to the structural changes in the industry that have seen changes in consumer behaviour, consolidation of enterprises and the convergence of job roles. Cyclical changes in the economy and have driven further driven down the number of people employed across the mainstream media.

A review of all the NS employment figures from 2002 to 2007 (the latest available), show a decline of about 30% across all divisions. In general, editorial workers were less affected. Fulltime editorial staff declined by 14% (see Figure), while part-time staff declined by 9.6%. The total editorial workforce in the Local and Regional Press shrunk by 13.75% over the period – which was before the global economic meltdown that started at the end of 2007.

A review of report on job losses published in Journalism.co.uk, Press Gazette and the Guardian Media sections between January 2007 and June 2010, indicate the number of jobs have continued to decline at even greater speed since the start of what is often called the “Great Recession”.

There is some evidence to suggest that the cuts in the regional press have been deeper than in the national press. At the Daily Mail and General Trust, for example, losses at their regional division, Northcliffe Media, over the past few years has typically be more than double those at the national division, Associated Newspapers and are reflected in the redundancy plans. In 2008, DMGT announced 500 regional job cuts , which was then revised to 1,000 in March 2009 and climbed to 1,500 “across the company” in a statement made in May 2009.

A “Redundancy Round-up” in Journalism.co.uk further points to possible differences between the levels of staff cuts in the regional and national newspapers. In reference to 78 job losses at Trinity Mirror Regionals, it is noted that the Press Gazette had reported, “The bulk of the job losses will come in Liverpool, where the 175-strong editorial team will be cut to 132 and the Liverpool Daily Post will scrap its Saturday edition.” The loss of 43 jobs represents a reduction about 25%. Other reports detailed additional cuts at the same offices.

The summary of activities in the national press includes this note: “Fifty editorial staff are to lose their jobs at Telegraph Media Group, management told staff today. ‘It is understood the cuts represent a 13-14 per cent saving to the editorial budget and will be brought into effect by Christmas at the latest,’ reports MediaGuardian."

The reports suggest that no media sector has emerged unscathed, including television. In September 2008, for example, the Media Guardian reported that ITV were cutting 1000 jobs, including 430 newsroom positions, accounting for almost 20% of its total workforce .

And jobs cuts have not only been ordered at advertising-supported media companies. For example, in October 2007 the BBC announced that 2,500 jobs would be axed as part of wide-ranging reforms driven, in part, by budget shortfalls .

A tally of the numbers reported in the survey of three trade sites - Journalism.co.uk, Press Gazette and the Media Guardian - suggests that more than 9,500 journalism jobs were cut between January 2007 and June 2010.

This is in line with the National Union of Journalists’ estimate that in the newspaper sector alone there have been at least 8,800 jobs lost and 54 local offices closed since December 2008. Based on a revised baseline estimate of 40,000-50,000 55,000-60,000 jobs in the mainstream media that would suggest that, as a result of structural and economic changes affecting the sector, the UK’s mainstream journalism corps has shrunk by about a quarter between a quarter and a third since 2001 (or between 40% and 50% down on the 2002 JAW report estimates).

So, back to the original question: How many journalists working if the mainstream media in the UK today? By my guestimation (which has been corroborated by researchers at Cision): 30,000 around 40,000.

How does that sound to you?

- Also: When it's done, the #laidoff study report will be available on the journalism.co.uk site. Feedback would, of course, be much appreciated.

- An appeal invitation: I would welcome discussions with those in the public and private sector bodies who would help fund a much-needed centre for industry intelligence (perhaps along the lines of the Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism in the US).

- Next post: How many students enrolled in journalism courses each year?

The Media Magazine: The biggest threat to the African news industry - change-averse company executives

The Media magazine in South Africa recently asked me to write a piece on challenges to the news industry.

Drawing on the findings of the last World Newspaper Future & Changes Study, I argue that the biggest threats to the local news business are change-adverse company executives:

The global economic recession couldn't have come at a better time for some media executives.

It has provided a convenient scapegoat for those top managers who hanker for the days when profits flowed like ink and who believe it'll be business as usual when the economy recovers. Declining audiences and adspend, they argue, will bounce back as fast as you can say "economic cycle". All this talk about the business opportunities that the advances in new technologies are bringing is malarkey, they say. Just look at what happened to those in the digitally dedicated, but decimated, newspaper industries in America, Britain and elsewhere.

In some ways, I wish they were right. But they're not. And those change-averse company executives are the biggest threat to the local news industry.

The rest of the article from the May 2010 edition of the magazine has been posted here.

Results from the 2010 World Newspaper Future & Change Study, which I conduct in partnership with colleagues at the Shaping the Future of the Newspaper project of the World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA) and the Norwegian School of Management, will be published in the Autumn.

Data & Journalism: perhaps onions are easier to understand?

When I was asked yesterday to provide comment where "data" fits in the journalism standards that Skillset is in the process of reviewing and developing, my answer was simple: Don’t geek it.

In the so-called Digital Age, one thing that is plentiful - and growing exponentially - data. What is scarce, and therefore potentially valuable, is information. And, even more than that, knowledge. And most rare: wisdom.

I'd been thinking a bit about the link between what is often called the "DIKW Hierarch" or the "Wisdom Pyramid" since the last Digital Editors’ Network meeting when Microsoft UK producer Alistair Bruce described how data was being used to tell stories on sites like MSN Local. He likened it to the layers of an onion.

So, I’ve drafted this "Onion Model" as a way to start describing where data links to journalism. And am thinking that perhaps it might even be useful to the discussions about where (or not) to put up "paywalls".

Alistair and I’ll are thinking more about it and will be including some of those ideas in a chapter in the (much-delayed) 4th edition of Writing for the Media, which Oxford is hoping to publish later this year.

In the meantime, I’ve been bouncing around those ideas with colleagues like Andy Dickinson, who said he’d be blogging about his take on it sometime soon, too. And I’ll probably weave it into the discussion at the #DEN2010 meeting on "Benchmarking Your Website". And, of course, I look forward to seeing just how data literacy, retrieval and repurposing is woven into the National Occupational Standards for journalism.

What's in store for online journalism and media in 2010?

From Journalism.co.uk

The past year in the online journalism and news media industries has seen more job cuts, paid content debates, moves into the smartphone market and the rise of the 'Twitter mob'.

But what will 2010 bring? Will there be new debates and launches or more of the same?

Yesterday we revisited predictions from industry insiders on what would occupy the industry in 2009, from hyperlocal to a surge in news start-ups. Below are the answers to a question put to journalists and industry commentators working online via Twitter for their predictions for the year ahead...

More on what I mean by reciprocity in the (very short) presentation I gave at last UK Society of Editors conference. Expanding on that idea is amongst my New Year's resolutions.

Investigating online business models. Or, where else is the money? (Online, that is)

Over the past four years, as my colleagues and I have worked with hundreds of editors and high-potential journalists to build their capacity and confidence to tackle the challenges of Digital, one question kept coming up,‘…but there’s no money online?’

Of course, that’s not entirely true. There’s a great deal of money being made online. Just ask Google. Or eBay. What is true is that the mainstream media aren’t getting very much of it.

So, for the last few years I’ve been looking into the online business models of the largest newspapers in Britain 66 cities and have only recently been in a position to share some of the findings.

* 12 September, I presented a paper based on the 2008 results at the second bi-annual Future of Journalism Conference 2009, held at Cardiff University. An edited version of that article is to be included in a special edition of the journal Journalism Practice.

* 28 October, I summarised the findings at the Autumn meeting of the Digital Editors Network and later that evening continued the discussion when I chaired the 13th Journalism Leaders Forum on the theme, Paywalls: Build them, break them,or look beyond them.

* 16 November, I presented the first comparision between the 2008 and 2009 findings as part of a session on new revenue models at the UK Society of Editors' annual conference held at Stansted. The session audio has been posted and PaidContent:UK reported the presentation here. My slides are below.

vs3: Where Else Is The Money?

View more presentations from Francois Nel.

* 2 December, Martha Stone of the Shaping the Future of Newspaper project and I presented findings from some related research, the World Newspaper Future & Change Study 2009, at the 62 World Newspaper Congress in Hyderabad. The findings clearly show that publishers everywhere are now actively looking for new revenue streams beyond advertising and paid content - and aim to invest in training their staff to do so better, faster.

Right now, I'm swimming in data - including a comparison between the mobile strategies employed by regional newspapers and those of the leading national papers, as well as a look into what journalists do after being laid off (or leaping) - and hope to soon make time to write it up for conferences and industry fora. And, of course, I'll post updates here too.

PS: I welcome comments, suggestions and am always interested in collaboration with others working in the same field. So, please be in touch.

Future & Change Study: SA newspaper executives highlight employee motivation as the industry's greatest challenge

A survey of senior South African newspaper executives found that employee motivation was the single most significant challenge facing the industry – and that organisations needed to improve competencies across all levels in order to meet future challenges effectively.

Other findings from the exploratory study, which I conducted amongst 12 executives in October and November 2008, include:

Greatest competition to come from other print products. Free newspapers were expected the greatest competitor to traditional newspapers in the next five years, followed by content on mobile phones and online news sites compiled by the large search engines such as Google and Yahoo.

Scope for significant cost reductions. The majority of respondents believed that newspapers did not operate as efficiently as they could and that significant costs reductions could be achieved without reducing quality. All the respondents to that question felt there was some room for cutting costs with the vast majority – 8 of 9 respondents - saying that there was potential to cut costs by more than 6% and a third saying that operational costs could be cut between 20-30% with little impact.

Companies will need to diversify their revenue streams. All respondents to this question agreed that newspapers will need to consider earning revenues from non-traditional sources, with 8 of 9 executives saying newspaper companies will need to look elsewhere for up to a third of their revenues.

Loss of experienced staff and out-dated technology have hurt companies.
When asked to reflect on the changes that had occurred in the last 3-5 years and what newsroom loss has hurt the most, the respondents highlighted two concerns:
Technology - not having the appropriate knowledge to keep up. “Not being up-to-date with the internet”
Qualified staff – losing experienced staff to bigger publications with new staff not being up to scratch. “Loss of quality journalists, level of new trainees is shocking” “Experienced middle management” “Experience”

Work is needed to prepare for the challenges ahead. All respondents felt companies were ready for the challenges ahead: 8 of the 9 respondents felt that companies were no more than 50% prepared. Respondents felt there was a great need for developing middle-management , particularly in the editorial and advertising departments with 8 of 9 respondents saying work in this area was very or extremely important.

What is the single most important change that has to be implemented in your newspaper over the next year? Responses to this question varied greatly, but could be considered to fit into two broad themes: developing staff and systems to implement multimedia news operations, and developing management that can effectively streamline operations for greater efficiency.

Additional highlights from the report are available in this short report.

The study is now being expanded globally in collaboration with Martha Stone of the World Assocation of Newspapers-IFRA and Erik Wilberg of the Norwegian School of Management.

Senior editorial and commercial executives from newspaper companies have been invited to participate and, as a way of thanking them for completing the 20-question survey, the researchers are undertaking to send them the final 2009 World Newspaper Future & Change Study report.

The results of the survey will also be analysed for a Shaping the Future of the Newspaper project report for the WAN-IFRA, to be published in December 2009.

• If you'd like to participate, please click HERE to take survey, which should take no more than 20 minutes to complete. [If you are not the correct person to answer the survey, please forward it to the appropriate person in your company.] And, of course, if you have any comments or questions, don’t hesitate to contact me at: FPNel @ uclan . ac . uk

Investing in Journalism Innovation: towards a petition for Government support for training

Evidence that the local & regional newspaper industry (amongst others) are in crisis isn't hard to find.

Just take a quick glance at the Media Guardian timeline of media job cuts (below). And while, as Ian Burrell pointed out recently in The Independent, not everyone thinks it matters. Others, like me, do.

And in those circles the view that Government has a more active role to play in the way ahead is also gaining support, as recent comments by the culture secretary and the establishment of the new Local Media Alliance) show.

However, while any interventions should necessarily help ensure the industry survives the cyclical economic downturn, that's not enough. The industry needs support for the structural changes essential if it is to thrive in the 'Networked Age'.

Or, to draw on an old adage: Government should not only give the hungry industry some fish and ensure that the legislative environment is conducive for fishing - but it should also help the industry build the knowledge to devise new ways of fishing.

Media job cuts on Dipity.

Training and re-training newsrooms for the (not so) new media media environment is certainly happening (my colleagues and I are engaged in a quite a bit of it ourselves).

But it's not happening enough. And it's not happening fast enough. And, with few exceptions, it's not happening broadly enough - particularly at the higher levels of organisations (as Hugh Stevenson and I have noted before).

With that in mind, I've been circulating an idea amongst some colleagues, which I'm now considering posting as an e-petition to No 10.

But before I do, I'd welcome any feedback or advice on the proposal which would read something like:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to…enable media companies to invest in building the much-needed capacity to innovate- including editorial and commercial management skills - by providing corporate tax relief for training of up to 1% of payroll per annum.

This investment, which would be subject to review after three years, would supplement, not replace, support for digital skills training available through current initiatives such as Skillset ."

What could this mean?

Well, a back-of-envelope calculation based on the premise that payroll comprises around 40% of the budget of a typical newspaper (cf the Independent). And let's work with a modest operation of 100 people that, using Frederic Filloux's rough calculation, means a payroll of around £5million. That would make around £500 available per person to invest in capacity building.

That may not be a great deal - but, I suspect, that it's a great deal more than most training budgets are likely to have right now. And would go a long way to helping the cash-starved news organisations build their capacity to innovate.

How does that sound?

NOTE: It's probably worth pointing out this is my personal blog and that these views are my own and that I'm am not speaking for my employer. Or anyone else.

Gathering the (South African) Media Milestones

I kicked it off in 1994 with the first edition of Writing for the Media. And continued it with the second edition. But dropped it when I put together the third edition.

But today, after get yet another query about the history of the South African press, I've decided to (re)build the media milestones on Dipity. And to invite others to join the project.

So, if you'd like to contribute, just pop me a note.

Francois N. - All Topics on Dipity.

A response to '‘Four Excuses That Impede Change in Media Academia’

At the edge of the Namib desert where the Swakob River empties, periodically, into the Atlantic Ocean, settlers in 1892 founded a town which many still today describe as 'more German than Germany'.

It's a place where the pioneers, mostly cut off from the developments das Vaterland sought (seek?) to perpetuate the culture as they remembered it.

The architecture, the bakeries and pubs are all wonderful examples of early 20th century Europe and seem untouched by either the changes on that continent or the cultures of the rest of Africa, which lies beyond the Namib desert.

In much the same way, too many media academics that I encounter on both sides of the Atlantic seek to perpetuate the norms and values of a time that no longer exists. And, yes, as Vin Crosbie points out in his column, ‘Four Excuses That Impede Change in Media Academia’ , it's often done with the best of intentions. And not all the outcomes are lamentable either (if you're ever in Swakopmund, try the fine beer and delicious baked goods). But, whatever else it is, it’s not fit for progress.

To change that will not only take a radical review of the curricula, as Vin suggests, but also a revolution of the culture in the journalistic establishment- newsrooms & the institutions that support them. That needs to start with the banishment of the common belief that no one outside the fraternity says anything worth listening to.

Consider, for example, the open disdain with which many journalism trainers (I hesitate using the word 'academics') regard their colleagues in media studies departments, where they do not simply perpetuate 'best' journalistic practice, but dare to examine the consequences of those actions. Similar attitudes apply to those who condescend to consider the market value of journalistic endeavour.

This particular brand of anti-intellectualism, I firmly believe after more than 20 years of working in and with newsrooms and universities in the US, South Africa and the UK, has resulted in the knowledge cul-de-sac that has contributed to the not-so-slow suicide of large sections of the mainstream industry in the US and elsewhere.

So it would be simplistic to suggest that out-moded academic curricula are the consequences of journalism departments that are cut off from the changes in industry. Instead, it's because, much like Swakopmund, the journalistic establishment has long made a virtue of isolating itself from everyone else. And while it was largely a matter of geography for the early setters of that patch of German South-West Africa, for much of the mainstream media industry its mostly a matter of mindset.