Does anyone feel there is an appetite for a new online daily source for upbeat goings-on? Is this already saturated? What sites do you use?
Replies13
- @Cameron ChristieActually, that's a great concept you've got there - a writer rating app like Uber's or Tripadvisor's would be useful in this, the mis-infomration age. Ideally, the rating system could have sub-ratings, i.e. one rating for accuracy and another rating for writing style. Of course, it would likely be subjected to hijacking by those trying to rig the system, in the same way that Amazon's products reviews have been. Nonetheless, a simple system that went deeper than 'likes', and was specifically concerned with assessing the author's skill would be great, and might even help up and coming writers get publishing and other contracts. For example, I know a number of outstanding writers whose work is lost in the mountains of meadiocre work now published online. As is, there's no crowd-sourced way for their talent to be quantified, and they are pretty much reliant on getting a lucky break. Had they the chance to gain an independently quantified measure of their ability, that may help them get noticed. But, until that comes along, my advise on sourcing writers would be, 1. look at feedback on their works from field experts, i.e. the communities of research and practice they have written about; 2. look for some foraml training, even if brief, because it usually makes a world of difference to their capacity to evaulate issues; and 3. look to whether their work - their words - catalysed a positve response, i.e. did an article they wrote inspire action on a critical issue, or did it recieve positive feedback in the form of letters from readers, etc. Good writers always, and without fail, show some capacity to move people's minds and/or emotions, and given your interest in in creating a publication that illicits a feel good feeling, that's a vital consideration if you proceed to develop your idea.
- @Melissa Sterry Thank you Melissa, lots of great points. It's a tricky area. My own experience is that I would like to get lost in an interesting article on a platform where I wouldn't be distracted/tempted by the harsh relalities of the world (I go there daily and have lots of choice) but creating a niche space of merit is easier said than done. As you suggest, focusing on the one subject area is a more sensible and managable feat but understanding what is credible without having the editorial experience is tough. It would be great if writers came with a rating like Uber!
- Commercially, it's a fairly saturated space. Creatively, there's scope for more. But, if looking to the bigger picture, the media space is saturated with soundbites, superficially analyses, one-sided arguments, and content that though vast in quantity is low on quality. This isn't helping to address the critical issues of our time - either environmental or social - indeed, if we were to take the mounting carbon emissions and wider pollution issues into account, one could even argue the contrary.Few content platforms are really pushing any boundaries in terms of creativity, and fewer still are giving issues the bandwidth they need. This is one reason why some within the wider populous are struggling to decipher fact from fiction, hence the copious quantities of mis-information that not populate the digital space, and to the extent they are making addressing fast-growing and profoundly problematic issues harder.What's needed above all is discerning editorial and curation by individuals that understand how to interrogate topics in a way that syphons out untruths, over-statements, and generally misleading information. Yet, that do so in a way that finds original ways to communicate sometimes complex information, and to neuro-diverse communities of varied levels of education and professional experience. The challenge any that seek to achieve this aim would face is the fact that most big brands' budgets are focused on publications that boast big audiences, which is one reason why so many big publishers disseminate click-bait so much - hits n' clicks = more ad / sponsorship revenues.Another issue an upbeat focused publication may face is the accusation of being oblivious to the harsh realities of the moment. Striking a balance between giving reason to be positive, but without being blinkered is yet another reason why, if you were going to put a publication or other content platform together, you'd be wise to work with some experience hands, more specifically to consult they that have previous experience in creating this content-type.Strategically, given, if a start-up, you'd struggle to gather the expertise to discern which stories were genuinely positive, as opposed to being hype or artifice across all subject fields, your best bet would be to select a particular field, such as mental health, and aim to do the subject justice, as opposed to trying to be a jack of all subject fields, while doing few, if any justice. That aside, format wise, for all the hype around it, Clubhouse is probably the sort of platform you should be thinking about in terms of audience. Why? Because newsletters... already too many, social media feeds... ditto, radio... good luck getting a license.... print... £££/$$$. Put another way, think about not only the content niche, but the production niche... which space isn't yet filled, be that on an audio app, or someplace else.
- @Benedict Cosgrove That certainly helps Benedict and a surprise that some of the big players will not pay for some of the articles. Many thanks once again.
- @Cameron Christie Cameron -- Payment for writers is such a thorny issue, mainly because (for most of us who have tried freelancing for a living) there is rarely a fee structure that applies across platforms, outlets, media, etc.In reply to your question: generally speaking, yes, the longer the piece, the higher the fee. But I've written short pieces that worked out to $4/word and longer pieces that paid a tenth of that rate. Considerations include the type of work (book reviews are gratifying to write, for example, but customarily pay very little); the outlet (I was recently paid $1/word for a write-up and interview with an author for an online-only startup magazine, but that sort of money is rare in the digital realm); and the "prestige" of the publication.That being said, plenty of "prestigious" online publications pay nothing at all for essays, reviews, etc. -- so just because some journals or online 'zines or websites are well-known or highly regarded is no guarantee that one will make good money (or any money at all) writing for them.Not sure if that helps -- but alas, there's no set answer to your question.
- @Benedict Cosgrove Hi Benedict, thanks for your thoughts. Original content most certainly (from established writers/commentators) and less of the sugar. As a writer yourself are you paid based on the article's length? You can tell I am at the early stages here of an idea!
- @Linsey M Thanks Linsey, I will add those to the list, great stuff.
- A few sites which maybe of interest to youhttps://thehappynewspaper.com/https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/https://www.positive.news/There are a few more instagram accounts I follow, will search them out and send over :)
- @Antonio Willis I agree, there is a glut of content that is not upto scratch and the negative and fictional does catch the eye. Like you say, everyone can create so the quality is harder to find unless you stick to the established outlets.
- @Brendan McKnight Great, I will certianly check them out.
- Cameron -- Real quickly, I don't think that the "upbeat goings-on" niche is overflowing (if I understand your meaning). There are certainly quite a few decent, or semi-decent, outlets doing this sort of thing, and plenty of major media sites have a "good news" component that aggregates feel-good stories from wire services, etc.But that does NOT preclude another player from moving into that space. I guess my question would be: What would differentiate yours from everyone else's? Would it be all-original content? And (importantly) will the tone be less treacly and cloying than so many of the feel-good sites already out there?Anyway, good luck with it, if you move ahead. B
- Future Earth (https://www.instagram.com/futureearth/) is a great account for positive, bite-sized, mostly climate-based news stories. I really like the format of their weekly 'Good News Tuesday' posts: https://www.instagram.com/p/CLE2gVGApxc/
- @Morphe Digital Design Thanks for your thoughts. It would be targeted at those seeking a positive slant on the day but based on short articles and less of the meme/100 words (so maybe ages 30's upwards). A newspaper gives you everything, twitter a bite size. Often it is information overload and the quality dubious.
You must sign up or log in before you
add a comment.