Facebook is My Newspaper

I remember the day when I realized that Facebook had replaced the newspaper for young adults. 

 
It was the day that I checked my account and saw a piece of national news (courtesy of Scott) and some museum-industry news (Jennifer).  There also was some hometown news (Jeff), and my sister posted she was eating lunch at her desk (a turkey sandwich).
 
Additionally, it was the second time that week alone that I first heard a piece of major news via news stories posted by friends.  Not via television, a news website, or the paper.  Facebook.
 
And it hit me.  I didn't need the Boston Globe anymore.  Or the White County News.  My friends were editing all the news I needed.  No, not editing.  Curating. 
 
We all know the newspaper industry is hemorrhaging.  Nearly every week another major paper stops printing (though does not necessarily mean stop operating, as some are going online-only). 

Even my Boston Globe has a murky future, at best, as it is losing $1,000,000 each week.  Hardly a sustainable future.  And while I still get the paper version of that newspaper, I recently cancelled my Wall Street Journal hard copy in favor of a subscription via my Kindle.  I am finding the reading experience to be different, but equal to, the hard copy (and it is never missing, or wet, or late).
 
Technology has made this all possible, and it has turned the news industry, in particular, upside-down.  Newspapers are struggling to find ways to pay the bills when consumers expect their news to be free and online. 
 
Meanwhile, the media world is continuing to fragment, and websites like Facebook are the places where information is pulled back together.  I can pull in Twitter feeds and RSS (real simple syndication) feeds in to only one or two spots, creating my own, custom, news pages.  I could stop getting the Boston Globe and not really feel I am missing much, if anything.  Having always been a newspaper junkie, that realization is a bit shocking for me, yet I am hardly alone.  A recent study from the Pew Research Center indicates only a third of American adults would miss their daily newspaper "a lot." 
 
Overall, the decline of the newspaper industry has brought some crucial trends and shifts to our attention - trends and shifts that will affect museums as well. 
 
1 - It totally changes the PR landscape.  Museums have traditionally used newspapers and, to a lesser degree, magazines, to promote their exhibits and programs.  Now that model is rapidly disappearing as the economics of those industries fail (and as linear inches allocated for news content continues to decrease).  Other avenues must be used to spread the word about events, programs, and exhibits. 
 
2 - It is increasingly an inefficient use of promotional dollars.  Newspaper advertising is not inexpensive.  On a "per dollar" basis, other venues, ranging from your own e-newsletter to social networking sites to even direct mail can provide more bang for your buck.
 
3 - The decline of newspapers is part of a broader trend from which no one is escaping as people seek out information in different ways.  News is now primarily consumed online and via television (or even radio - NPR's audience has grown by nearly 50% since 2000).  What other venues are out there providing similar information to what you share?  Wikipedia?  Flickr?  YouTube?  Fortunately, museums have a secret weapon:  the real, authentic stuff.  Working with those information venues could actually create more relevance and interest in your museum.
 
4 - There has been a fundamental shift in our economy to a free-based model.  So many things are now free, running off a model of giving away certain content, or services for free, and it is paid for by a smaller number of consumers who receive additional, premium content or services.  But here is the thing.  Museums can and should thrive in the free economy because it is already the business model museums operate on.  Many people (visitors) receive free or drastically reduced admission that is subsidized by a much smaller group of members, donors, and funders.
 
5 - Newspapers were considered by many as a stalwart of the community.  Yet now, according to the Pew report, fewer than half of adult Americans think civic life would be hurt "a lot" if the local paper failed. (Go to http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1147/newspapers-struggle-public-not-concerned for more on Pew's research.) What are the other stalwarts of a community?  Museums certainly fall in the community stalwart category, but how many would miss us "a lot" if we failed?  It is a worthy question to ask yourself.
 
Yet all of this also presents tremendous opportunities for museums.  Going back to Facebook as just one example, it allows me to receive notices of things going on in my community, including museum programs, just like a local paper might.  I can "fan" all the museums I want, and am automatically informed of all their programming.  And see if any of my friends are going (thus making my own visit more likely).  It also reminds me of an event the day beforehand, so I don't forget.  I can subscribe to the news feeds, blogs, and Twitter feeds of museums as well, and actually become more informed directly from the museum itself on what is going on than reading an (edited) version via the paper.  And the best thing?  Museums actually have better control of the message and the distribution is free.
 
Will Facebook replace the newspaper for everyone?  No, but the fastest growing demographic on Facebook is adults over 35.  Facebook may or may not have legs, but if Facebook fails, something new, and probably even more comprehensive, will undoubtedly take its place.  The trick is keeping up and utilizing these tools to reach your audiences (and potential audiences) more effectively, where they already look for information, and in a way that builds relevance in their lives.

What do you think?  Is there anything you disagree with?  Or do you see these trends playing out as well in your community?  Click on “comments” below to share.  (If you are reading this from your e-mail subscription to the blog, please go to our blog's website to add a comment.)  Please include the name of your museum as well!

-Susie

Comments

[Kevin - Lincoln Children's Museum]

I have some pretty intense thoughts on this subject, so rather than begin a rant, I’ll stick with some concise comments I’ve made in the past:

Very few newspapers have adjusted their business model to effectively utilize the Internet and they are now paying a substantial price.

Advertising in the physical newspaper is becoming tremendously inefficient from a cost perspective, due in large part to an ever-shrinking audience. And unfortunately most newspaper (and to be fair - local television) websites are tremendously difficult to navigate for content outside of the main page – a problem which prevents it from being an appealing alternative for advertisers.

The other, and probably larger issue, is that journalism doesn't really exist anymore. Rather, everything has morphed into media - and the "journalistic" wing of media has shifted emphasis from fact-based news gathering to breaking news - to the detriment of both the institution of journalism and the reader/viewer.

Long story short - if newspapers cannot convince us they have something different and better to offer than the alternatives, they are certainly doomed to fail.

Also, there was an interesting article in Fast Company a few months ago that I think everyone should read before completely abandoning the print ship and signing up for their Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc. accounts: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/130/not-so-fast-social-misfits.html

[Nina Simon]

Susie,
Interesting to see this connected to newspaper. I've been talking to folks recently about Facebook as the new homepage (blog post coming soon), that we are moving from a time of atomized search via Google to socially contextualized information via Facebook. College students use Facebook as their homepages. Google changed the way we think about information. Facebook (or whatever major social networks "win") will do that too.

[Laurie]

As a Facebook-er since it's beginning (when I was in college), until now as a museum professional, I've never been a newspaper reader. In fact, I see newspapers as 1., a waste of paper, and 2. a waste of time (unfortunately). Why sit and page through a paper to try and find something that interests me, when I could be Googling recent world news or catching up with more personal news on Facebook? And then there is the time delay - why read breaking news in the morning newspaper which I read the story online last night?

When I think of an image of someone who reads a newspaper, the individual is a member of my parents' generation and my grandparents' generation. I know of no one my age (mid to late 20's)who subscribes to a newspaper. Unfortunately for the newspaper industry, we, speaking broadly for my age group, see it as pointless.

In thinking about museum audiences in general, I agree, the trick is to keep up, and to always keep in mind which audience you are marketing to. Speaking to the season - cover all your bases!

[Alison]

Alright, admittedly, I work in PR (although I never intended to), but before this September, I was a civilian Gen Y too, Laurie. In museum grad school, I did subscribe to a paper--the Wall Street Journal. Maybe a strange choice for a liberal arts oriented person, but I was hungry for a different perspective and novel (to me) information outside of my dictated learning. And I *loved* getting the paper copy. I relished sitting with a cup of coffee and trying to parse the business news.

Does our generation really google news information? If we're not reading a paper or if only our friends (through Facebook) are curating our news, are we really getting a sense of the entire world. What's going to ever force us out of our comfort zone and encourage us to develop new interests?

And our generation needs to think beyond the immediate gratification of hastily written, breaking news. We need thoughtful, well researched pieces. Newspapers aren't pointless; they're the lifeblood of a democracy. If our generation stops reading the paper and the newspaper industry fails, who is going to police the government? What will accountability really mean? A thousand bloggers typing in caps does not have the weight of one investigative news piece.

[Laurie]

The Wall Street Journal is great - I subscribe and read it online! Wish I had the time in grad school. :)

The concept that news printed on paper carries more weight rather than online news is interesting. Is that because of the history of news? The history of research in general? I don't know and can't speak to accountability or policing the government, but there are numerous mistakes in both printed, investigative and online news. It's up to what the reader believes.

In thinking about a switch from paper news to online news, it broadens even more to accessibility. Museums are on a trend of putting their collections "online" - in order to make things more accessible to their audiences, preservation and organization reasons. Reading the news, checking facebook and blogging online - it's accessible. And it's quick. And it's searchable. And it's researchable.

It's just so intriguing.

[Nicole Belolan]

First, a profile - I'm a 24-year-old female in grad school. I subscribe to the print version of The New Yorker magazine; The NY Times is my browser home page. I watch ABC news (local and national) most nights, and if I had cable, I would also watch cable news outlets. I periodically read the local newspaper online. I browse the NY POST and the Wall Street Journal online many days. I listen to NPR, especially prior to 9am and after 4pm (in other words, the news).

Most of my information regarding museum programming (especially exhibitions)comes from reading the listings in the New Yorker, reviews in the NY Times, and visiting museum web pages themselves. I am a "fan" of several cultural institutions on Facebook, but I have never, ever learned about any sort of programming for those institutions via Facebook. I consider my "fan" status as a way to reflect my values and my chosen profession. Although I "share" interesting news stories (MOST OF WHICH ARE ABOUT MUSEUMS) on my Facebook page, I have yet to read something a Facebook friend "shared" on their page.

Are newspapers on their way out? As a printed artifact, perhaps (even though I would prefer to hold a newspaper than read it online myself). Should museums abandon them as potential modes through which to disseminate information? Heck no. As mentioned above, as a more "traditional" new gatherer, I pass on my NY TIMES museum news, etc., to my Facebook community. I know friends who read the same news paper (and who do not focus on museum news) pay attention because they've commented on these postings Ultimately, as mentioned by others who commented here, I think all the resources for news mentioned in this blog post and in the comments continue to hold weight with one or more audiences and should we used by museums to spread information.

I probably don't represent a majority, but perhaps my habits are representative of others' habits.

[Laura]

I want to shift the comments in a slightly different direction... not about newspapers (I read the Globe every morning) but to museums online. I recently heard someone say that you are kidding yourself if you think your museum does not have an online identity. It does - the only question is who is controlling it. For those who do PR, this is an opportunity and a nightmare. All those bloggers (the whole mom-blogger thing is completely out of control) and TripAdvisor/Yelp reviewers are reaching far more people than press releases ever did. Articulating and maintaining a brand message is a real challenge in this environment. We need more than a skill set (and a Facebook page) - we need a different attitude and strategy!

[Nicole Belolan]

Laura - I agree with your comments based on personal experience. There have been several occasions when I have been looking for information about a museum (especially the nature of collections and exhibitions for the purposes of applying for jobs at those institutions or for academic research purposes), only to find that their web sites are very inadequate. I have turned to the only other option - sites like TripAdvisor or other sites that are made-up of user-generated information - to get what is likely somewhat-accurate information about the institution I am researching for whatever reason. This is all well and good, but I would imagine that museums would prefer to control their own information output(as Laura suggested may be an issue)using a variety of outlets.

[Nina Simon]

Susie,

I wrote more about this concept--of how increased use of social media changes the way museums represent themselves on the Web here: http://museumtwo.blogspot.com/2009/04/simple-argument-for-why-museums-and.html

[Scott Wands]

Great discussion!

We need a healthy variety of news outlets to provide information. The internet allows access to articles from news markets I never would have been able to reach before. If a museum story of relevance happens in Bakersfield, CA, my friend out there might post it to her facebook page where I'll see it, read it, and possibly share it. This is good.

The bad will be when this proliferation of online sources causes these independent, geographically diverse news outlets to dry up. Then there will be little or nothing to share.

Print media has taken too long to respond to the availability of news information via the internet. And society's own desire to have fast, accurate content--but not pay for it--is a non-sustainable model.

I for one love learning about issues via the Web. However, I also subscribe to the Hartford Courant. The Web has yet to, and likely never will, replace the tactile joy of leisurely reading the paper in the morning over a cup of coffee.

[mypostcardprinting]

facebook has come to the point that it really is the first thing I open online and I spend more time on the web than with myself at times. Dont get me wrong, I just enjoy getting it on my monitor than flipping through the pages of a print. Catching up on all the events that I choose to read is a huge part of why its much easier, comfortable and meaningful for me to just log on and get on with my so called online life.

I just love it.

[Emily]

The museum where I work just started a Facebook page. We are located on a college campus but rarely visited by college students, and we're hoping to change that. There is no way we could go paperless, however, because most of our clientele is older and has been getting our program brochures for decades and are used to seeing things a certain way. We can't abandon them in favor of the next generation; it's another layer we have to add to reach a new audience.

The one thing that newspapers have over internet news is that you are more likely to read about new and different things in the newspaper than online. At least I am. The newspaper delivers news to your doorstep, but with the internet you still have to search for it, opt-in for an RSS feed, or be generally proactive about finding new perspectives. If you read the newspaper cover to cover, you may discover a new play, book, or news story that you wouldn't have otherwise.

[Mary Ann Colopy]

There are privacy issues associated with facebook. There is also the issue of availability overload. Not everyone works at a desk at a computer, and mobile devices are limited. When the non-newspaper generation ages out of the need to be instantly available to everyone, and the technology matures that is is no longer quite a novelty, then news delivery can be assessed.