Publishing as Life Hack

 

[image of life hacks by Phil Gyford]

***

Last Sunday, as I was hitting publish on my post about collaborative journalism, Gina Trapani was talking to Lifehacker's audience about her decision to step away from the site's editor job to go back to "making things, noodling with software, and writing about it." I've read her open letter a couple of times because it says so much about how publishing has evolved into a conversation among content creators - readers and writers mixed in different doses.

We discussed the combination in a conversation published here. "My definition of success is handing a reader a useful tidbit that saves time or makes life easier in a small way," said Trapani. The other insight I had from the post - which, as she wrote, broke the two "keep it short and sweet" and "it's not about you" rules - was that publishing itself is a life hack. Her post generated 378 comments.

This to me seems to be the biggest difference between sites born as new media and those who have migrated online from print - that of educating and inspiring comments, building rapport through conversation. Contrast this with the tone of the exchanges that take place at Wired.com, for example, and you may see what I'm talking about.

The new in media seems to take publishing much more personally than the mainstream. Not just a job, a reason and a way to improve one's knowledge and life. Do you think that's because some of the native publishers in the new format were not born as journalists? In some discussions over this very point, I heard things like - journalists are authorities who publish, therefore they don't get involved in conversation.

Many in the comments to Trapani's post expressed appreciation, but also awe at what is possible to achieve. That is probably one of the best examples of crowd evaluation I have seen. After reading the post, I thought about some questions to ask media companies that have an online property. They are the same questions bloggers have been asking themselves and others for at least as long as I have been active.

1. Do you provide the best return on time invested on the Net? Is your site a must read? As Randy Smith puts so well in a comment - if it isn't original content, then what about high quality leads?

2. Do you create a community at your site? The answer to the question is in spirit more than literally. Many print publications succeeded in doing that, in becoming quite different and thus unique in their readers' minds. 

3. Are you an original or a copy? Online, it's more tempting to copy, isn't it? Copy the URL, or buy something very similar - are among the forms of misdirected cleverness. Why? Can't you be yourself? Can't you develop your own personality? The worst thing you can do is be too clever for your own good, actually - you know who you are. If so much could be done from code (zeros and ones), imagine the life hacks you could put together if you were just more willing.

4. Do you show tireless devotion to your readers? Great journalists have that drive and belief. It comes across clearly from professionals like Christiane Amanpour - not just when you have the opportunity to be in the same room with her, but in her robust body of work.

5. Do you know when it's time to refocus your priorities? I know how easy it is to continually optimize one model, instead of seeking to break new ground in the evolution of a business.

6. Can you say that you've inspired someone to become a journalist? Educating and making it exciting is part of it. Being part of defining moments is a good way to know that you're on the right track. With so many more voices, there is still plenty of opportunity for signal.

7. Would your readers and customers give you an award? That is what matters. Prizes like the Pulitzer should be a nice outcome, and not a goal in and of itself. It's the same conversation we have in business, and even in the blogosphere.

The essence of life hacking, as Trapani writes in her post, is this - "for someone who loves making things on the web, spending 100% of the time blogging about what other people are making is simply untenable." Are you publishing as life hack, or is it time to consider what you'd rather make?

Comments

[Steven Woods]

Valeria,
I truly hope the online version of journalism evolves that way. The challenge will be for readers and bloggers to push this evolution, as there is a distressing trend to write "populist" content; link list, me-too articles, top 10 ways to do X, that generates lots of Diggs and links, but does not contribute much to the conversation.

If we, as readers actively seek out the interesting, novel, creative, and challenging reads, we will encourage more of them. If we, as bloggers, link to content because it is truly great, rather than any other reason, we can encourage that evolution.

I'm certainly hoping that you've set out the vision for where online journalism evolves to, but I think it will be a challenging road from where we are at the moment.

[Valeria Maltoni]

The most I think about this, the more it makes sense. It was Gina Trapani who put it so well that it just flowed. As you probably noticed, I rarely go for the easy pieces here.

Somehow I'd like to find a way to invite more comments - this is where all the good stuff is anyway. I also don't do link posts - unless it's as a resource guide of sorts when I do not find one. Instead, I prefer to link to resources organically. My post on Obama's campaign linked to 14 blogs - all with good content.

There needs to be an economic part to this conversation. I think Lifehacker has done well (someone correct me here if I'm wrong). It's possible. If it were easy, we'd already all be there. The fun is in the getting there and learning.

[Denis]

1 and 3 are great point!

1) is a good answer (or question) for all the old biz models that keep requiring ROI

3) is an issue very close too me... it seems that speed is today's value, and to be fast most they just copy. A competition for being the first reporter of X or Y while there is hardly an opinion, or an insight...

[Ekaterina Tsvetkova]

Interesting post, Valeria! I would like to comment to point number 2, "Do you create a community at your site?" In the print world, we have audited circulation data to confirm the audience of the publication. The larger media auditing organizations are making great strides in replicating that process for the digital world, which is great, because without that I don't think have the tools to understand who the audiences actually are and what communities publishers are creating when shifting online. Ways to better understanding of digital media audiences have been discussed on the site called Buy Safe Media. Its goal is to promote accountability through media circulation audits: http://www.buysafemedia.com