About a week ago, traditional publishing giant McGraw Hill announced it wanted to sell or spin BusinessWeek, one of the most venerable of all American business publications. The news, I am told, stunned most of the editors and reporters still there.
So far, almost no one has pointed to a possible acquirer and almost everyone close to the matter believes BusinessWeek is going to have to change business models if it is to survive. So far, at least two well-known BusinessWeek writers have suggested possible solutions. Design writer Bruce Nussbaum suggested two new models; the first being sort of an ongoing forum on selected business topics and the second by Stephen Baker, who covers social media suggests converting a portion of the publication into a wiki.
In 2005, while I was writing Naked Conversations, Baker really irked me by implying that somehow journalistic standards for blogging were inferior to those required to write for BusinessWeek. For a while I nursed an idea of taking him on in my book, until on the third or fourth revision of the book, I realized that Baker had a valid point.
As a blogger, I often post content on one draft. As readers remind me, I often miss obvious and blatant typos. I have no editor questioning and filtering what I have to say. I have no colleagues sharing an anecdote or insight that will make my story better. When writing books, I undergo much more editorial scrutiny, but even there, it is not the hard-nosed, Devil's Advocate style of a quality news editor who has general authority over the content provider.
This is true, not just for me. It is true for most social media writers who provide original content. Few of us are parts of a team and only a tiny handful of online social publications have our copy scrutinized and challenged by editors.
Yet, in recent years, we are the ones who are finding--and telling--an increasing portion of the world's stories. A 19-year-old, Dutch kid named Casper Oppenhuis de Jong, tweeted the first news of the Szechuan Earthquake to the west, where traditional media picked it up; Janis Krums was just trying to get to New Jersey, when a plane landed on the Hudson River when he took a TwitPic of a plane landing. The increasing role of people with cameras and connected devices in Mumbai, Gaza and Tehran have driven the point home with drama and flair in the last year. Traditional media have turned to people on the streets of the world to get the information of the world and share it with subscribers.
And yet there is an ambivalence about it, I imagine at places like BusinessWeek. We on the streets are unknown factors. We do not always report with accuracy. Sometimes, as is the case currently in Iran, we won't even reveal who we are or what sources we have. Many, like Casper or Janis, had no plans to contribute to citizen journalism. Casper was in a bookstore so he could Skype home to his folks in Amsterdam. Janis parked in New Jersey because it was cheaper than driving into Manhattan. And yet they both changed the information the world needed--and wanted.
Stephen Baker, talks about the "last 5%," that extra effort many elite publications take with pride to get the precise words that make a story more accurate and polished. He's right. Very few social media writers have time, desire or talent to do that.
The world will not be a better place, however, if the salvation of BusinessWeek is in snipping off that last 5% of quality. And the world will not be a better place if the extremely talented team that is BusinessWeek succumbs to the extreme challenges that traditional media organizations face today.
It seems to me that most people see the value of both the disciplines of old media and the speed and breadth of new media. It seems to me that the news organization of the future will need to braid these two camps of traditional and citizen journalists into something that emerges into something new and different; something that does not yet exist but needs to; something that can cut the costs of printing inefficiencies while increasing the speed in which information is distributed.
This new, "braided" BusinessWeek, would of course move to online only. It would abandon the antiquated concept of news being released once weekly. It would do almost everything that the organization is already doing at BusinessWeek.com, but it would become a much more social platform, incorporating functionality from independent blogs, tweets, YouTube and podcasts.
In my [undetailed] vision for an braided BusinessWeek, the organization would use content submitted by social media people. It would not be instantly published. Editors would revise, challenge and polish. The news would be posted as quickly as possible.
There would also be some form of revenue sharing. Instead of just giving a blogger a stringer's pittance, the social media person and the publication would revenue share any advertising. BusinessWeek would cover local business news and offer advertising to local and regional advertisers.
I hope it's not too late for BusinessWeek. If it is, I hope some other publication will look at this concept of braiding traditional and citizen journalism in a social media venue as an enduring solution to an chronic problem.

{ 4 comments }
btw, further to my response above, let me be clear that I think there's *much* more we (BW and media organizations in general) can and should be doing -- just wanted to point out how we've started down this road as context for this discussion.
cheers,
Shirley
Hi Shel, some interesting thoughts here! To give you some background, BusinessWeek does incorporate social media on a variety of fronts. For more than a year we've been publishing content from our readers, many of whom blog & are on Twitter and other networks, in our weekly MyTake series of user-submitted columns. Our latest example featured a reader-produced column & video: http://bit.ly/I758l -- and yes, we "revise, challenge and polish" whatever we run. We encourage readers to submit story ideas (http://bit.ly/BWYSI) and feature comments on our homepage and on our channels (tech, investing, etc.) We collaborate with readers on editorial projects such as our "Trouble at the Office" project last summer and this summer's upcoming "Case for Optimism" package. We incorporate Twitter on many fronts, including inviting questions for our CEO video Q&A series, Five Questions For (http://bit.ly/5Q4), crowdsourcing stories (as Steve Baker has pioneered) and slide shows, such as this work-life balance survey: http://bit.ly/aEeL. We've got Twitter widgets sprinkled across BW.com and our Business Exchange platform, which was the first major media site to integrate Twitter for commenting. Our journalists have been blogging, shooting video and experimenting in the digital space long before I joined BW, just over a year ago. We've got almost 60 writers and editors on Twitter (http://bit.ly/BWtweeps), with writers such as Doug MacMillan (@dmac1) using Twitter, Facebook & other SM in his reporting. As for your thoughts on business models, revenue sharing and related matters, I'll defer to BW.com editor-in-chief @JohnAByrne!
--Shirley "Braidy" - Community Editor, BusinessWeek (@shirleybrady)
Shel--good thinking here; I think something like the "braided" BusinessWeek concept is the right direction. To some degree the battle over "old" vs "new" media approaches is being distorted. The world is moving away from print whether we like it or not and we need to take the best practices from both. The "extra 5%" does matter and it goes far beyond catching typos, as I tried to argue in my recent post: Why BusinessWeek Matters (from a former BW writer). Now it's really about adopting these disciplines and systems to new online platforms, with sustainable business models. Thanks for uplifting the discussion here.
I guess I should point out the typo in the title Shel.
Oh and great minds seem to think a alike.
My take: http://www.onebyonemedia.com/the-changing-face-of-journalism-or-fixing-businessweek/
Comments on this entry are closed.