CNN sees an opportunity, because the more newspapers cut staff, the more they need to rely on outside sources to fill their pages. On the surface, it sounds like a good deal for papers. But it’s not, especially for a paper that wants to have a strong online presence.

Why? Three words: search engine optimization.

For you newspaper execs who are just hearing the term for the first time, SEO is the practice of using strong keywords and story descriptions to get your content high rankings on Google and other search engines and drive more traffic to your Web site. (You should try it sometime. Really, it’s great.)

But SEO has a lot of tricks and rules that can undermine your efforts if you’re not careful. One of those is the “duplicate content” rule. Under this rule, if a story you post is too similar to a story someone else has posted, both stories will plummet in the search engine rankings.

That’s where using a wire service comes in. If you’re one of 100 (or even 10) papers that runs the same wire story in your online edition, nobody will ever find your specific page on Google. There’s just too much competition.

You’re better off, as Jeff Jarvis says, creating “an infrastructure to share and link to original journalism.” Spending money on this new CNN wire, or any syndicated content, isn’t a smart investment these days.

The Poynter Institute is preparing to sell the catchily titled “President Obama Election 2008: A Collection of Newspaper Front Pages Selected by The Poynter Institute,” according to Editor and Publisher. The book will reprint Nov. 5 front pages from several major U.S. metropolitan newspapers, as well as some international papers (The Jakarta Post and The Daily Nation of Nairobi) and even Yale’s student pub, the Daily News.

At $14.99 (paperback) and $24.99 (hardcover), seems like a good, cheap Christmas holiday gift for the newspaper lover in your life.

Opie and Anthony had a great show, but their schtick had gotten old recently, with Anthony whining and ranting about how Barack Obama is going to take away his guns, and Opie not doing enough to reel his partner in. Toucher and Rich are consistently funnier, but O&A always had some great, serious conversations. (Their defense of free speech during the Don Imus controversy was top notch.)

Can’t wait to see the wars T&R start with new morning competitors Dennis and Callahan on WEEI and Greg Hill on WAAF. Should be fun.

Today, if I’m interested in critical takes on, say, Australia, in a click or two I have at hand the writings of Manohla Dargis, Ebert himself, Ken Turan, Ella Taylor and Todd McCarthy on that film. A click or two more and I have at my disposal the collective wisdom of the internets’ collective film writing, the intellectual equivalent of that sandworm in Dune, majestic and slightly nauseating at the same time.

What in the world is wrong with this picture?

For virtually everyone interested in film criticism, today’s state of affairs is great.

Ebert’s vista is the too-narrow one of daily newspapers. That’s an artificial construct that has no resonance to anyone with a computer.

Sure, Wyman uses words like “vista,” “resonance” and “artificial construct,” but at least Swimmin’ Hole! knows that “Internet” is capitalized.

Until now.

That’s because the lengthy, in-depth newspaper film review is dead, replaced by syndicated columnists and “news” about what A-Rodonna had for Thanksgiving dinner. So, like every other old school journalist who’s having trouble adapting to the 21st Century, Ebert is whining about it in a Chicago Sun-Times column:

When they opened the envelope did little cork pellets fall out?

I can just see it now: “And the winner of this year’s Sammy Sosa Cork Pellet Scholarship is …”

Hmm, now where have you heard that before?

Oh, that’s right.

Right here on Swimmin’ Hole!

FIVE DAYS AGO.

Sure, we just picked up the story from FishbowlDC, who had the real scoop. But hey, we still had it before the Post, whose offices are only two miles away from the Newseum. So take that, Post. You suck.

Science fiction blog io9 has a pretty funny post about what will happen to Clark Kent/Superman when Metropolis’ biggest newspaper, the Daily Planet, starts cutting costs and offering buyouts.

He’ll suffer the “gross injustice” of becoming a blogger:

You file your post, you see your byline on the front page, you smile…and then the comments start coming in, and you think, I know I addressed that point in plain English. Hey, I didn’t say that, why are you attacking me for saying that? Seriously, do you not get that it was a joke? Hey, I didn’t say that either. I do not even know what that means. No, that’s not socialism. Hitl—really? You went there? Did you even read what I wrote? That’s what passes for logic in your world? THIS WASN’T EVEN ABOUT THE WATCHMEN MOVIE!

And that’s just if he’s lucky enough to write for io9. We commenters over here are, by and large, Pulitzer nominees compared with what they get at, say, newsweek.com. And Clark would probably end up somewhere like that; he’s not hip enough for Slate or New York.

Clark, when that fateful day comes, there’s a spot open for you at Swimmin’ Hole! And don’t worry, your secret’s safe with us.

(Via Bloggasm)
Posted in blogs, newspapers Tagged: blogs, newspapers, Superman ]]> http://swimminhole.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/superman-the-blogger/feed/ 0 Swimmin' Hole! http://swimminhole.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/enough-with-the-bailouts/ http://swimminhole.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/enough-with-the-bailouts/#comments Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:01:54 +0000 Swimmin' Hole http://swimminhole.wordpress.com/?p=54 ]]> “Bailout” is quickly becoming the media’s overused buzzword du jour.

Spurred by coverage of the economic bailout and now the auto industry bailout, writers and editors are going out of their way to inject the B word into as many stories as possible — even when the story has nothing to do with any kind of bailout at all.

The latest offender is Variety, which posted a story this weekend called “Needed: Network bailout?” Intrigued by the possibility that the U.S. government would even consider bailing out struggling TV broadcasters, I clicked on the link … and quickly found out that wasn’t the story at all.

Instead, Michael Schneider writes about how ad revenue is down and the networks may have to cut back on programming to make ends meet. It’s all very interesting, but using the “bailout” buzzword so inappropriately is misleading and unfair to readers.

Mostly, the obsessive media coverage stems from the fans’ own obsessions with their hometown players and teams. But with so many outlets covering every team’s every move, it can be tough for any one writer to stick out. And so occasionally we get things like Bill Burt’s column in today’s Eagle-Tribune, the provocatively — and obnoxiously — titled “Brady Who?“

Sure, Patriots backup quarterback Matt Cassel is exceeding everyone’s expectations as he fills in for Tom Brady. He gets better every week, he’s putting up ridiculous numbers, and his teammates are looking to him for leadership. And the fact that, before this season, he hadn’t started a game since high school, makes his feats even more impressive.

But the fact is the Patriots are still 7-4 and in second place. Will they make the playoffs? Likely. Will they win the Super Bowl? Highly doubtful. And will Cassell start dating a Brazilian supermodel? Nuh uh. So to call his emergence “one of the greatest stories in NFL history,” as Burt does, is pure hyperbole.

Brady came off the bench seven years ago to lead the Pats to three Super Bowl wins. Now THAT is one of the greatest stories in NFL history. Cassell’s just the latest in a long line of athletes who have taken advantage of special opportunities.

And “Brady Who?” is just the latest in a long line of columns that give the Boston sports media such a bad image.