Category results for "Perspectives"

One of my new favorite YouTube channels is First We Feast, specifically the show Hot Ones, where celebrities answer great interview questions as they eat progressively hotter wings. While it’s always entertaining, a recent interview with Academy Award winner Matt Damon really stuck with me because of the way it parallels what is happening with news media today.

He was asked about the macroeconomics of Hollywood, particularly how streaming has affected the subjective quality of content compared to decades ago. Damon explained how DVDs once generated huge revenue, allowing studios to take more creative risks because they could rely on profits from DVD sales after a film’s theatrical release. He shared an example from a studio executive who explained that making a movie would, in theory, cost $25 million, with another $25 million for print and advertising. Gross box office receipts are then split with theater owners, who typically keep about half. This structure means the film would need to earn around $100 million just to break even or beginning to even discuss profit.

Safe bets versus experimentation and adaptability

This hit me close to home, even though I’m in a different industry. It made me think about how the news media industry has also undergone drastic changes due to technology, shifts in audience consumption habits, and declines in traditional revenue streams like print subscriptions and classified ads. Both industries now take fewer risks in unpredictable environments, arguably leading to a drop in content quality and diversity. While exceptional work is still produced, the shift toward safer, commercially viable content is evident. Yet the evolving landscape hints at a future that demands a more integrated and adaptive approach.

Hollywood content creation, as Damon suggests, centers on box office hits that drive significant revenue in their theatrical run. In news media, revenue reliance is on digital ads, subscriptions, and paywalls.

Damon’s discussion of the economics of film made me wonder: What’s the new “DVD-sales” for the news media industry? What will create sustainable revenue beyond conventional methods? As technology advances, I believe the solution is in building new models that effectively leverage current tech and audience trends to offer long-term financial stability.

While traditional news content remains important, it’s clear that audience expectations constantly evolve. Technology unlocks new possibilities which organizations must experiment with to master. At the same time, communities and influencers are reshaping how audiences connect with news. To stay relevant, news media has to adapt to these changing consumption patterns and provide deeper engagement. It’s time for journalism to meet these evolving demands, focusing on the key areas that will define the future of news and become the industry’s new “DVD-sales.”

Diverse and individualized identity in media

As audience preferences evolve, identity and self-representation are becoming central to media consumption. People no longer want just content—they want content that reflects their values and creates a sense of belonging. Subscriptions, affiliations, and donations have become extensions of personal identity, allowing individuals to support causes, movements, or news platforms that align with who they are or aspire to be. This shift is empowering. It fosters deeper connections between the audience and the media. However, it requires representation and relatability.

Audiences increasingly seek a voice in the content they engage with. Community-led journalism and immersive experiences meet this demand by offering behind-the-scenes access, deeper insights into investigative reporting, and platforms for expressing concerns and successes within communities. These media-driven town halls—both in-person and virtual—create spaces where passion and substance shape the conversation. Historically, community-led journalism has also empowered underserved groups. It gives them ownership of their stories, fosters empathy, and reinforces a sense of identity as individuals see themselves reflected in the content.

Mission-driven partnerships

As audiences seek media that reflects their authentic selves, corporations and philanthropic organizations are aligning with news outlets that share their values to forge impact-driven partnerships that open new revenue opportunities for news media. These partnerships—particularly with philanthropic foundations, renewable energy companies, and organizations focused on health and sustainability—fund journalism with shared societal goals. Rooted in corporate social responsibility, they empower journalism to deliver objective reporting while driving meaningful social change.

By supporting investigative journalism, documentaries, and projects that resonate with consumers’ values, these partnerships enhance engagement and create a sustainable, mission-driven funding model. And companies that invest in media that align with their core values forge deeper connections with consumers who see these efforts as an extension of their own identities. This trend could shift news revenue models from short-term advertising to long-term, scalable partnerships, offering a significant and exciting opportunity for the future of news media.

Transformative role of technology

While sticking with the tried-and-true tactics may seem like the safe bet, the industry will need to reinvigorate its spirit of innovation and risk to best connect with ever-evolving audience expectations. Technology has empowered today’s audiences to be more authentic by providing quicker access to information and more immediate ways to explore their interests. Information access helps people understand themselves and the world around them with greater speed and depth.

Newsrooms can harness this shift by embracing immersive reporting through interactive experiences like AR and VR, which allows individuals to step into different perspectives, fostering empathy and engagement. These immersive technologies, from placing reporters on the front lines to using interactive learning platforms, enable audiences to connect more deeply with content, helping them refine their views and consider how they want to contribute or enact change.

The real breakthrough, however, is in AI’s role in driving personalized engagement. AI allows news organizations to deliver hyper-personalized content based on individual habits and preferences, a process once manual and time-consuming. With AI-enhanced data insights, organizations can understand their audiences at a granular level, offering timely, relevant, and highly customized content. This deeper connection with consumers anticipates their needs and creates impactful experiences, potentially transforming how news is consumed and delivered.

The road ahead for media revenue

So where is this all leading, and how does this become the new “DVD-sales” for news media? The answer lies in a transformative, identity-driven, community and tech-powered ecosystem where audiences help shape the content. This approach will foster loyalty and create scalable, sustainable revenue beyond traditional ads and subscriptions. By leveraging the combined power of community and technology, news organizations can form partnerships with purpose-aligned entities, redefining how journalism is funded and experienced.

I envision a digital platform where users actively participate, voting on story ideas or contributing content in an environment that tackles local and global issues. With AI and data-driven personalization, users can receive tailored content and news organizations can create high-demand immersive experiences like virtual town halls.

If you’re wondering how these ideas translate into reality, take a look at City Bureau in Chicago, which is already putting some of them to work. This journalism lab is reimagining local media by equipping communities to address information inequity. Their Documenters program trains and pays residents to cover local government meetings, boosting transparency and citizen involvement.

This concept upholds journalistic integrity, ensures accuracy and drives meaningful community involvement. It integrates the community into the editorial process without compromising professional standards. The approach builds authentic connections and strengthens trust, which is crucial for attracting corporate sponsorships and philanthropic partnerships. No, it does not come in a handy book-sized package like the DVD. However, this is a model that puts the audience at the center to build a sustainable model through experimentation in how the news is made, delivered, and funded.

Perspectives

DCN’s media industry must reads: week of October 31, 2024

October 31, 2024 Michelle Manafy, Editorial Director – DCN

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

The Guardian | Journalism is the lifeblood of British democracy. My government will protect it (3 min read)
Financial Times | From Paddington Bear to Gladiator, tax breaks lure productions from Hollywood heartland (7 min read)
The New York Times | California Governor Proposes $750 Million in Annual Film Tax Credits (7 min read)
Variety | Six Biggest Companies to Spend Record $126 Billion on Content in 2024, up 9%, Led by Disney (3 min read)
CTV | Google exempt from Online News Act for 5 years, must pay news outlets $100M: CRTC (1 min read)
The Washington Post | Opinion: The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media By Jeff Bezos (4 min read)
Semaphor | Rivals scramble to react to Washington Post endorsement crisis (3 min read)

Perspectives

The grey zone: Where the media fits into fake news

October 29, 2024 Heidi Gautschi – Associate Professor, Digital Society, Haute école pédagogique Vaud

Change is an inevitable part of journalism. No one would deny the radical – and ongoing – technological shifts impacting the craft over the past three decades. And few (if any) would deny that some things have stayed the same. These include both a steadfast belief in the importance of journalistic ethics and the existence of fake news.

Where there are journalists creating news, there are codes of ethics to guide them. And where there is information widely disseminated to the public, there are those who would use it to communicate falsehoods. Without doubt, the two have intersected time and again throughout history. And today is no different. In fact, the incentives of modern media distribution may well lend themselves to the spread of anything incendiary (if not entirely accurate).

The familiar story about the impact of Orson Welles’ radio play The War of the Worlds is typically cast as a warning about the influence of the media on the public. Legend has it that listeners to the fake news alert truly believed that aliens were invading the country. But that appears to have been only part of the story.

Some scholars speculate that newspapers, acting on their fear that radio would siphon off their audience, planted the story to discredit their upstart competitor. According to Pooley and Saclow, the real fear was rooted in the media business model. Dependent on advertising, newspapers had to prove that they still had what it takes to attract readers. In order to do so, why not use their medium to report on spurious accounts, thus undermining radio and entering the grey area of fake-ish news.

Fast forward a hundred years. The contemporary focus on fake news has been expressed as starkly black and white. There are champions of truth and there are the peddlers of lies – at any point on the political spectrum. However, there is actually a good deal of unexplored grey space in the fake news discussion. And the media is due for a bit of soul searching in where it fits into this space.

Certainly, the premise that social media is solely responsible for the proliferation of mis- and disinformation is one that appeals to media-watchers, scholars and journalists of all stripes. They (social platforms) took audience attention and advertising revenue with their addictive design, algorithmic acumen, and surveillance advertising models. Given the sheer reach of these platforms, it is only natural to assume that they are responsible for the spread of fake news.

Yes, but… While social media platforms can track the number of views, likes and shares, they certainly can’t tell us why a post was shared and how someone reacted to it. Fake news may travel far and fast, but—while a key consideration—spread is only part of the problem.

Reach is something all media platforms and players crave. And as the fight for audience attention intensifies, the pressure is on to compete—which may mean everybody finds themselves playing by the platforms’ rules.

However, as social platforms “distance themselves from the news,” decrease its visibility, or outright block news altogether, the media business is presented with an uncomfortable moment on many levels. The traffic firehose has been kinked. Newsmakers need to rethink how to find, attract and build audiences. And if that’s less from social platforms and a return to direct relationships, it’s a great time to examine the way the message has been skewed to the social medium.

Journalists make good news

During the course of research I’m working on with an international workgroup (funded by the Center for Advanced Internet Studies in Bochum, Germany and which includes DCN’s editorial director, Michelle Manafy), we had the opportunity to speak to 20 U.S.-based news professionals. We asked them what they believed the role of the media is in society, and what they perceive as standing in the way of achieving that objective.

Every single one of them expressed the idea that their responsibility was to inform the public. And nearly all of them said that this was getting harder to do because of journalism’s broken business model, which they pointed out is driven by increased competition for attention, particularly with or on social platforms. Unfortunately, this attention imperative—on a digital playing field where comments and shares have taken on outsized import—incentivizes attention over information.

It feels a bit like “any publicity is good publicity.” Except that, as they adhere to standards of quality that beget trust, journalists should be picky about what kind of publicity they seek to attract.

Today’s distribution channels—social media “public square” —may not afford us the ability to carefully curate the presentation of news as we might like. But just as we might look back and shudder at Yellow Journalism or propaganda-laden news reels, we need to own our place in the history that is unfolding.

Precision is key

If a headline or a soundbite may be the only aspect of the news our audiences are exposed to we must view it as such. Even when we know that a single scintillating fact is likely to get passed around on social, responsible journalistic practices mean we must provide the kind of context that avoids the likelihood of misinterpretation. Journalistic ethics should encourage us to resist the temptation of drifting into the grey zone with misleading hooks.

If research suggests something—and remember, one report rarely “proves” anything—we must avoid blanket statements and absolutes, even if they are going to be much more “engaging” on social. If engaging means fueling the rage cycle with pithy half truths and headlines that highlight the most flame-fanning aspect of a story, the news media becomes complicit in the fake news lifecycle on social. Undoubtedly this approach is frequently rewarded with fierce debate. It might spread like wildfire on the socials. And to some, that will feel like success; who doesn’t want their 15 minutes of fame? Of course, this begs the question as to mission of news media.

But as social media dials down the news, it only gets harder to break through. And by extension, the incentives to find that sick factoid most likely to go viral grows.

Rebuild trust and the value proposition

Informing the public. Holding the powerful accountable. Representing the voices that go unheard. Serving the essential role in American Democracy as the Fourth Estate. These are the things that the news journalists we spoke to see as the role of the media in society.

And as the news seeks to find its way back to the American public; as it seeks to rebuild its crumbling business models, these are the foundational pillars.

Ask yourself what a misleading headline does to trust and your audience relationship because that relationship takes on a whole new meaning when the goal is more than a click, comment, like or follow. As we focus on the post-social distribution model, random clicks fade in importance. Fleeting engagement will be reshaped as loyalty. And loyalty is built on trust; trust that you are making news so valuable it’s worth paying for.

Perspectives

DCN’s media industry must reads: week of October 24, 2024

October 24, 2024 Michelle Manafy, Editorial Director – DCN

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

The New York Times | Former OpenAI Researcher Says the Company Broke Copyright Law (6 min read)
NiemanLab | Why millions of Americans avoid the news — and what it means for the election (12 min read)
The Wall Street Journal | Meet Hollywood’s AI Doomsayer: Joseph Gordon-Levitt (3 min read)
Techcrunch | Ireland adopts Online Safety Code for video-sharing platforms including TikTok (6 min read)
NPR | Jailed reporters, silenced networks: What Trump says he’d do to the media if elected (7 min read)
The Wall Street Journal | Wall Street Journal, New York Post Sue AI Startup Perplexity, Alleging ‘Massive Freeriding’ (3 min read)
The Verge | Disney Plus and Hulu won’t let you sign up through Apple anymore (1 min read)
The New York Times | As Election Looms, Disinformation ‘Has Never Been Worse’ (6 min read)

Publishers need a new robots.txt for the AI era

October 24, 2024 Chris Pedigo, SVP Government Affairs – DCN

While in some ways the web has evolved organically, it also functions within accepted structures and guidelines that have allowed websites to operate smoothly and to enable discovery online. One such protocol is robots.txt, which emerged in the mid 1990s to give webmasters some control over which web spiders could visit their sites. A robots.txt file is a plain text document that is placed in the root directory of a website. It contains instructions for search engine bots on which pages to crawl and which to ignore. Significantly, compliance with its directives is voluntary. Google, has long followed and endorsed this voluntary approach. And no publisher has dared to exclude Google considering its 90%+ share of the search market.

Today, a variety of companies use bots to crawl and scrape content from websites. Historically, content has been scraped for relatively benign purposes such as non-commercial research and search indexing, which promises the benefit of driving audiences to a site. In recent years, however, previously benign and new crawlers have begun scraping content for commercial purposes such as training Large Language Models (LLMs), use in Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) tools, and inclusion in retrieval augmented generation outputs (aka “grounding”).

Under current internet standards such as the robots.txt protocol, publishers can only block or allow crawlers by domain. Publishers are not able to communicate case-by-case (company, bot and purpose) exceptions in accordance with their terms of use in a machine-readable format. And again: compliance with the protocol is entirely voluntary. The Internet Architecture Board (IAB) held a workshop in September on whether and how to update the robots.txt protocol and it appears the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), which is responsible for the protocol, plans to convene more discussions on how best to move forward.

A significant problem is that scraping happens without notification to or consent from the content owners. It often violates the website’s terms of use in blatant violation of applicable laws. OpenAI and Google recognized this imbalance when they each developed differing controls (utilizing the robots.txt framework) for publishers to opt out of having their content used for certain purposes.

Predictably, however, these controls don’t fully empower publishers. For example, Google will allow a publisher to opt out of training for their AI services. However, if a publisher wants to prevent their work from being used in Generative AI Search—which allows Google to redeploy and monetize the content—they have to opt out of search entirely. It would be immensely useful to have an updated robots.txt protocol to provide more granular controls for publishers in light of the massive scraping operations of AI companies.

The legal framework that protects copyrighted works

While big tech companies tout the benefits of AI, much of the content crawled and scraped by bots is protected under copyright law, or other laws which are intended to enable publishers and other businesses to protect their investments against misappropriation and theft.

Copyright holders have the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute and monetize their copyrighted works as they see fit for a defined period. These protections incentivize the creative industries by allowing them to reap the fruits of their labors and enable them to reinvest into new content creation. The benefits to our society are nearly impossible to quantify as the varied kinds of copyrighted material enrich our lives daily: music, literature, film and television, visual art, journalism, and other original works provide inspiration, education, and personal and societal transformation. The Founding Fathers included copyright in the Constitution (Article I, section 8, clause 8) because they recognized the value of incentivizing the creation of original works.

In addition to copyright, publishers also rely on contractual protections contained in their terms of service which govern how the content on their websites may be accessed and exploited. Additionally, regulation against unlawful competition is designed to protect against the misappropriation of content for purposes of creating competing products and services. This is to deter free riding and prevent dilution of incentives to invest in new content. The proper application of and respect for these laws is part of the basic framework underlying the thriving internet economy.

The value of copyrighted works must be protected

The primary revenues for publishers are advertising, licensing, and, increasingly, subscriptions. Publishers make their copyrighted content available to consumers through a wide range of means, including on websites and apps that are supported by various methods for monetization such as metered paywalls. It is important to note that even if content is available online and not behind a subscription wall, that does not extinguish its copyrighted status. In other words: It is not free for the taking.

That said, there are many cases where a copyright holder may choose to allow the use of their original work for commercial or non-commercial purposes. In these cases, potential licensees contact the copyright holder to seek a negotiated agreement, which may define the extent to which the content may be used and any protections for the copyright holder’s brand.

Unfortunately, AI developers, in large part, do not respect the framework of laws and rules described above. They seek to challenge and reshape these laws in a manner that would be exceptionally harmful for digital publishers, by bolstering their position that content made publicly available should be free for the taking – in this case, to build and operationalize AI models, tools and services.

Publishers are embracing the benefits of AI innovation. They are partnering with developers and third parties, for both commercial and non-commercial purposes, to provide access and licenses for the use of their content in a manner that is mutually beneficial. However, incentives are lacking to encourage AI developers to seek permission and access/licensing solutions. Publishers need a practical tool to signal to bots at scale whether they wish to permit crawling and scraping for the purposes of AI exploitation.

Next steps and the future of robots.txt

The IETF should update the robots.txt protocol to create more specific technical measures that will help publishers convey the purposes for which their content may or may not be used, including by expressing limitations on the scraping and use of their content for GAI purposes. While this should not be viewed as in any way reducing the existing legal obligations of third parties to seek permission directly from copyright holders, it could be useful for publishers to be able to signal publicly and through a machine-readable format what uses are permitted, e.g. scraping for search purposes is permitted, whereas scraping to train LLMs or other commercial GAI purposes is not.

Of course, a publisher’s terms of use should always remain legally binding and trump any machine-readable signals. Furthermore, these measures should not be treated as creating an “opt out” system for scraping. A publisher’s decision not to employ these signals is not permission (either explicit or implicit) to scrape websites or use content in violation of the terms of use or applicable laws. And any ambiguity must be construed in favor of the rights holders.

In order to achieve a solution in a timely and efficient manner, the focus should be on a means to clearly and specifically signal permission or prohibitions against crawling and scraping for the purposes of AI exploitation. Others may seek to layer certain licensing solutions on top of this, which should be left to the market. In addition, it should be ensured that there is transparency for bots which crawl and scrape for purposes of AI exploitation. Any solution should not be predicated on the whims of AI developers to announce the identities of their bots or operate in any manner that obscures their identity and purposes of their activity.

And, critically, search and AI scraping must not be comingled. The protocol should not be allowed to be used in a manner that requires publishers to accept crawling and scraping for AI exploitation as a condition for being indexed for search.

Let’s not repeat the mistakes of the past by allowing big tech companies to leverage their dominance in one market to dominate an emerging market like AI. Original content is important to our future and we should build out web standards that carry forward our longstanding respect for copyright in the AI age.

Perspectives

DCN’s media industry must reads: week of October 17, 2024

October 17, 2024 Michelle Manafy, Editorial Director – DCN

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

The Wall Street Journal | This AI Pioneer Thinks AI Is Dumber Than a Cat (8 min read)
NPR | Canceling subscriptions has to be as easy as signing up, FTC says in a new rule (2 min read)
The New York Times | What Should a Music Magazine Be in the TikTok Era? Pitchfork Alumni Have an Idea. (5 min read)
Ars Technica | Apple Engineers Show How Flimsy AI ‘Reasoning’ Can Be (7 min read)
PressGazette | Why Microsoft Copilot Daily launch is ‘moment of significance’ for news industry (5 min read)
Gallup | Americans’ Trust in Media Remains at Trend Low (4 min read)
Reuters | NYT sends AI startup Perplexity ‘cease and desist’ notice over content use (2 min read)

Perspectives | Supporter Spotlight

Reimagining the place of news in social media

October 14, 2024 George Adelman, Principal – FT Strategies

As with many of you, the 2024 Reuters’ Digital News Report continues to give us much to reflect on even months after its release. While there are many learnings from the report, the one chart that stood out to us was the “proportion that used each network for news.”

While the major drop for Facebook was anticipated (given Meta’s strategy to deprioritize news), we found ourselves asking: has the news hit its high-water mark on social media, and if so, how do we adapt?

Since 2018, algorithm changes on social media have prioritized user content over public content, including news. This shift has reduced the benefits for news organizations on these platforms. We asked the report’s author Nic Newman for his reflections. He explained that the decline in the “post and refer” model is due to platforms favoring formats like video that keep users engaged within the platform. In this blog, we’ll explore how publishers can navigate and maximize their presence on social media in this changing landscape.

Leveraging video

Posting videos on social media has grown to be a strong means of developing brand awareness and engagement with audiences. However, production costs (financially and operationally) have historically been much higher than text-based content. Monetizing video on social media also proves to be a challenge with video requirements being strict and unrewarding unless scale is achieved:

**Source:YouTube Partner Program**, **YouTube CPM**, **TikTok Creator Program**, **Facebook Partner Monetisation Policy**

Aside from these requirements, social media platforms require videos to fall within their community guidelines and be “ad-friendly”. TikTok has a much more controversial requirement that videos must not contain sensitive or controversial topics (which are rather loosely defined). Videos that have been deemed controversial are either faced with being demonetized or being placed with limited visibility on user feeds. In other words, unless a user is actively looking for news publisher content, it will only rarely appear on their feed. Nieman Lab conducted a study which found that TikTok’s algorithm made it unlikely and difficult for news organizations to reach users.

Engaging your audience

While social media no longer drives the same traffic as it did, it still serves as a powerful avenue to connect and engage with your core audiences away from your website which has become increasingly important as platforms promote posts which users engage with more. While a more tailored engagement varies per platform and your audience.

Videos are currently the strongest way to engage an audience on social. While they are difficult to monetize, they are effective in capturing the audience’s attention and driving curiosity to read more. The challenge is capturing your audience within the initial five seconds before they scroll along in the ether of social media. You can do this by showing preview clips of the video or providing a quick summary at the beginning to engage your audience right away.

Another effective practice is featuring your journalists. This provides a face for your audience to interact with and helps them develop a deeper relationship with your publication. Putting them on explainer videos showcasing their expertise, retweeting their tweets to provide them a platform or having them directly communicate with interested audiences through Whatsapp or Instagram broadcast channels can help develop deeper levels of engagement.

Lastly, developing interactive content such as polls or gamification features is a strong opportunity to get your audience to interact with your social media page and open themselves to conversations and discussions.

These practices may change as time passes and algorithms evolve. But traditional news publishers have lots to learn from social media first publications who have already navigated social media through experience such as Brut (French), Will Media (Italian), and dw_berlinfresh (Germany).

Each platform plays a different role

The social media landscape continues to evolve and constantly presents itself with new challenges. However, we cannot deny the importance of the platform in reaching audiences who may not otherwise engage with the news. With Facebook still boasting over 3 billion active users and Instagram, YouTube and TikTok around 1.5-2 billion active users, social media is still an invaluable tool in connecting and engaging with your core audience while reaching new audiences as well.

However, given recent changes, now is the time to reimagine the role of each platform in the context of news:

Facebook – given its large reach – is still helpful in slowly converting new audiences into regular readers through peer-to-peer exposure of your content by focusing on virality, as Facebook itself has stated.
YouTube, on the other hand, offers a strong opportunity for monetization. Publishing long-form video content on the platform can help diversify revenue streams for your publication with the right audience.
Instagram and X may still hold opportunities for traffic even though a much stricter link placement policy has taken hold (though lenient in comparison to Facebook’s policy). However, it is important to recognize that both platforms serve distinct needs:
- X focuses on real-time updates and discussions around current events, politics, and social issues.
- Instagram focuses more on visually appealing content to drive engagement. This is evidenced by the International Journal of Research in Marketing which finds that posts with a certain combination of characteristics are likely to receive 19% more engagement.
TikTok remains an unknown quantity. However it is a platform worth exploring, especially for those trying to reach younger audiences. 55% of TikTok’s user base in the United States are those aged 18-34 and the global average watch time of short-form video is 95 minutes a day.
WhatsApp has seen growth as a popular platform for news distribution particularly in countries where mobile usage is high and access to traditional media is low such as Brazil, India, and South Africa. WhatsApp can potentially be used to directly connect and engage with audiences given its nature as a message platform, allowing journalists to develop a more personalized connection with your audience.

These are only a few strategies you can employ in each platform, but understanding their strengths and leveraging them towards your publication may help bring added value.