<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>mathewingram.com/work &#187; usatoday</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/tag/usatoday/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work</link>
	<description>... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2011 15:34:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>USAToday &#8212; bad model or bad fit&#063;</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/08/16/usatoday-bad-model-or-bad-fit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/08/16/usatoday-bad-model-or-bad-fit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:32:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mathew</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[newspapers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[usatoday]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/08/16/usatoday-bad-model-or-bad-fit/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Update: As Allen Stern of Centernetworks notes in the comments here, and Mike Arrington notes in this follow-up post on USAToday, the paper says that its traffic not only hasn&#8217;t fallen but is actually up by double digits. Maybe we need to file this one under the heading: &#8220;better traffic data urgently needed.&#8221; Original post: [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2007%2F08%2F16%2Fusatoday-bad-model-or-bad-fit%2F"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2007%2F08%2F16%2Fusatoday-bad-model-or-bad-fit%2F&amp;source=mathewi&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p><b>Update:</b></p>
<p>As Allen Stern of Centernetworks notes in the comments here, and Mike Arrington notes in <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/08/16/usatoday-says-traffic-way-up/">this follow-up post</a> on USAToday, the paper says that its traffic not only hasn&#8217;t fallen but is actually up by double digits. Maybe we need to file this one under the heading: &#8220;better traffic data urgently needed.&#8221;</p>
<p><b>Original post:</b></p>
<p> There&#8217;s a post up at TechCrunch in which Mike Arrington <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/08/16/usatoday-relaunch-as-social-network-may-not-be-paying-off/">raises the question</a> of whether the USAToday&#8217;s high-profile launch of &#8220;Web 2.0&#8243;-style features &#8212; including comments on news stories, blogs, voting on stories, and so on &#8212; is paying off or not. According to the stats Mike has from Compete and comScore, traffic to the <a href="http://USAToday.com" title="http://USAToday.com" target="_blank">USAToday.com</a> site has fallen over the past several months by anywhere from 14 to 29 per cent. </p>
<p>At first, I assumed &#8212; like <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/08/16/usatoday-relaunch-as-social-network-may-not-be-paying-off/#comment-1559047">some commenters</a> &#8212; that this might be explained by a normal summer decline in readers, a lack of compelling news, etc. But as Mike points out in his graph, the Washington Post and the New York Times haven&#8217;t seen any similar decline over the same period.</p>
<p><img class="center" src='http://www.mathewingram.com/work/wp-content/uploads/usatodaycomnytimescomwashingtonpostcom_uv_310.png' alt='usatodaycomnytimescomwashingtonpostcom_uv_310.png' /></p>
<p>Of course, all the usual <a href="http://www.siliconbeat.com/entries/2006/08/10/web_stats_are_broken_so_youd_better_have_brass_knuckles.html">caveats</a> about traffic measurement should be inserted here &#8212; neither Compete nor comScore (nor any of the other major measurement agencies, for that matter) have what you would call 100-per-cent reliable statistics. But the fact that both of them together show a similar trend at least leads me to believe they are on the right track.</p>
<p>So what can we learn from all this? Mike wonders whether it&#8217;s possible that &#8220;news and social networking just don&#8217;t mix.&#8221; But I think Tish Grier &#8212; who was involved with Jay Rosen&#8217;s Assignment Zero crowd-sourcing project, among other things &#8212; gets closer to the mark with <a href="http://spap-oop.blogspot.com/2007/08/lights-are-on-but-nobodys-home-usa.html">her post</a>, in which she argues (as I have in the past) that, well&#8230; social networking is hard.</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t just set up shop and expect people to suddenly show up and start contributing and interacting. For one thing, as Chris Heuer argues, online community <a href="http://www.chrisheuer.com/2007/08/16/why-usa-today-is-not-a-social-networking-failure/">doesn&#8217;t fit</a> with everyone and everything. There also needs to be real interaction from the newspaper side as well, and encouragement and moderation and so on. It&#8217;s like gardening, not construction. And there has to be a reason for people to want to participate, as <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/08/16/usatoday-relaunch-as-social-network-may-not-be-paying-off/#comment-1559079">someone notes</a> in the comments on Mike&#8217;s post.</p>
<p>Much like gardening, it also takes time for the fruits of your labours to become obvious &#8212; I&#8217;m not sure we should write USAToday&#8217;s experiment off just yet. And for what it&#8217;s worth, Jason at Webomatica says that he <a href="http://www.webomatica.com/wordpress/2007/08/16/usatoday-casual-user-perspective/">enjoys the comments</a> there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/08/16/usatoday-bad-model-or-bad-fit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

