analytics


According to Chartbeat, 45 per cent of readers leave a story within 15 seconds of clicking onto a page so cannot be counted as having read it. “If a reader launches a page view and does not read it, it’s not valuable for journalists,” says Nicholson. “We want to know how far into the content the reader makes it.” Why don’t people scroll further? Is it because they aren’t


interested? This, says Nicholson, is something for newsrooms to discuss but complex language is generally a turn off, while pull-out quotes may tempt readers to stay longer. She agrees analytics should not be used to rate journalists’


performance but says they can help writers to improve. “Analytics are not a good or bad thing. It’s about the culture you create around data,” she says. “There is a recipe that goes into success on digital platforms.” Adam Tinworth, a lecturer in journalism at City University, London, says it is vital that journalists are involved in discussions over the use of analytics. “People could reject it because of the discomfort of being measured or lack of understanding, or because [they think] it automatically means clickbait,” he says. Rather than wait for management to impose simplistic targets, journalists should show interest in the potential of analytics. “It’s done best when staff are supported, and they understand what the measurements mean and know what the objectives are,” he says. Laura Sharman, editor of online journal Local Government


News, normally checks Google Analytics three or four times per day to see how many people read stories. While important for advertising, the results also demonstrate interest in topics. She stresses it is not just about how counting many hits a story receives.


Hooking readers with a score


Ever wondered how much you learnt from a story? Or what more you could find out? Answers to such questions will be available to FT digital subscribers by September if, as planned, the FT starts giving live knowledge scores based on what people read. Tests with volunteer


subscribers are due to be held over the summer. With digital production firm Crux, which helped develop the tool, the FT has to decide how to measure the amount of


“ ”


knowledge in a story, and how best to direct readers to further information. Offering a score plus the


prospect of raising it is an advanced form of reader engagement. “We are not going to test


readers on knowledge,” stresses FT group product manager James Webb. “We want to reach people who are less engaged with a new behavioural hook.” According to Webb, it is


reasonable to assume FT readers will wish to achieve a high score, and maybe compare it with


others’. “It’s not a leap of imagination to say longer articles will be more knowledge rich,” he says. “We may need to blacklist stories that don’t lend themselves to the concept.” The scheme could raise


an estimated £1.5m a year if subscribers visit the FT site more often or read more articles. But Webb insists there is no question of journalists being asked to increase or ration information to influence online behaviour. “The editorial team is fiercely independent,” he says.


Online journalism shows us that stories stand or fall on their own merits


“There is no good in having a story with 500 hits if people are on the page for 15 seconds,” she says. “We are not about clickbait. We are interested in quality journalism.” Sharman is particularly interested in the ‘bounce rate’ – how


many readers stay on LGN’s site to read further stories. “You have to know what you are looking for. Are you retaining your audience? Where are they going next?” she asks. “As a journalist, you want to write articles that are right for your audience.” Persuading people to become regular readers is becoming more of a priority. The Times and Sunday Times appointed an engagement editor to attract online readers, while the Financial Times is about to offer subscribers live knowledge scores, based on the what they learn from reading articles (see box). Figures showing the week’s most popular stories can come as a surprise. It is not unusual for a story that is a year or two old to be more popular than recent news. According to Tinworth, journalists should not be concerned if readers are attracted into online archives. “It’s a concept we have to get around,” he says. “We are no longer producing a product that will go into the recycling in a few days.” Media organisations are not short of choice when it comes


to analytics. Facebook provides a free tool called CrowdTangle, which measures a story’s performance based on social media interactions, while Parse.ly, another US firm, offers a live dashboard service similar to Chartbeat’s. Daniel Banta of Parse.ly agrees that page views should not be the be-all and end-all when it comes to measuring success. Just as interesting, he says, is whether people are likely to read stories on a desktop or a mobile device, and what this means for using graphics and images alongside text. Back at Trinity Mirror, Higgerson says discussions are


continuing over how to ensure some stories are better read. No story is above scrutiny, he says, regardless of how worthwhile or important it seems. The question is how journalists and editors interpret data and use the myriad of tools available now and in the future. “The key is to allow yourself to be led by analytics, but not governed by analytics,” says Higgerson.


theJournalist | 15


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28