Can Hyperlocal Save “Old” Media? Should It?
Amid declining newspaper circulations and the financial woes of once seemingly-untouchable media giants, a super-focused type of journalism known as hyperlocal has emerged as a bright spot in the industry’s cloudy future. While the movement has been around for nearly a decade, the continuing evaporation of small town newspapers and the squeezing of newsrooms big and small has created a void for readers and advertisers in the local market, which has increased focus in recent years on the importance and perhaps necessity of a hyperlocal presence. Case in point: this past year saw several well-established media companies as well as start-ups dip their toes (or dive head first, in some cases) into the hyperlocal pool.
An obvious argument for the creation of hyperlocal sites is to provide information for those in the community that have lost the town/village-specific news that was once provided by a now-defunct city or regional paper. On the business side of things, hyperlocal creates ad space for those mom and pop stores and local businesses that also lost an advertising outlet with the folding of the local paper. But is the revenue there to support a hyperlocal presence? Jeff Jarvis, journalist and hyperlocal champion, thinks so. (Full-disclosure: Jarvis is on the Editorial Advisory Board of my employer, Patch.com). He has developed several business models that point towards the profitability of hyperlocal journalism. As the hyperlocal path continues to be paved, will “old” media companies bend to these new models? And will they do it in time to stay afloat?
October 2nd, 2009 at 3:05 pm
I doubt that it will “save” media in its current form, but it offers another option for younger journalists who are still trying to get their feet wet. I think the hyperlocal of tomorrow will be the weekly community newspaper of today. NPR just received a $3 million grant for its hyperlocal initiative. Who’s next?
October 14th, 2009 at 8:02 am
There’s an ongoing discussion within SPJ now as to whether folks who work on these sites – some paid, some volunteers, unpaid or severely underpaid – are journalists, and whether they can join SPJ as professionals or if they’re more fittingly associates. I’m of the mind that anyone who “commits an act of journalism”, paid or not, no matter the format, is a journalist. They may need more training and knowledge about ethical standards etc., which SPJ is happy to provide by the way, but they’re already journalists. Thoughts?
October 18th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Hoi, I am always surprised if people say with this or this business model you will be successful. If everybody is doing the same in your market than there is no profit in your business.
I think hyperlocal can be an answer particularly since there is still a hyperlocal markets for attention alias local advertising. But that will definitely not be the only business model.
I believe that their will be other long tail markets as a hyperlocal market is nothing but a long tail market. Think about the Economist, it has a global market for certain niche topics that are not covered in the national press anymore. Think about their coverage of African affairs.
I wrote about these ideas on my blog: http://blog.business-model-innovation.com/2009/09/who-says-paper-is-dead-business-model-innovation-in-the-newspaper-industry/ Might be interesting for you.