Jessica and I had a wonderful interview on KPFA’s Morning Show with the wonderful host Aimee Allison (@aimeeallison) (and current Progressive Women’s Voice Fellow!) It was a lot of fun, even when we contended with a couple of tech/new media grumps. Take a listen. It starts at the 1 hr. 35 min. mark..

Over at the NAMAC site, you can read my update on the events that Tracy and I have been hosting around the country in conjunction with our book tour:

On March 18, NAMAC hosted a lively “Media Impact Summit” that drew together leading public and independent media makers, funders and researchers to share and hone assessment strategies. This was one in a series of summits that I have been partnering with Tracy Van Slyke of The Media Consortium to organize since February. So far we’ve held them in five cities: Chicago (hosted by the MacArthur Foundation), New York (hosted by the Center for Media, Culture and History), Miami (as part of the We Media conference), Los Angeles (hosted by the Norman Lear Center) and San Francisco (hosted by NAMAC). We have two more summits scheduled by mid-April: Washington DC (hosted by the New America Foundation) and Boston (hosted by the Association of Independents in Radio).

The goal of these structured discussions is to gather relevant approaches to evaluating public interest media in order to share information and build tools with stakeholders in the field. The research is also designed to inform broader discussions among funders, outlets and policymakers about how best to support public interest media in the networked age.

More>>

Priceless:

Over the past week we’ve been featuring a series of visualizations that examine how media makers can work with various layers of networks to increase their impact. These layers include:

• Networked users
• Self-organized networks
• Institutional Networks
• Networks of Institutions

For our last visualization, we’re taking a closer look at how outlets can engage and collaborate with users at every stage of production, from conceptualization to distribution to evaluation.

Too often, makers and outlets only involve their users late in the process—to comment or donate funds in response to a finish product. But there are opportunities for engagement at every point, which can increase the relevance, “spreadability” and authenticity of your media project. Bringing users at key moments over time can involve them as a central part of your strategic planning, leading to a cycle of engagement that builds upon itself.

How open is your project to engaging networks of users? Check the boxes to find out:

| Download PDF

We’re finally here! Today we examine and visualize the last of the four layers of networks taken from our book Beyond The Echo Chamber. In this post, we offer not one, but two visualizations that illustrate how media makers can integrate and interact with the final network layer: Networks of Institutions.

As a quick recap, over the last few posts we have examined and visualized three of the four layers including:

• Networked users: See Monday’s post
• Self-organized networks: See Tuesday’s post
• Institutional Networks: See Wednesday’s post

Networks of Institutions bring together all of the previous layers—users, self-organized groups and institutional networks—to form the most complex and powerful of all the networked layers.

With this layer, we break down the walls preventing journalism and media organizations from working together and with other organizations. In fact, we argue, in this new networked media environment, when faced with increased competition and reduced resources, collaboration and cooperation are key to impact.

In the visualization below, we describe what makes up the first kind of Network of Institutions: a Media Network. “Media makers and outlets can form collaborative networks to jointly report on complex issues, and structure new models for innovation and revenue,” as we elaborate in the book. “Bloggers and legacy media outlets can and should coordinate around shared reporting on complex issues, work together to build upon each other’s strengths, and fill in each other’s gaps.”

| Download PDF

The Media Consortium (with Tracy as the Project Director) is a current example of a media network.

Common characteristics of a media network include:

• sharing tools and business strategies
• working together to integrate/build upon editorial strengths
• collectively influencing public discourse
• setting/leading news agendas
• building relationships and advocating for sector

But we’re not done. Networks of Institutions also include a “hybrid model.” As we note in Beyond the Echo, “Networks that combine media outlets, nonprofits, and grassroots organizations can work together to drive traffic, build buzz, and raise the stakes around particular issues or events.” We explain that such partnerships can, “drive traffic and awareness via single stories or shared long-term interest in a particular topics. As such networks of institutions develop, the partner institutions can cross-post reporting, devise action opportunities, jointly fund-raise, and more.”

| Download PDF

Characteristics of Hybrid Networks include:

• Combine media outlets, institutions and networks
• Short or long-lasting
• Formed around an ad hoc campaign or a persistent issue
• Spread content and make connections among multiple institutional networks to drive and inform action and set news agendas
• Can strengthen movements and overall progressive movement. (NOTE: not all hybrid networks have to be political or ideological. Feel free to rethink this characteristic if if it applies to your organization’s mission and your sector.)

And last, but not least, here are the strategic questions for media organizations to ponder when deciding how to integrate strategic networks into their work.

• How can your outlet strategically build and connect with hybrid networks?
• How can you reach new users and inform mobilization?

And that’s it for our special series on the four layers of networks! These posts and visualizations are intended to stir conversation (and possibly arguments) among media leaders, makers, funders, investors, academics, users and more. We also hope they will be used as strategic tools by a broad swath of media makers as they determine how they should operate in this network-powered media environment for long-term sustainability and impact.

For more information and detailed analysis of the four layers of networks, please be sure to check out our book Beyond The Echo Chamber.

But we’re not done yet—stay tuned for a super secret, super awesome visualization release. You’re not going to want to miss it.

Hello again! We’re on the third layer of our Four Layers of Networks taken from our book Beyond The Echo Chamber where we are not only defining, but visualizing how media makers can interact with each of these networked layers for maximum impact. So far we’ve described and visualized the first two layers:

• Networked users: See Monday’s post.
• Self-organized networks: See Tuesday’s post.

The next two layers move from ad hoc networks to more durable and deliberately organized networks.

• Institutional Networks
• Networks of Institutions

Today, we zero in on “Institutional Networks.

In Beyond The Echo Chamber, we write, “Through short and long-term partnerships, outlets can work with allies to funnel their content to institutional networks and directly track how this content is used for action. Connecting content to outcomes is a critical component of demonstrating the impact of the [progressive] media. If done correctly, partnering with institutional networks helps make that connection clear.”

| Download PDF
The opportunities for media makers to work with institutional networks is noted in the visual. “Media makers can also harness more durable networks of users — hosted or organized by institutions such as nonprofits or campaigns — to share content, offer crowdsourcing opportunities, and develop fundraising relationships.” Download the Institutional Networks PDF.

Characteristics of Institutional Networks include:

• more formal than self-organized networks
• longer-lasting
• hosted/supported by institutions that provide: organizing tools—i.e. widgets, petitions, frames, backgrounders; offline organizing opportunities and action prompts

Media makers must ask themselves these strategic questions when discerning how to help create or work with Institutional Networks.

• What institutional networks might use or host your content?
• What tools and strategies can help you to assess how networks use your work?
• How can your outlet work entice members of an institutional network to also join your network?

For a more detailed examination of Institutional Networks, the other three layers of networks, and much, much more please be sure to buy your own personal copy of Beyond The Echo Chamber today. We’re coming to the end of our four layers of networks.

Next on the list: Networks of Institutions. (But as a special bonus, you’ll get two visuals for the price of one blog!)

And as always, let us know your feedback and comments on any or all of these four layers of networks and if you’re using them for your own strategic development.

Welcome back to the second in our blog series on the Four Layers of Networks. Taken from our book Beyond The Echo Chamber (buy your copy today!), we are not only defining, but visualizing these four layers. They include:

• Networked users: See Monday’s post on this first and foundational layer.
• Self-organized networks
• Institutional Networks
• Networks of Institutions

Today we take a look at how media organizations must strategically think about integrating and interacting with the second layer: Self-Organized Networks.

In Beyond The Echo Chamber, we note, “Networked individuals users tend to be part of many overlapping online groups, crossing boundaries of work, play and, politics. Such groups can be fleeting or durable, open or closed, sprawling or focused–but each offers media makers the possibility of amplifying issues, engaging in viral, outreach, and attracting new supporters and users.”

| Download PDF

As noted in the visualization, “Users can work together to form ad hoc networks around unifying elements such as shared issues and/or breaking events. Media makers can tap into these networks to spread relevant content, follow breaking trends, and cover collective actions.”

Characteristics of Self-Organized Networks include:

• made up of networked users
• can form for an hour, a day, months or years
• united by common interests, concerns, issues, enemies, desired outcomes

Media makers must ask themselves these strategic questions when discerning how to help create or work with Self-Organized Networks:

• How can media producers participate in self-organized networks?
• How can you offer tools, space, actions, and content that help networks to form?
• How are networks using your content, and how are you actively engaging them?

Please leave comments and feedback, as we hope our definition and understanding about these networks is only the starting point. We’d also love to hear how/if your organization are using these visualizations in your strategic development. And don’t forget to purchase Beyond The Echo Chamber for a more detailed look at Self-Organized Networks, the other three layers of networks, and oh so much more. Next up: “Institutional Networks!”

As we noted yesterday, we’re proud and excited to be releasing a series of visualizations that bring to life our theory of the “Four Layers of Networks” that journalists and media organizations must strategically integrate into their planning for maximum impact.

Those four layers are:

• Networked users
• Self-organized networks
• Institutional Networks
• Networks of Institutions

Today, we tackle “Networked Users.”

The visualization below lays out out how media organizations must strategically think about integrating and interacting with networked users. As we write in Beyond The Echo Chamber, “The audience has morphed into users who are connected to both the outlet and multiple social networks. They can take on a myriad of roles that benefit the outlet. Ultimately, such interactions empower users with information and activities that can increase the impact of the news and information being disseminated.”

| Download PDF

As noted in the visualization, “Media makers must learn to work with users who are connected to multiple networks and can distribute, amplify, and serve as ambassadors for the media producer’s content.”

Characteristics of Networked Users include:

• some influential users can serve as valuable connectors, amplifying content, issues and campaigns
• networked individuals use participatory media to form and strengthen connections based on friends and family, proximity, work, personal identity, political affiliation and more.

Media producers must also ask themselves these strategic questions when thinking about how to work with Networked Users.

• How does your project attract and interact with networked users?
• What tools or strategies can you use to make content spreadable and participatory?
• How networked are you and your staff?

Each of the following layers (and corresponding visualizations) are based on the role and foundation of Networked Users. Tune in tomorrow for: Self-Organized Networks!

Neiman Journalism Lab has a great post this a.m. in reaction to a new Google Lab release: a Google News timeline view,:

which gives users the ability to see and scroll through headlines, photos and news excerpts by day/week/month/year. The sources of this data can also be customized to include not just traditional news sources but also Wikipedia, sports scores, blogs, etc. It’s a fascinating way of interpreting the news — not something that is likely going to replace a regular old Google News headline view, but an additional way of looking at things.

One question kept nagging at me as I was looking at this latest Google effort at delivering the news, and that was: Why couldn’t a news organization have done this? (I’m not the only one to wonder this). Why not a newspaper, or even a collective like Associated Press (which seems to prefer threats to creativity)? Isn’t delivering the news in creative and interesting ways that appeal to readers what we are supposed to be doing?”

I had the EXACT SAME REACTION when I saw the Google Timeline yesterday. Progressive media peeps–it’s time to put the creativity hat on. So I have a proposal, something I’ve been thinking about for a while.

I think we should do a multimedia timeline of our collective economic coverage over the past 8 years–maybe focused on a single issue or two (i.e. predatory lending, Wall Street regulation) and input coverage from video, text, audio, blogs, reports, etc. from key progressive media sources. I think this effort could do a couple things:
a) Everyone keeps asking where the financial press was during this economic crisis. Well, the progressive media has been reporting furiously on the economic meltdown for years. Let’s show it. Let’s prove that what the “lefty” press was reporting and predicting came true.
b) We’re wondering how to tell this very complex and sprawling story to our audiences in a way that makes sense of the past and sets the stage for future reporting. A visual, searchable component that connects the reporting together into a larger narrative and makes it comprehensive for our audiences is a critical informative tool.
c) The opportunity factors: There’s an opportunity to start playing/integrating new storytelling and journalism formats. (We need to start figuring it out soon). This is an opportunity to leverage and utilize individual content into a collective, larger story and the opportunity to reach a potentially larger audience. And this could be an opportunity to have our audience be part of the creative process. Can our audience crowdsource to research, identify the reporting to go in the timeline?

What do you think of this idea? What would you add or argue with?