Facebook vs Twitter as journalistic tool?


Since I wrote the posting below partly about the brand new Facebook page “Journalists on facebook” and finished that part with the sentence: “I’m pretty sure that many journalist now will take the oppertunity to use this possiblity, to get more out of their daily work.” There’s been a lot of buzz regarding Facebook vs Twitter as a journalistic tool.

Justin Osofsky, Director of Media Partnerships at Facebook, says that the page has been created: “to serve as an ongoing resource for the growing number of reporters using Facebook to find sources, interact with readers, and advance stories. And that “the Page will provide journalists with best practices for integrating the latest Facebook products with their work and connecting with the Facebook audience of more than 500 million people.

I believe he’s spot on, but… I do respect the critics. Among other I got an e-mail from Daniel at Newsy.com who recommended me to see the video about the topic Facebook vs Twitter as a journalist tool.

The news anchor Jim Flink at Newsy, says:
“So, could Facebook challenge Twitter in the battle for reporters’ hearts? One blogger says – probably not:
“Twitter allows you to order the account you follow into lists so you can have all the information about one subject on the same feed while Facebook imposes on you the feed of every journalists you will follow, no matter the subject they are working on or they are specialized in.”

Gigom’s Mathew Ingram suggests the company might have to alter its image a bit to make this work.
“…many users still likely think of Facebook as a place to socialize rather than be informed — a place to play games … not necessarily a place where journalists are active. Those things may not be mutually exclusive, but it’s going to take some work to make them feel like they belong together.”

I do agree. But my point of view is that both services has some left to prove to be kick ass tools for journalists, and their audience in particular.

I would say that the biggest headache right now for both this services, within this matter, is that most people has only one newsstream (or wall) for all their interests, topics, networks, etc (discussion in groups excluded). And most of the people is as a matter of fact interested in several topics and member of many communities. Do you really want the latest news from the revolution in Egypt on the same wall as where my cousins birthday party shows up? I don’t. And these lists feature is too… time-consuming. The same applies for Twitter. Ranking system, like Facebook Edgerank, might make the updates more relevant, but doesn’t solve this problem.

Personally, I love my Google RSS Reader with an extensive but careful selection of sources (social networks included)  in combination with Flipboard.

B t w – what happened to the service “LinkedIn for Journalists”? What I can see is pretty much no more… Or it ended up as a tiny group.  And LinkedIn Today…? Well – we won’t start our days with that kind of news aggregator, do we?

To be continued.

Ny rapport: Journalister ointresserade av sociala medier


För en dryg månad sen släppte The George Washington University i samarbete med Cision (USA) en rapport på temat: “How the Press Uses and Values Public Relations and Other Media Resources”.

I slutet av förra året skickade man ut 12 frågor till 12.337 journalister i USA, varav 745 av dem svarade på alla frågor (svarsfrekvens 6%).

Syftet med undersökningen var bl a att försöka förstå hur journalister använder och värderar olika källor i sitt arbete.

Här några slutsatser som sticker ut:

Websajter generellt sett är den i särklass populäraste källan. 93% använder den “hela tiden” (minst en gång per dag). Till skillnad från bloggar och sociala nätverk, som bara 23% resp 8% använder hela tiden.

journalister ointresserade av sociala medier

Tvärtom så menar 50% av journalisterna ifråga att de aldrig använder sociala nätverk – och 21% att de aldrig använder bloggar – som källa i sitt arbete.

Journalister ointresserade av sociala medier

Då är tips från PR-kommunikatörer betydligt populärare: 38% av journalisterna menar att de alltid använder denna källa och bara 6% att de aldrig använder denna källa.

Hur viktig olika källor är på en skala 1-5 (oviktig till mycket viktig), så får websajter generellt sett 4,58, tips från PR-kommunikatörer (pressmeddelanden) 3,88, medan bloggar bara får 3,19 och sociala nätverk bara 2,19 d v s tämligen oviktiga.

journalister ointresserade av sociala medier

Men när det kommer till att gälla tips från PR-kommunikatörer så får alla följande påståenden 4+ (mycket viktigt) på samma skala som ovan. MEN tipsen ska:

  • vara mer relevanta; överensstämma mer med mina intressan.
  • vara mindre säljande
  • innehålla mervärden för min målgrupp
  • större nyhets- och/eller informationsvärde
  • innehålla svaren på frågorna: vad, vem, var, när, varför, hur?

journalister ointresserade av sociala medier

Andra bloggar om: , , , , , , , , ,