Why Broadcast Journalists Don't Use RSS
Although the evidence is only anecdotal, according to Steve Safran at Lost Remote PR professionals and everyday users aren't the only one slow to adopt RSS. Broadcast journalists aren't using it either or know what RSS is.
Over the years I have found that broadcast reporters and producers tend to take their cue from what's in the newspaper on a given day. For the nationals, like clockwork they scan the web sites New York Post, USA Today, New York Times and Wall Street Journal and then create a visual version of the same stories. My recent appearance on CNBC was sparked by a story that ran in the Journal that same day. So it doesn't surprise me that they're skipping out on RSS.
Again, while there isn't any hard data to back this up, I suspect that for online, print and newspaper journalists, the situation is completely the opposite. There's much more pressure on them to avoid getting scooped. So with that they're going to make sure the scan blogs and RSS goes a long way to helping them.
Hi, Steve. I'm an analyst that gets on TV frequently. The top three triggers (in order):
1. I got quoted in a story in the New York Times or Wall St. Journal.
2. A story appeared in the Times or the Journal, and they needed an analyst to talk about it.
3. News happened during the day and they needed someone to comment, often combined with outreach based on our analysis of the news event.
The thing is, I don't think people look to broadcast for analysis, they look for timeliness and, in the online age, visuals. The interview with Steve Ballmer is more interesting than the quote from Steve Ballmer, if you have a TV.
Posted by: Josh Bernoff | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 01:41 PM
Hey Steve et al.,
Speaking from a former sports industry PR guy and sports broadcast journalist, I would agree that what appears in print often dictates broadcast stories of the day. In my experience (limited in mainstream PR, but growing, vast in college athletics), the lack of resources and/or "beat" reporters for broadcast entities, almost necessitates the broadcast journalist rip and read or get leads from the papers of record.
Which, in my mind, brings up a good point -- Is all this talk about print being dead and the emergence of the public as journalists simply a bunch of hype? If radio and television journalism is, in fact, a by-product of the old and trusted print pieces, doesn't this logically mean print won't die because if it does, everything else will to? Or will it mean a shift to the electronic mediums for "real" journalists?
Interesting.
Posted by: Jason Falls | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 02:37 PM
I wonder if there will be a new (and better) emerging technology by the time journalists (broadcast and print) start embracing RSS more completely...
Posted by: david weiner | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 04:22 PM
Steve:
RSS is a tool. For broadcast journalists to embrace it, they need to know how it helps them do their job. What problem does it solve for them?
You folks, over in the 'geek spectrum', do a poor job explaining the benefits of RSS and other visual production technologies.
Gosh the Lost Remote guys should try a Web.20 survey, with Journalists. That's sure to generate serious glazed eye syndrome.
How does RSS save time, serve as a lead generator, assist in gathering the elements of visual presentation? Tell me, show me!
Posted by: Bruce Winter | Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 05:27 PM
Am I missing something, or isn't the rich media option for publishing broadcast content called "podcasting?"
If the debate is about consuming RSS feeds, this would not surprise me.
I am a great advocate of RSS, however I am not convinced that there has been any significant adoption of RSS amongst PR professionals or even journalists, of any type.
I blogged about this recently, see http://www.flacksrevenge.com/2007/01/rss_read_stop_s.html
(RSS - Read: Stop Stalling!)
Posted by: Robert Geller | Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 10:24 PM