1. future of regional press group
1.1. "I've been working for regional papers for free since I was 15 and now there are no jobs for me"
1.2. My Key Questions would be:
1.2.1. Where's the public service?
1.2.2. What support can we give this industry
2. sweeble.com
2.1. as simple as a blog: a printed newspaper
2.1.1. print on demand and web based design app
2.1.2. aimed at small communities of interest
2.1.3. you might not be able to make money from a blog - but maybe you can if you also have a newspaper that you can sell
2.1.4. Costs about a quarter of what you get from your local printer
2.1.4.1. and its full colour
2.1.5. 6-templates, all A5
3. PANEl Q1: are media companies the wrong size to survive an online future?
3.1. Tom Scotney
3.1.1. Large media companies (Like TM?) still have a part to play
3.1.2. can we make a synergy between the grassroots and the mainstream?
3.2. Jon Bounds
3.2.1. Bloggers could benefit from the expertise that trad newspapers have in terms of local ad sales
3.2.1.1. So maybe the enemy is google for newspapers, and not bloggers
3.2.1.1.1. again it's the back end and the platforms where the money is
3.2.2. markets don't care about journalism
3.3. Sue Heseltine
3.3.1. the way the newspapers have developed over the years has left gaps
3.3.2. we're now looking for the models that might come and fill in those gaps
3.3.2.1. coops
3.3.2.2. trusts
3.3.2.3. grassroots (blooging then I guess?)
3.3.3. part of the conversation is how you make money out of that
3.3.4. the answer is probably smaller, more local, community led
3.3.5. journalists on local papers are involved in advertising
3.3.5.1. do bloggers need to think in these ways to position content
3.3.6. journalism is important to communities to expose wrong doing and uphold what is good
3.3.6.1. my concern about grassroots is that some of this is lost
3.3.6.2. the news agenda changes: I'm not sure if it's good. In some ways it does because it removes the power of editors, but it's not entirely a good thing
4. KEY!
4.1. where you see this sign that's something I have written not something that the speakers said
5. Panel Q2: What shouldn't people get for free
5.1. John (?)
5.1.1. it may be that the publishing arm of a newspaper becomes a money loser
5.2. Tom Scotney
5.2.1. maybe there isn't a model to make money
5.3. Jon Bounds
5.3.1. yes I'd love to be paid, bt I don't see how because advertising doesn't work
5.4. Sue Heseltine
5.4.1. Films are for free, music is for free, we are not going to make people pay for news
6. Panel Q3: what is the most exciting thing you have seen re the future of journalism?
6.1. Joanna Geary
6.1.1. Social tools to get people engaged with making news
6.1.2. social tools that generate small amounts of cash for news
6.1.3. spotify: could there be one for news?
6.2. Sue Heseltine
6.2.1. We get asked "do you feel bad about students who are going into a world with no jobs? No because the world has changed, and they're going out into that new world with the skills to make a go of it
6.3. John (?)
6.3.1. twitter
6.4. Jon Bounds
6.4.1. nothing specific but collaboration is easier, and that's good for democracy
7. conclusion
7.1. Grind on / stop
7.2. Does the business plan work?
7.3. The pain of due diligence
8. Scoopt (Kyle Macrae @kylemacrae)
8.1. Idea: to give opportunity for public to sell images
8.1.1. Agency structure to represent people
8.1.1.1. prevent them getting ripped off: tab's will try to fob people off with a few quid, but their content is valuable
8.1.2. £5k build
8.1.2.1. went out to tender, range of costs up to about £60k
8.1.2.1.1. Lots of functions, upload via phone, mgmt functions etc.
8.1.2.1.2. Kyle says you could get it done for half that now
8.1.2.1.3. 5yrs ago
8.1.2.2. This actually sounds incredibly low for me: how on earth did it get built for that?
8.1.3. Conventional advice 5yrs ago
8.1.3.1. Just build an audience and a market, don't worry about money
8.1.3.1.1. then sell it or partner up
8.1.3.2. Kyle's approach:
8.1.3.2.1. this won't work, build the money making in from the start
8.1.4. grind on or stop
8.1.4.1. they ground on, based on belief that there was an emerging market and that someone like getty would want it
8.1.4.1.1. Sold a front page pic of light aircraft crash in NY - big story, but only £300
8.1.4.1.2. Same time, deal to bundle their software into Sony handsets
8.1.4.2. Kept on grinding on, this was increasingly stressful
8.1.4.2.1. contacted Getty at a low point
8.2. conclusions:
8.2.1. stop or grind on
8.2.2. painful process of sale
8.2.3. get out of the echo chamber? only way to find opportunities
8.3. Some questions that I have from this:
8.3.1. do the public think of sharing first, rather than selling?
8.3.1.1. Answer: Kyle advocated a mixed model of free sharing and CC licensing alongside a revenue model
8.3.1.2. BBC user generated content took a lot of business when they started asking for pictures
8.3.1.2.1. it's hard for us to compete as a compnay they don't know
8.3.1.2.2. we asked for secondary sales rights
8.3.2. Would this have worked better now? Paid the price for being an early adopter?
8.3.3. Would it work better if it had been 4ip funded?
8.3.4. How the hell did the website cost only £5k?
8.3.4.1. And actually would the platform have made more money than the service
8.3.4.2. What about a white lable service?
8.3.4.2.1. More agencies, more advocates
8.4. From the Q&A
8.4.1. more money to be made as a lawyer chasing copyright infringement now than running a picture agency
8.4.2. Flickr:
8.4.2.1. commercial arrangement with flickr didn't come off
8.4.2.2. So bypassed this and asked flcikr members to tag "scoppt"
8.4.2.2.1. They publish, then scooopt filter
8.4.2.3. "every photo sharing site should offer a way for people to make money from their images"
9. Panel Q5: does your council get it, and does that matter? is it an opportunity for people to make money?
9.1. Jo (?)
9.1.1. it doesn't matter because council stuff will get picked up at a local level
9.1.2. there's opportunitiess for people to do stuff with local data
9.1.3. Not sure where the business opps are, there is statutory stuff that councils do
9.2. Robin (morley?) from BBC
9.2.1. stuff will happen whether or not council is involved
9.3. RObin (Hammon?) Headshift
9.3.1. We're already helping councils to do social media
9.3.2. it is an opportunity for local journalists (who understand social media) to generate local content
9.4. Andy Dickinson, Uni of Lancashire
9.4.1. why do councils want or need to do that?
9.4.2. there's lots of thing sthey could to help journalists but there's no desire to do that
9.4.2.1. RSS info straight from the council to the newsroom, or liveblog council meetings: they make it hard for people to have access in an offline world, why will they suddenly open up under digital?