Comments on: TV sites not getting enough credit

By: Cory Bergman

Cory Bergman — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:36:17 +0000

Right, great point, But just to reclarify for the rest of us who work in TV — when newspapers have the hype, it’s easier for them to capture online advertisers away from us.

Local TV needs to get better at sending out press releases to local business press and industry magazines, tipping blogs like this one, etc., to get their success stories told.

By: Steve Safran

Steve Safran — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:40:09 +0000

This is an excellent point. The audience doesn’t care about distinctions between a “TV” website and a “newspaper” website. They care about interesting material. We need to keep that in mind. The web is the web. Period.

By: Matt Sokoloff

Matt Sokoloff — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 04:01:50 +0000

I have to agree with Tim. I don’t think it matters if its a TV station or newspaper. I’m getting ready to graduate in May. Went to Mizzou for broadcast turned to online and now I’m taking my first job at a newspaper.
If we are talking differences (I know I just said we shouldn’t) I would point out that most of the TV jobs I looked at were posting TV stories to the TV website. The newspapers were the ones wanting original video. Granted that’s has a lot to do with the fact that they don’t have any video to begin with.

By: Safran

Safran — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 03:31:23 +0000

Don: great work, as always. I hope more will follow your lead.

By: Don

Don — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 03:23:35 +0000

Steve says: “They’re going gangbusters with video classifieds. How did that happen? ”

In my market, we’re the only ones doing video classifieds. Between our classified brand (ZIdaho) and news brand (KTVB.COM) we outdraw the newspaper. I’ll say it again: it’s time to innovate… or get left behind.

By: Sorenson Squeezer

Sorenson Squeezer — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 01:59:20 +0000

Two TV sites larger than the newspaper sites in their markets: WGAL.com (Lancaster/Harrisburg), KCCI.com (Des Moines).

By: invitedmedia

invitedmedia — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 01:03:55 +0000

“stripping out” items? that’s akin to the gov’t saying when you strip out “the volatile food and energy component there is no inflation”. no one i knows eats or drives a car. and no one i know looks for a job or buys or sells anything either.

i’m surprised the focus is only newspaper/tv and not radio/newspaper/tv.

there s such potential in radio moving to the web. and yet another competitor.

By: Rex

Rex — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 00:44:59 +0000

Last time I checked (which was a few years ago), there were only two markets in the top 100 where a tv website was #1. (Which ones? Madison and Raleigh; channel3000.com and wral.com.)

Anyone got more recent stats? I don’t have access to local Nielsen numbers anymore…

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 00:42:38 +0000

It’s time to stop differentiating; maybe we need a new name for “media organizations that disseminate information”.

Who cares if it’s a television station’s site, a newspaper’s site, a magazine’s site, or a site from an outfit that’s always been based on the Internet? If it’s got what people want, it works, if it doesn’t it’s dust.

By: Jim (not the one credited)

Jim (not the one credited) — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 00:11:11 +0000

Props to the Washington Post for offering a video podcast that can be played on the new Apple TV!

Why many stations still probably don’t even know what a podcast is (likely thinking in terms of audio only), tv sites that repackage the stories from their air on their site are destined for failure. How many news stations have the Anna Nicole Smith baby story on their main page? Likely scores of stations. Don Imus must be thankful the baby verdict is in……the heat is off him for a few days…..

By: Steve Safran

Steve Safran — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 00:02:16 +0000

It’s not just that newspapers are “doing” video. They’re going gangbusters with video classifieds. How did that happen? Why aren’t TV sites THE place for video classifieds? Newspapers are outselling local TV in video classifieds 3:1. I’m all for success stories, too - I’d like to hear about TV sites taking back innovation.

By: Jason Salas

Jason Salas — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 23:13:17 +0000

Just my $0.02, but I think the hype lies in that be cause of the limited nature of their medium, most people don’t expect that much from newspapers in terms of multiplatform/multiformat services applicable to a variety of digital devices. So when traditional print companies go all-out, it’s big news.

Contrast this with TV sites, who many people automatically will assume will be relevant all over the board. It’s less of a shock when TV sites become all-encompassing.

By: Anony Mouse

Anony Mouse — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:12:36 +0000

And remember if you strip out the stats for page views that go to Career Builder, classifieds, third party sites, etc., newspapers come down to a more equal footing with TV sites.

By: Don Day

Don Day — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 21:34:25 +0000

I’ve been frustrated with the “the newspapers are doing video!” stories floating around lately. So?

Many TV sites launched online video in the late 1990s. TV sites have been on newspaper turf: PLAIN OLD TEXT for at least that long. TV sites knew what multimedia was way before YouTube came around.

Are there some paper sites doing cool things? Sure, but those innovations are sometimes (often) TV-site copycats. People hyperventilate about how newspapers outdraw TV sites in most markets. True, but newspapers often generate more than 30% of traffic from classifieds. Most TV sites generate a zero — or very little — traffic from that type of content. Plus - when you add up the typical market’s NBC, ABC, CBS & Fox affils - they FAR outdraw the total traffic of a newspaper.

I like to remember this: TV stations have been doing breaking news for decades – most newspapers have been doing breaking news for months.

We’re an innovative industry… it’s time to start acting like it.