It hasn’t been the best of weeks for the New York Times on the social media scene, but not for lack of trying.
It all started Sunday with the publishing of a lengthy piece headlined Spinning the Web: P.R. in Silicon Valley which I am tempted to say simply missed the point altogether if I can ever figure out exactly what the point was in the first place.
Then there was the small but more significant Mashable item Wednesday pointing out that the Times’ Social Media editor hadn’t tweeted in more than a month … but hey, who’s counting? And how long is that in Web days?
Finally … and stop me if you’ve heard this one before … the Times re-ran the tattered old flag up the pole once again today wondering aloud whether or not readers might possibly ever maybe-in-a-million-years consider paying to read the paper online.
First things first.
Having been a member of the Fourth Estate for more years than I care to remember, I can tell you that the only thing worse than having to work over a three-day national holiday weekend is trying to come up with anything resembling an actual news story to put in the paper. Not only are there no reporters reporting, the people who make news are on holiday, too.
Except for sports, of course. That’s why they are all so bitter.
So it is no wonder the P.R. story was played so big (accompanied by a half-page circa-1995 illustration of a Blackberry with eight legs on a web … get it?) across the front of the Business section.
At first, I was so excited to see the Times run a story on social media that I immediately posted it to my Facebook page.
Then I read the story.
Huh?
Then I read the story a second time, more confused than ever. By the next day I figured it was in all likelihood either a tongue-in-cheek parody or serious put-down of Silicon Valley culture and what passes for business here, at least from an East Coast perspective.
The author certainly spent a lot of time researching the story and if you read between the lines you might get some value out of it if you try hard. Very hard. I looked up and added every name mentioned to my Twitter follower list and actually picked up a couple nuggets, neither of which happened to be the subject of the story, Brooke Hammering. I just checked and her latest tweet manages to drop the names of Donald Trump and Taylor Swift. I am also certain that she received a free Cuban sandwich and fish dinner from the two spots she tweeted about today, too. I’m not criticizing her mind you, I get hungry myself sometimes. Free food is a big part of professional journalism and always will be.
And to be fair to the author of the story it is quite likely that she is as surprised (for lack of a better word) as anyone to see it in print in its raw, not-ready-for-prime-time form. But what’s a summer intern on the business desk to do with all that space to fill?
It’s easy to understand why the social media editor Jennifer Preston has not tweeted since the Clinton administration was in office. Says so right on her one-line bio: Mother of twins. Enough said.
Certainly anyone who can type NYT in the Twitter search field knows the Times gets the social media thing. And Twitter. @NYTimes currently has 1,342,783 followers and has created individual Twitter accounts for every section, columnist and topic of the day … enough to make your iPhone sing. And check out Nick Kristoff on FB or Twitter @nytimeskristoff for a lesson from one of the earliest adopters on how to do it right.
Those who can write, Tweet. Those who can’t, edit. Maybe the baby threw up on her smartphone. It happens.
As for whether or not anyone would want to pay to read the paper online … no. It doesn’t matter how many times someone asks. N-O. No.
At least they didn’t propose charging by the Tweet.
Filed under: New York Times, Old Media, Twitter, Facebook, Kristof, NYT, P.R., Social Media, Times, Twitter
Social MediYeah! 