I have even offered free video critiques of people’s work three or four separate times. No takers! For free!

As a result of my efforts over that time period, I have achieved the following milestones:

• my Google page rank has dropped to 2
• my Google organic search position has dropped from 6th to 10th on my main keywords, with similar drops with secondary keywords
• my Facebook friends list for NDS has stagnated at 42 (oops, someone must have unfriended me, it’s just 41 now), and most of them are family, friends or friends of friends
• my Facebook discussion questions have gone unheeded
• on AdSense, so far this month I have had 1,002 impressions, with 2 clicks for $0.11
• Google analytics tells me that, in 2010, I have had 2,727 visits from 2,176 visitors and 6,089 page views. No takers on the free offers, no sales of a good e-book, no sales as an affiliate of a great WordPress book, no contacts for my services
• my recent tweets with links back to blog posts have received 3-5 clicks. Tops. (I have 120 or so followers.)
• my recent request for “tricks of the trade” from designers who I know follow me on Twitter drew two (2) responses, despite several requests

Granted, I am ticked off most of the time at the spam, the banality of most tweets and Facebook posts, and I can’t seem to keep it to myself, but what curmudgeon isn’t lovable at his core? Have I missed my market? Am I not offering what people want? Is the answer obvious?

I should mention that my two main clients this past year came to me because of my writing/editing skills. I have received three queries in about two years regarding newspaper design, but none responded to my initial e-mails back to them.

So the question I have for the two of you who will actually read this is: What do I do now? I am inclined to just let the site and blog lay fallow for awhile and work on the novel I have been threatening to write. What do you recommend? Here’s a poll to help you focus. You may vote as many times as you wish.

Related posts:

1. Newspaper designers are dorks
2. How to annoy people with Twitter: 6 tips
3. How many people would pay for Twitter?

I have been a little hesitant to embrace some of the arguments, but I am starting to come around. Universities aren’t in such good shape either, and certainly the movement toward having higher ed work like business is losing traction, given the state of American business.

Maybe it’s time to collaborate.

In March Jonathan Zimmerman of the Christian Science Monitor suggested that professors could write for newspapers for free. After all, he reasoned, they already write for academic journals for free: what would be wrong with pushing some toward getting decent local content into the local paper?

My initial reaction was negative, but I’ve moved in that direction a bit. I believe we could find hundreds of willing professors, who in the world of “publish or perish,” would be happy to swap The Journal of Impossibly Unimportant Studies for The Daily Blab.

Professors are required to add to their field’s body of knowledge through research or work with professional colleagues on important projects to keep their skills fresh. The results of both are meant to be brought to the classroom as well, so that students benefit directly from professors’ non-teaching work.

It seems like a good approach to me. If institutions would better recognize and reward such publications, professors in many fields — not just journalism — would certainly sign up for a byline. If you build it, they will write.

More recently in Inside Higher Ed, David Scobey, a professor at Bates College, brought up the concept of dailynews.edu, another attempt to bring universities into the fray. Scobey suggests three potential models: (1) many public radio stations already are hosted by universities, why not a newspaper staffed by both profs and talented students; (2) something similar to the extension services that are part of land-grant institutions; and (3) something akin to cultural institutions such as museums, theaters and botanical gardens.

All are financial mash-ups of public and private monies that served the local area. Why not do the same thing with the newspapers? The ad model can’t carry the load by itself any more, and having the government simply step in to subsidize newspapers is not an idea I can live with.

Seems like a win-win to me. Professors would get a new creative and professional outlet for their work, students would gain a solid apprenticeship in the field that would supplement their classroom work, and the local public would benefit from the work of both.

I think it is worth considering.

Sources:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0309/p09s01-coop.html
http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2009/08/28/scobey

This post in streaming audio. Right-click to download.

Related posts:

1. Newspapers and the 3 umpires
2. Newspapers, news and advertising
3. A film about journalism long ago….

It has been my experience that newspapers are incredibly reluctant to change, even as they read about the trials and tribulations in the industry every day. Despite evidence to the contrary, they seem to keep doing the same old things. Change is necessary, and the changes newspapers have to make to remain alive are not small or easy ones. But change must occur.

One of the many ideas that publishers are having a tough time dealing with is the interactive aspect of news web sites (and can include the print product, too). It is no longer a one-way street. Readers want to be a part of the action. What? Turn over content to the readers???

It’s called User Generated Content (UGC), and you need to make room for it on your web sites and tease to your UGC in the print product. I have talked about this in earlier posts. Set up reader blogs, wikis, photo galleries, and areas where special interest groups can get together and interact with one another. Get a few of your more creative staffers to start blogs as well. Readers will start jumping in with comments.

Get your your paper and your reporters on Twitter. Some readers will want to follow the paper or a particular reporter or both. You can report live action, send out follow-up links to important stories, get story ideas sent to you, and keep up with what people are talking about. Twitter is gaining more traction every day. (You can follow me on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/newsdesign.)

UGC seems to make so much sense because YOU don’t have to pay for it, yet readers want to read or see it. And advertisers are likely to want a piece of the action, too. That’s the point of all this isn’t it? Stop thinking about the old model. Your readers want more.

I also believe that many would be willing to pay for access to a web site that offers them information, interaction, and a pleasurable experience. Many would disagree with me, but I truly believe that if your web site is good enough, and you limit access to some portions of it to subscribers to the print product, you will find takers. Of course, you need to improve your print product as well….

An interesting piece along these lines from a British blog can be found here. Ideas worth thinking about.

Need some help going interactive? Let me help. E-mail me with your questions.

Related posts:

1. New York Times OKs paid content
2. No. 6: Get interactive for free
3. No. 1: Build a better web site