The List
![[Score History]](/images/profile/chart/830)
![[Score History]](/images/profile/chart/830/print)
When You Want to Have a Conversation, but Can't
 Carepages.com
Social networking services like CarePages are becoming an increasingly important part of the health news and info landscape. |
According to this report, people seeking health information have been early adopters in the transition from the read-only Web to 2.0 -- but health professionals have been relatively reluctant to follow them. The report also explores how some high-traffic health blogs and wikis work, and projects what might happen when healthcare organizations join the conversation.
There's just one problem: CHCF's own site isn't 2.0. It offers no functionality for readers of this report about online conversation to join a conversation about the report with the report's authors.
|
RELATED RESOURCES | |
|
But give CHCF credit: They're aware of the irony. Spencer A. Sherman, CHCF's director of publishing and communications, told me in a e-mail: "We are in the process of adding the ability for readers to respond to commentaries posted on our two news services: California HealthLine and iHealthBeat. That should launch in several months. We will be looking at the response from our readers and, based on their interest, potentially include the ability to add reader comments to our other sites."
Meanwhile, report author Jane Sarasohn-Kahn (a health economist and technology consultant) is starting a conversation about these issues on her own blog, Health Populi.
News Brands Lost in Translation?
 ReefRaff, via Flickr (CC license)
Some attempts at translation just don't work. |
"Which of these URLs do you recognize?
"For those of you who claim to recognize the first two, you are either lying, or you have lived in both Iowa and Arizona, as I have. ...Even if you do live in those regions, the chance that you've never visited one of these sites increases as your age bracket skews younger."
The point of this exercise is Kredit's question: "Does a traditional media brand name (i.e. Seattle Times, Kansas City Star, etc.) provide significant value to an online audience, or does its value get lost in translation somewhere between the printed word and the 19-inch flat-screen you're currently staring at?"
This is well worth pondering, I think -- and definitely not just among media or journalism insiders. What makes news valuable enough to support a business for producing it?
I do think that mainstream news brands still attract (and deserve) a considerable level of "default trust" among many communities and demographics -- if only because with the recent explosion of news and media options, it's hard enough for many people to fully grasp the breadth of what's available, let alone decide what news to trust.
Trust is a pretty important and attractive selling point. It simplifies decisions and thus can reduce the inherent stress of uncertainty. When it comes to news and information, "Who can I trust?" is a primary concern that cuts across lines of age, race, income, ethnicity, politics, and other key demographics.
That said, it's interesting to look over NewsTrust's broad array of most trusted sources. People are definitely extending trust beyond established traditional news brands.
The "default trust" dynamic -- which keeps people coming back to news brands -- only works if people have experience with that news brand. So it's not just about trustworthiness, it's also about relevance and presence.
Kredit's point is that when news brands fail to continually establish relevance and presence early on with each new generation, they simply become invisible. He suggests that "Newspapers might consider abandoning their traditional print brand online, reinventing an entirely new media brand for the Web. This allows a great deal of autonomy to operate -- much the same as an Internet company, not a newspaper company with a Web site." I have my doubts about that strategy, since an established brand, even one in decline, almost always gets more recognition than a brand-new one.
So: What's your news brand's strategy for continuously establishing relevance and presence with new generations and communities? Please comment below.
Mini-Tidbits: Insights from Israel, Civic Info Research, More...
 TravelingGeeks.com
Traveling Geeks, a group of Bay Area bloggers (including Susan Mernit) is blogging the world, starting with Israel. |
Knight Commission on the Information Needs of Communities in a Democracy (Press release): New research project will "look into whether the information needs of 21st century American citizens and communities are being met and make recommendations for public policy and private initiatives that will help better meet community information needs."
The Web is the center? Maybe just one of the centers (Steve Yelvington): "Newspapers should use the net to execute a Google-like, open-source-inspired, conversational approach to journalism, while remaking print around focus, quality, depth and thought-provoking discovery."
Building an Online Community (NewsWire): "Interesting discussion about improving Environmental News Online (ENO) as a brand, and improving its community. This is due to the fact that the level of content on the site is steadily declining -- something we need to address."
Senate Hearing: FCC Chair Condemns Comcast (MediaPost): "FCC Chair Kevin Martin said the FCC is still investigating pending complaints, but left little doubt that he would favor some sort of action against Comcast, if the company violated the FCC's 2005 net neutrality principles."
Newspaper advertising drives online traffic (NAA): "Among people who research products and services after seeing them advertised in newspapers, two-thirds (67 percent) use the Internet to find more information. Of that group, nearly 70 percent of consumers actually make a purchase following their additional research."