March Tweets Provide Plenty of Competitive Editorial Analysis Tips
Exclusive guidance covering the best ways to develop editorial competitive analysis reports was last month’s featured Tweet focus. Included was a tweet announcing the introduction to a three-part series—How to Fend Off Competitive Attacks on Editorial Quality—which will review the best ways to size up print and online news strengths and weaknesses. Other topics addressed this month were job description quantitative goals, training program hurdles, and how to write story-telling captions.
If you like what you see, be sure to subscribe to my Twitter feed.
Don’t become a victim of presumed editorial superiority. Since you last looked, the coverage domination you think you still own may have been usurped by alert competitors — in more ways than one. Check it out!!!https://t.co/Q1E1uWQugT
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) March 19, 2019
B2B editorial competitive analysis and fact-checking programs are in the same boat. Both programs seek required verification; but that reality often doesn’t translate into action because there’s nobody available to get the job done. In both cases, resolution is badly needed.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) March 14, 2019
Anticipating competitive analysis attacks will help you avoid possible presumed editorial superiority traps. Worthy weapons include “scoop analysis”, “look who’s talking” reports and “first & only” documentation.
I cover these and other tactics in upcoming blog series.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) March 26, 2019
Editorial competitive analysis reports for at-show issues should cover 61 factors. Add another 13 for post-show assessments.. Separate reports measuring editorial quality require 25 factors. Graphics analysis focus calls for at least an 18-point review. https://t.co/rjHH696ZPk
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) March 18, 2019
When reviewing online news quality vs. opposition, you should conduct like-item analysis. Several times you may find that you and competition run items using identical angles and sources. Generally speaking, shortfall detected reflects absence of enterprise reporting policy.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) March 13, 2019
Years back, a common B2B editor complaint was lack of training programs. Today there are more training resources available. However, many editors don’t have time to participate. Some terrific sessions continue to attract slim crowds at best. How can we resolve this dilemma?
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) March 28, 2019
Missing link in many written editorial job descriptions is quantitative goals. “How long” or “how many” data is especially helpful for reference during performance reviews. Some managers also have created guidelines that apply quantitative guidelines to qualitative work.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) March 25, 2019
Captions must perform story-telling function. Insufficient are those descriptions that merely explain obvious photo scene. There is a difference. In particular, feature article’s first photo definitely must prelude key story point. And face photo “labels” should be abandoned.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) March 8, 2019