Author: Dan Oshinsky

Posted on

The Three Stages of a News Start-Up.

I’ve been spending my week down in St. Petersburg, Fla., at the Poynter Institute. The theme of the week: entrepreneurial journalism. And after seeing case study after case study about successful journalism start-ups, I’m starting to see three common areas of overlap during the initial start-up process.

Those areas are:

Conceptualization –> Validation –> Realization

To break it down a bit further: the ends are the easy parts. Conceptualization: Man gets idea for business. Realization: Man makes business legitimate.

It’s the middle part — validation — that’s tricky. That’s the part where I’m hearing stories about what Seth Godin called ‘the Dip.’ It’s the part where a start-up is still trying to decide if their business is feasible, and it’s where they’re going through a massive period of self-doubt about the business’ chances for success.

But there are a few sources of validation that can convince a start-up to keep pushing forward. The three that seem to be on repeater:

Validation (or approval) from:
-The audience
-Investors (foundations/angels/VCs/donors)
-Other media (buzz about company/product)

It seems to be — and this is obviously a ‘duh!’ moment, but — that the companies that make it from concept –> reality get enough validation to convince them that it’s worth pushing through the Dip. It’s one thing to believe in your own idea. It’s another to hear from outsiders that the idea is one worth believing in.

Because without that validation, it’s almost impossible for a start-up to go from concept to reality.

(photo at top from South Park’s Underwear Gnomes episode.)

Posted on

Happy Birthday, Mom.

A very happy birthday to you, mom, without whom this blog would not be possible, and without whom I would be rendered hopelessly, painfully normal.

Indeed, I cannot imagine it.

Posted on

What Reuters America Means for Stry.

The big news out today is that Reuters is going after the AP. Their new service, called Reuters America, intends to produce “Tier 2 domestic US news” with “one-person bureau chiefs,” with news “tailored to the needs of the US consumer media domestic audience.”

Which means they’re sending one-man bands into under-served markets and selling the news to American news organizations at prices that the AP can’t match.

In brief, it sounds a lot like my plans for Stry.

But here’s a key difference: Reuters America will still answer to breaking news. Per one of their job openings:

The one-person bureau chiefs for the service will be experienced correspondents… [responsible for] chasing down US domestic spot news on tight deadlines (15-30 minutes to match breaking news for Web sites with brief Urgents)

This is where Reuters misses the point.

There is an inefficiency in the news ecosystem, because wire services answer to breaking news. These wire services are easily distracted — time can’t be spent reporting on key issues in communities because a police scanner is lighting up. Great reporting requires focus.

And then there’s one other truth: with the growth of the web and social media, breaking news isn’t hurting, even as news organizations shrink.

So a modern news agency needs to take breaking news out of the equation. That’s the difference with Stry. By removing that obstacle, Stry will let our reporters focus on the stories that are of most importance to communities. Our model will allow us to deliver meaningful news to consumers. The best stories know no news cycles, and we are not going to rush our stories or the news gathering process.

I think Reuters America is doing a smart thing: they’re trying to disrupt the business model that’s taken them this far.

Their only failure is that they haven’t gone far enough.

photo courtesy of Christopher Woo

[ois skin=”Tools for Reporters”]

Posted on

The Things I Found.

During the previous month, I’ve been cleaning out my childhood room, and I’ve made some unusual discoveries. Here is some of what I’ve found, presented without comment.

3 Maryland Terrapins posters from 1995, featuring an ad for Erol’s Internet

1 World Cup USA 94 bumper sticker

1 pack of ‘Moochas Gracias’ stationary, featuring a picture of a cow in a sombrero

1 letter from my father to me, expressing extreme joy at the Washington Capitals’ recent signing of Jaromir Jagr

Several tiny magnets, including one from an airline called US Air, and another from the NBA Team Store

2 fake elementary school awards, including one for ‘Outstanding Participation’ in chess club

1 nose piece from my original (and only) pair of Rec Specs

1 ‘Share the Dream: Washington-Baltimore 2012 Olympics’ bumper sticker

1 copy of the front page of the Washington Post on Sept. 9, 2002, featuring the headline “Spurrier Dazzles in Debut”

1 photo of me interviewing former Maryland governor Bob Ehrlich

1 essay from my 7th grade English class, titled, “The Washington Capitals Have Just Given Up on this Season”

1 copy of a 50th anniversary magazine tribute to Bugs Bunny

1 photo of me, obviously taken at a bar mitzvah, in which I am strategically Photoshopped inside a toilet and looking out

1 photo of me in Montgomery County jail, taken during a 4th grade field trip

1 copy of the American Journalism Review, featuring the editor of the Los Angeles Times and the headline “Let the Good Times Roll”

2 Polaroids — 1 with Elroy from the Jetsons, and another with my father and sister at the Air & Space Museum

1 guide to napkin folding, as provided by the Holland America Cruise Line

1 trading card of Seattle SuperSonics center Olden Polynice

1 set of ‘moo’-themed stationary (separate from the ‘Moochas Gracias’ line of stationary)

1 copy of Sports Illustrated, featuring Mark McGwire and the headline “WHAT A SEASON”, and “AOL Keyword: Sports Illustrated” in the lower left hand corner

1 copy of the Washington Post, featuring the headline, “War Won’t Be Short, Bush Says”

1 telephone modem

1 baseball hat from the Bethesda-Chevy Chase youth baseball league

1 list of 70 potential careers, in which “writer,” “reporter” and “journalist” does not appear

Posted on

Self-Promo Alert: Talking Stry.

A few weeks back, I was late for ONA10 in D.C. I had meant to get to a talk on APIs, but I missed the first subway ride down, and then I stopped for a bagel, and then I spotted David Cohn — he of Spot.us fame — and suddenly found myself even later.

Because he wanted to interview me about what I’ve been doing with Stry.

So below are three good[1. Warning: I’m defining ‘good’ very loosely here.] minutes I spent on camera talking about Stry. (David was also kind enough to include me on his list of ‘Smart People at ONA10.’)

Posted on

#onefinalread

I’m trying a new experiment on Twitter this week. Usually, I end each day with a #closingthought. But my closing thoughts have gotten a bit weird. Last week, they were all Allen Iverson quotes. Since I started tweeting out songs more frequently in the morning for #AMinspiration, my closing thoughts have suffered.

So this week, a new experiment: #onefinalread. It’s an article or a link or a tweet I think is worthwhile. Ideally, it’ll be something that makes you stop and think.[1. Though, now that I stop and think about it: when was the last time you actually stopped and thought?]

#onefinalread RT @Slate: The WikiLeak reveals how skilled the Obama administration is at wielding America’s power http://slate.me/fTw5TQMon Nov 29 23:07:31 via Tweetie for MacDan Oshinsky
danoshinsky

Thoughts/ideas/suggestions on #onefinalread? Tweet at @danoshinsky and let me know.

Posted on

The Next Time Someone Asks You If Journalism Is Worth Paying For, Say This.

Funny how some things are cyclical. Again, I’m hearing reporters question whether or not there’s money to be made in journalism. And again, I’m wondering why reporters feel the need to undermine themselves. Why not just come up with an explanation for why your job is essential to our democracy? Why not say something like this?

Journalists are a lot like teachers. In any other society, they’d be highly paid and highly trained. They’d be the best we’ve got, because they’re the ones educating us and keep us informed.

But we don’t live in one of those societies right now. In America, teachers aren’t highly paid, and journalists wish they had the kind of financial security that teachers have. We live in a society that places less value on information, because it’s too easily accessible. The truth can be fudged. The facts can be altered. This is the first democratic society that doesn’t see legitimate, verified information as important to its existence.

Don’t believe me? Turn on cable news for a minute. That’s all you’ll need.

Right now, Wikileaks is releasing thousands of pages of information about what the United States government is doing. But even the news organizations reporting about it can’t get simple details right, and others news organizations are spending time openly attacking transparency. The stories will be easily available, but they won’t be read. (Except, maybe, for the one about the wild wedding in Russia. It’s very TMZ.)

Our society is supposed to be built on being highly informed. We’ve got apps that tell us where to save $.03 on gasoline, but we don’t have nearly the same instinct to seek out truth. How can we live in an interconnected world that sees facts as irrelevant?

So the question is: Do you want to live in a society that does value truth? Because good reporting is just like everything else in our society: if you value it, you’re going to have to pay for it.

Posted on

How Far Can 100 Really Good Books Travel?

That’s the question I’m asking in a new project that will soon be launching over at BooksAround.org. It’s a spin-off on the old dollar bill experiment: if I send 100 interesting books out to people around the country, and ask those people to read and pass the books along to friends, where will those books eventually end up?

To get this off the ground, I’ve enlisted the help of Kickstarter. You’ve probably got a dollar or five lying around. So watch the video below, click the link and help get this experiment off the ground.

Posted on

The Power of Love (or: Things My Mother Does Not Know About My Father After 29 Years of Marriage.)

If you are reading this, then there is a good chance that my mother knows everything about you. She knows when you were born and how much you weighed. What elementary school you went to. Your favorite type of Girl Scout cookie.

Everything.

I can say this with certainty because she really does remember everything. I’ve seen her whip out personal trivia on people she hasn’t seen in decades, and I’ve seen them stumble for an explanation on how she could have remembered something so forgettable. The first time I saw the show “Chuck,” I thought: a Jewish person with a Polish-sounding last name and a database of totally useless information stuck in his head? Hey, that sounds like my mom!

Which is why I was so surprised to learn last week that when it comes to my father — with whom my mother has been married for the previous 29 years — my mom doesn’t really know that much.

At all.

It started innocently enough at first. My mother wanted to transfer some airline miles between frequent flier accounts. We logged onto Delta’s website, and logged in with my dad’s information. (He had the miles.) They asked us to first submit two security questions for my father. Our choices were:

Mom looked at me. “Are there any other choices?” she asked.

I just stared. “Mom, one of the options is, ‘Where did you meet your spouse?’ Come on, you remember that one.”

“Don’t you?”

Mom kept staring at the screen. Then she yelled up the stairs.

“Billy! Where did we meet?”

Now, I’ll say this: some of those questions are tricky. I don’t even remember the name of my first pet. (Or even what type of animal it was. A goldfish, maybe?)

But it’s also worth wondering: Should a woman who’s been married nearly three decades really get foiled by a Delta security questionnaire?

Especially on a question involving herself?

Proudly powered by WordPress