A new study of how U.S. business journalists use the Internet has some interesting implications for those who evaluate its impact on standards. It's clear that the journalistic use is primarily information-gathering.

The study for the Arketi Group asked business journalists (it isn't clear in the study how many) how they use the Internet. Not surprisingly, 98 per cent said they use it to read news, while 91 per cent use it for sources and ideas. Industry experts, interested parties and corporate websites are the most frequently used sources.

Slightly more than two-thirds (69%) use the Internet for social networking. Journalists are more likely to have Linkedin accounts (92%) than Facebook (85%) or Twitter (84%) accounts.

As for their own creating, a little more than half (53%) blog. Other top uses include consuming webinars, YouTube and Wikis, producing and listening to podcasts and social bookmarking.
 
 
A nice, common sense post from Meryl Evans on WebWorkerDaily identifies the rules of thumb for social media. In essence, there really aren't any.

Having said that, Evans approaches social media smartly and has some discipline about even the free forms of it. Among her rules:

1. Do it the same time daily.
2. Spread the Tweets.
3. Join the right Twitter chats.
4. Review Facebook daily.
5. Update Linkedin at least a few times weekly.
6. Write at least two blog entries weekly.
7. Read others' blogs.
 
 
Two studies this week chronicle practices in social media. One is an early indication of the challenge of commingling advertising in that conversational space, the other is about the seemingly innocuous traits of that conversation.

Linkshare has determined that only about one in 20 social media users interact with advertising. Banner ads are only clicked through by four per cent of users. That said, fewer than one in five consider advertising intrusive in that space. Still, only five per cent on Linkedin and nine per cent on Facebook felt they were useful.

Then there is a study from Pearanalytics that seems to play into the prevailing criticism of Twitter --- that it's a haven for mindless prattle. The report found little news on Twitter (3.6 per cent, in fact) and a lot of vents and blasts (40.5 per cent). There are plenty of conversations and a fair amount of promotion and spam in the mix.

(My own view is that, when you follow a good group, you get a good reading on Twitter's value. If you simply open up to everything, you don't get value for the experience. Twitter wasn't established as a news distributor, but as a conversational tool --- as a social medium, after all.)
2 Comments
 
 

News organizations have been struggling to sort through the challenges of social networking and their applications to conventional media. Newsrooms I know use Facebook and MySpace for gathering content, and I belong to Linkedin and other social and professional networks for their excellent connective purposes.
The allure is the interactivity and functionality of sharing content and using generated content. But the downside is, well, no one's really making money on the model.
This week's Economist has a compelling take on how social networks may be a big part of the Internet, but not really a business model.

1 Comment
 
DA25E68FDEC14EAFA7B2A27D26C48058