According to the study, knowing how to write “print style” or “Web-friendly” stories is a must.  The majority of stations (85%) reported that their producers “frequently” or “sometimes” wrote Web-friendly stories.  Almost all the stations (93%) said their reporters “frequently” or “sometimes” write Web-friendly stories.

Producers, in particular, are also often required to resize or reformat still images and video for the Web.   Producers at well over half (59%) the stations “frequently” or “sometimes” work with still images; similarly, half of the stations said reporters “frequently” or “sometimes” are manipulating still images for Web use.   These findings reinforce the need for multimedia journalists to have an understanding of Photoshop or similar progams.

Producers and reporters also are resizing/reformatting video for the Web. Over half the stations (52%) said their producers perform that task “frequently” or “sometimes.” Reporters work with Web video slightly less: about forty-percent do.

When it comes to higher-level Web production, newscast producers and reporters are less likely to do as much.

We defined multi-media production as creating an integrated package for the Web (such as slide shows) that includes such elements as text, graphics, still or motion video and sound… Less than twenty-percent of stations said producers performed such tasks “frequently.” A third said producers did multi-media “sometimes.”  Just over half the stations reported that producers “never” do multi-media packages.

The findings were similar for reporters. Less than a fourth of the stations (21%) said their reporters were involved in multi-media production “frequently.” About a third said its reporters “sometimes” did it, and at close to half of the stations (45%) reporters “never” did multi-media.

Producers and reporters were also embedding raw documents in stories, adding links and making some use of HTML, but not at very high levels.

Photojournalists were most likely to be involved in putting  additional materials from reporter packages such as extended raw video, natural sound pieces or full sound interviews on the website.

So, how important are Web skills when it comes to hiring for TV jobs?  More than a third (38%) of news directors say such proficiency is “extremely important” when they decide on a new producer hire. Over half (53%) say “somewhat important.” Very similar results were found for reporter hires.  Forty percent of news directors consider new media skills “extremely important” when making hiring decisions, over half (53%) say “somewhat important.”

The research paper, “New Media Skills Competency Expected of TV Reporters and Producers: A Survey” was presented at the AEJMC convention in Denver.  Thanks to Nancy Dupont for the tip and to Suzanne Lysak for sharing the paper.

According to the report: among all cell phone owners:
• 54% have used their mobile device to send someone a photo or video
• 23% have accessed a social networking site using their phone
• 20% have used their phone to watch a video
• 15% have posted a photo or video online
• 11% have purchased a product using their phone
• 10% have used their mobile phone to access a status update service such as Twitter

Gegg says mobile is a vital part of the station’s multimedia strategy.

“Our viewers and users are always on the go, so with our mobile products (including our apps for the iPhone and Android), they can get the news they need at anytime, and anywhere. Our page views on our mobile product climb every month,” Gegg says.

For example, he points out that from May to July 2010, mobile usage of WMTV content climbed 51 percent.

“Also, we consider our viewers/users our eyes in the community. As noted in a recent Pew study, 54% of all cell phone owners have sent a photo or video via their cell phones. Viewer-submitted photos and video is so valuable to us during severe weather and breaking news situation,” Gegg says.

In addition, WMTV reporters and photographers send video and pictures from breaking news scenes that the station can post instantly on the website and social media sites, as well.

Gegg says mobile strategies are going to become increasingly important for journalists to understand.

Media Shift recently explored the various ways in which the content farm works.

But the approach to churning out that content varies from how-to articles (Demand Media), vertical topics (High Gear Media), hyper-local (Patch.com) and sports (Bleacher Report, SB Nation). And at some sites, writers get paid a small amount, while at others they toil for free.

A roundtable of representatives from various content farms talked about the ways in which this is different from citizen journalism and why some people may want to write for free.

Content farms may provide opportunities for writers to get noticed and a forum for those who are passionate about a particular topic or who want to promote a particular agenda or point of view.

Frankly, I think the term is still a bit undefined, but the potential for impact on journalists’ salaries is there, as well as on the overall profitability of news sites. It’s a term we’ll want to learn more about.

To that end, Tompkins shared his 10 Laws of Multimedia with a group of educators at the Poynter Institute.

Law #1 Make it interactive
It gives control to the user, and with our interest in metrics, interactivity increases stickiness — basically the amount of time spent on the site.

Law #2 Be search engine friendly
Design your site and your headlines with SEO in mind.  Avoid Flash animation or images in the upper-left of your page.  Spiders look at first 1-4 words in a headline, so you want to pay special attention to the way you write them.

Law #3 Aggregate and generate
Don’t be afraid to publish good work that other people do in addition to the work that you generate.

Law #4 Go raw, let viewers experience information on their own terms
Use raw video and other source information to let audience members see it for themseves.  Put your evidence online.

Law #5 Leverage your digital assets
You may be generating information that the public will be interested in, i.e. putting your editorial meeting online.  If it’s completely unique content that people really want, they’ll pay for it, i.e. at least one newspaper experimenting with a pay wall for obits.

Law #6 Involve the public, but make it meaningful
Give people a way to share what they know.

Law #7 Tap into local passion groups
Give people a place to meet like-minded individuals ala Facebook.  Help them form communities.

Law #8 Map it
Mapping gives you a wide shot and specificity in communicating information.  The washingtonpost.com “Faces of the Fallen” project is one example.  Try quikmaps for easily creating an interactive map.

Law #9 Feed your needs, too
Get yourself in front of the world online.  For example, check out the oil ticker on the NewsHour website, which they allowed other news organizations to embed in their own sites.

Law #10 Save elaborate presentations for projects with staying power
If it’s going to be a lot of work, make sure it has shelf life.

“The most important reason to do multimedia is to improve the journalism,” Tompkins said.

He pointed to a recent piece in which the band Vampire Weekend was interviewed by fans who had sent in video questions.

“What’s better, an interview with Vampire Weekend with some reporter asking the same old  questions or questions from passionate fans?” Toppo asked. 

Of course, using viewers or readers to ask the questions is not exactly new, but Toppo says he’s trying to empower the journalists who work for him to look at each story they cover and then determine which tool will help them tell that story best.  For example, Toppo says he was delighted when an associate producer produced this piece within hours of Apple announcing the name, iPad.  All it took was Skype and some initiative. 

“Without ever talking to me, she and a co-worker got on the phone, got the interview, went into the control room and did the whole thing,” Toppo said.  “That’s what I like to see.”

Toppo also said that “video is not right for every story.” He pointed to a piece about teenagers overdosing on methadone as an example of a story that became more powerful through the use of audio and stills. 

At other times, CNN.com becomes an aggregator of content, according to Toppo, creating an “explainer” for users by pulling together content that’s already available else where online, such as a Web package on the “New Jews.”

Perhaps this is the start of the next chapter for journalism — with more journalists becoming more adept with more tools, the quality of storytelling may improve, if we can keep the focus on selecting the right tools for the right stories.

This year, as in the past, the list is short — only a very small percentage of nominees come from local TV.  Even in the category of “Best Local TV/Cable-Affiliated Web Site,”  just two traditional stations make the list:

•    KTKA.com, The World Company
•    Super3 Club, DDRTV Inernacional
•    WRAL.com, CBC New Media Group

TV, in general, is not well represened either — CNN and CBS MoneyWatch received several nominations, but these awards are clearly dominated by the print folks once again.

To see good work done by students, check out the finalists for “Best College Newspaper Web Site:”

•    idsnews.com, Indiana University Student Media
•    NYCity News Service, City of New York Graduate School of Journalism
•    The Temple News – temple-news.com

I hope this is a case of TV newsrooms simply not entering the competition, and maybe we’ll get ‘em next year.

The Wire is a pretty simple idea at heart: a searchable three-day timeline with pop-up boxes for news, events and comments from both newsroom staff and users. Users can click on an entry for more information, including text, photos, video or behind-the-scenes notes from WCCO journalists. Then they can add comments or share the item with their social networks.

The Wire lets users watch in real time as news stories unfold and contribute to them, as well. Whenever information comes in on a story the station adds a new post, so users can scroll back and forth to see what happened when. Because users will know when the station is working on a story, they “could add to it, or comment about it, which may potentially change the shape or scope of that story,” says WCCO creative director Casey Kespohl in a video introduction to the new project.

The timeline also includes tweets from WCCO staff and from other local news sources, including competing television stations. That’s a pretty bold move, since those tweets include clickable links to the other guys’ websites.

Want to know more about how it works? Here’s a how-to video the station posted on launch day:

The Wire isn’t all about news, though. WCCO obviously hopes the Wire will make money, so organizations and businesses can post events on the timeline “for a nominal fee.” That gives advertisers “brand integration,” says Kespohl. In other words, when they buy their way onto the Wire they’re getting the online equivalent of product placement on the air. That’s a controversial concept, to say the least. But Kespohl justifies it by saying the site isn’t just a news source, it’s more of a community.

Maybe the old rules really don’t apply on a site like the Wire. But it wouldn’t be that hard for events to carry a “paid advertisement” label, would it?

That said, WCCO deserves credit for trying something different, lifting the curtain on how news is made and inviting the public to weigh in in real time. Will people use it? Will it make a difference in the newsroom? And will it ever turn a profit? We’ll have to ask those questions in a few months.

Sourced from: NewsLab

The topline summary suggests that pay-for-view news is going to be a tough sell as 79% of users say they would no longer access a Web site that charges them. 

However, the study also found that about 8% of people have already paid for newspaper content at some point and more than 40% say they would consider paying.  For radio news/talk, about a quarter of those surveyed say they might pay for the privilege of listening. 

Though the survey did not ask specifically about TV news, about 50% of people said they would consider paying to see “professionally produced video” (and yes, there was a separate category for theatrical movies).

But here’s the rub — the survey also indicates that “71% of global consumers say that if have to pay for online content it must be considerably better than what is currently available for free.”

The new report from Nielsen surveyed 27,000 consumers from 52 countries.

We wanted to speak to how speed and space limitations can compromise accuracy and fairness. We wanted to speak to the frictions that occur when journalists “friend” people on Facebook. We wanted to say something about how journalists are always journalists, even when they are off the clock. We also thought it was important to speak to how journalists sometimes say or post things online that they would not say or show on the air.

Additionally, we wanted to say loudly that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other such sites have a legitimate place in the distribution and collection of news and information, but that like any tools, they should be used carefully.

In addition to all that Tompkins mentions, one of the guidelines that strikes me as particularly noteworthy is the suggestion that news organizations correct their social media mistakes.  As someone who turns to Twitter and other social media sites during breaking news, I can tell you that many news organizations do report inaccuracies, but few seem to own up to it.  It seems to me that preserving journalistic integrity is critical to preserving journalism’s future — and that every station ought to be developing a social media corrections policy.  How about you?

It was very simple, I set up an account, had someone hold their iPhone up during the show, and voila! We were streaming. I teased viewers and friends via Facebook and Twitter, telling them to tune into our behind-the-scenes broadcast of the 5 o’clock news.

The stream was very casual, informal and candid. There were several viewers who tuned in and were able to comment during the show. We started streaming from right before show time, explaining to viewers what we were doing, introducing them to production assistants and just talking casually about what to expect. We streamed throughout the first block of the show, and then commercial breaks, where I interacted with viewers via a chat-like setting on LiveStream. We even had a few random people from different countries!

It was a simple and easy way to let the viewers in on a little piece of the news that they don’t normally get…the long-time weather man who everyone in our market adores, what the studio really looks like, and how it all works.

Burdine went on to say that the station does plan to do it again, but “not too much.”

And that raises the big question: How much IS too much?

Certainly there seems to be nothing wrong with taking viewers behind the scenes of a newscast. And people who spend a lot of time in the “social media space” see absolutely nothing wrong with reporters sharing via Facebook or Twitter details of visits to the Wendy’s drive through or trying to get cat hair off their clothes, but sometimes I wonder how all this changes our notions of journalism?

Is the end result a “personality-driven press” where everyone is vying to win a popularity contest with the audience? Will journalists be known more by their private lives than by their publications?

Perhaps not, but you can follow Nikki Burdine’s day today on Twitter: @NikkiBurdine.