Tweet Update: The ‘More With Less’ Editorial Dilemma
Will corporate demands to “do more with less” overwhelm editors who already have their hands full with print and online responsibilities? Several tweets posted over the past two months indicated that answers are not immediately forthcoming.
Other tweets in this time frame summarized several high-value guidelines covered in the first four installments of the new Competitive Analysis 101 series.
If you like what you see here, be sure to follow me on Twitter.
B2B editorial managers must prepare for a “do more with less” environment when staff squeezes are likely. Best defense is to start now creating quarterly or monthly reports that accurately portray already existing heavy workloads. I’ll write more about this in future columns.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) May 13, 2019
Many editorial performance analysis projects I do for folks seeking “more with less” solutions are dismayed to learn staffs are delivering amazing amounts of content with limited resources. Top brass pushing “how low can you go” buttons already may have reached rock bottom.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 3, 2019
If your editorial staff travels effectively, keep top management aware via quarterly field editor report. Among other data, show number of stories published per trip, travel percent devoted to conference coverage vs. individual reader visits (to both end-users and vendors).
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) May 15, 2019
By the mid-90’s, many B2B editors were laboring with job descriptions that required playing 10 roles well. Editor and writer was just one of the many. If we took a count today. to what extent has the job title of editor diversified? Is this a good thing or are we failing to cope?
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) May 8, 2019
How best should B2B publishers deal with upcoming recession? One possibility is to address reality that in some areas, we’ve been struggling with overextended resources. Meanwhile, be sure to read latest thinking in Editors Only newsletter https://t.co/MDffCtcoHE
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 30, 2019
With many publishing gurus demanding increased editorial vitality, you’d think an immediate cure would be sought for lethargic print news sections. How well have you met this challenge? My 8-question list will verify your news section status. Request info: editsol1@optimum.net.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 24, 2019
Editors preparing editorial competitive analysis reports should go beyond standard page counts. It’s important now to find new ways to score editorial performance. New weak links can be detected due to increased “less is more” pressure . I’ve started measuring enterprise.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 10, 2019
Always rate story-telling headline capability when gathering competitive editorial analysis data. Front covers alone frequently let snafus slip through, such as absence of numbers or inactive story lines. And sometimes, articles highlighted on covers don’t deserve to be there.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) May 17, 2019
Key qualitative factors competitive editorial analysis should compare include chief editor visibility, scoop analysis, reader involvement devices, story-telling graphics. https://t.co/e1iH7d0cUi
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) May 17, 2019
Major challenge when writing e-news is getting started. Many unable to reach key story point within first ten words. Competitive Analysis 101, Part 3: Eight-Factor Test of Editing Skill https://t.co/BbSRHbHWMY
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) May 3, 2019
Your e-news package should always reflect a “timeliness when read” flavor. Opposition can make a big fuss over so-called today’s news that actually was posted weeks or months ago. Competitively speaking, conduct “scoop analysis” to verify who owns breaking news bragging rights.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 29, 2019
It pays to check frequently whether a presumed editorial edge has been usurped by alert competitors. https://t.co/trGpPggQB0
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 26, 2019
Recently reviewed study of 43 e-news sites that scored highest among 300 previous analyzed. Even then it was apparent that enterprise reporting presence was underwhelming. For example, only 26 articles reflected high enterprise. The balance showed “low” or “zero” effort.
.— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 22, 2019
Scoring systems that rate editorial performance often don’t make sense. For instance, some questionnaires evaluate each factor listed on a 1-10 basis where 10 is best. Why??? It’s time to abandon this approach unless scorecards include definition for each factor measured.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 22, 2019
When posting an article that introduces a new columnist to readers, the debut effort should be packed with actionable ideas. Instead, some editors settle only for reciting the author’s credentials and a general (dull???) summary of future contributions.
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 15, 2019
At least 17 common ethics challenges could confront editors this year. Leading the list are plagiarism, fabrication and advertiser pressure. But of at least equal concern to many is quality slippage. As one chief exec put it during conference talk: “we have become less good.”
— Howard Rauch (@fogindex8) April 3, 2019