New Irish Times politics podcast

Mr Pseudonym

Inside Politics Podcast

Part of the Irish Times' online strategy is to "launch (podcasts) on a range of subjects". Already, there is a travel podcast with Fionn Davenport, and the Second Captains sports podcast with the team who left Newstalk's Off the Ball. Previously, there were several iterations of a motoring podcast, which I think has since stopped, and several attempts at cultre, business, and politics podcasts.

The Inside Politics podcast, which is released on Wednesdays, is the latest initiative. So far, there has been a "bailout-exit special", and two regular episodes. It is presented by Hugh Linehan, the Digital Development Editor at the paper, and released on Wednesdays.

The Special began with a broad discussion between Frances Ruane (ESRI Director) and Diarmaid Ferriter (UCD historian) about the state of Ireland post-bailout. The next part considered the international perception of Ireland and the bailout, with Derek Scally (Berlin Correspondent) and Suzanne Lynch (Brussels Correspondent). The show concluded with a discussion between Stephen Collins (Political Editor), Fintan O'Toole (Columnist), and Pete Lunn (ESRI economist).

Subsequent shows have begun with a round-up of the news by political reporters from the paper (two of Michael O’Regan, Fiach Kelly, and Harry McGee), followed by two separate parts. To date, the topics of the parts have been: the Reform Alliance; the coming local and European elections; consumer sentiment in Ireland; and the Irish political Left.

I listen to a lot of radio, and, in my opinion, this was of the same standard or superior to much of Radio 1's political output. It also had the added advantage of not having any ads. Hugh Linehan is a remarkably good presenter, and is surprisingly well informed and opinionated on current affairs for one who used to be involved in the culture side of the IT. As would be expected, they made wide use of their journalists and columnists with only one of the nine sections not featuring a current or former IT scribe. Their guests, especially Ruane and Ferriter, were also impressive.

The quality is so good that I almost wonder should not RTE commission the podcast and broadcast it in one of its graveyard slots - maybe Sundays, up against Marc Coleman's Show. There is precedent, as the IT's motoring podcast was broadcast on R1 Extra.

It amazes me that it has taken so long for the Irish newspapers to develop blogs and audio/visual content. The Guardian has a wide selection of podcasts, and has its Comment is Free section - which publishes many guest writers; The Telegraph has several blogs written by its columnists; The Times has recently started a political podcast which features its heavy-hitting columnists - Finkelstein, Parris, Aaronovitch, etc; The Economist has some excellent blogs, and very good multimedia content (here is an interesting presentation by John Prideaux, who was then "Homepage Editor").

It would seem obvious to me that to stave off disaster for the IT (its readership has slumped 30% since 2008, and that shows no sign of abating) it must drastically improve its online presence, with a view to then going behind a paywall. I am a regular newspaper reader who firmly believes in the necessity of paying for online content, but even I wouldn't subscribe to the IT if it went behind a paywall tomorrow. The websites of the London equivalents are so much fuller and more pleasing to look at, despite the fact that the IT's website was recently redesigned. It also feels like the homepage barely changes throughout the day. Previous attempts at multimedia have been short-lived or disjointed: the IT youtube page, which used to show reports from its writers, has only had weather reports for the last year; the paper kicked into action during the Seanad Referendum with several videos by Harry McGee and infographics illustrating turnout, etc - that has since gone quiet; this embarrassing effort is badly scripted and presented, poorly recorded, and takes soo long to illustrate so little - I have no idea how they thought it was fit for uploading.

The Irish Times has a big task ahead of itself, and it should start with its website.

IRE60

There’s a whole heap of points that I’d like to reply to, but I have to limit it.
Somebody woke up one day recently and said – “Jesus, our business model is fcuked and people aren’t buying papers anymore!”

But it was a decade, if not a decade and a half. too late. So they had to have another hot topic and decided that they were information providers and would become all things to all men.

Nearly every newspaper now has a “studio” where they can pretend they are multi media producers. I was having a chat a few weeks back to a “newspaper” journalist who would regularly do video for the web for the title. Luckily the individual came from a broadcast background so its petty decent stuff.

I drew attention to a video that was compiled for a publication in January regarding the storms. It was appalling. The logic being we have a studio – let’s make a video. But because you have a studio doesn’t mean it will be professional.

It was cringe worthy and makes Ciara O’Brien’s video you pointed out look like it came from the Cohen Bros! They should stick to their knitting.

On the subject of the Times: Perhaps if they stopped sticking mobiles in water (it’s a bit Blue Peter?) and did something with their site instead. In 2013 50% of their traffic was mobile and they feel that it will top 70% shortly. I’d ask any of their developers/editors to use their site on a tablet – it’s a mess and slow to the point of distraction. Perhaps an effort there instead.

Loafing Oaf

The problem lies in monetising any of this stuff. Is there any evidence from elsewhere than an enhanced audiovisual presence significantly boosts the number of people prepared to subscribe to a newspaper online? I'm a big news junkie but I can't ever see myself a subscribing to the IT because there's so much 'content' (I hate this jargon) available gratis elsewhere on the net.

Mr Pseudonym

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

The problem lies in monetising any of this stuff. Is there any evidence from elsewhere than an enhanced audiovisual presence significantly boosts the number of people prepared to subscribe to a newspaper online? I'm a big news junkie but I can't ever see myself a subscribing to the IT because there's so much 'content' (I hate this jargon) available gratis elsewhere on the net.

There's also so much comment and opinion available on the internet, but, I think, people still buy papers because they are generally of high quality and trusted.

More and more outlets are going behind a paywall. The IT and S/Indo had indicated they intended to do that before the end of last year. Whether or not enough people are willing to subscribe, thereby sustaining an industry, is a moot point. The Irish newspapers need to be in a position where, if people are, they have an attractive product.

Apologies for repeated use of "content"!

Evan DietrichSmith

Very interesting post Mr P. and thanks for putting it out there.
I'll confine myself to comments on the Podcast itself and the one I listened to which seemed to cover consumer confidence.

I found it excellent,well presented by Hugh Linehan, who clipped on nice and briskly and had none of the annoying traits of a lot of presenters I could mention.
Pity the gentleman from Consumer & Attitudes hadn't that skill as he put a 'yeah' after almost every sentence where he wanted to emphasise.

Would have me reaching for the off button if I got a lot of that.

Well worth a listen and promising based on only one Podcast.

One word of caution though, as an experienced commercial and economic watcher and participant myself,be carefull about 'talking heads'.

There are gallons of talking heads out there ho can put forward theories and plans and economic standpoints and the 'divil and all' and make themselves sound very convincing.

Just remember that there is a huge difference between the talking heads and those who actually have to implement difficult agendas and change.

Very easy to throw out rhetoric and theories but it's a totally different thing to get
Difficult policies implemented.

To make an omelette you have to break eggs, and these people seem to think you don't have to.

I'll leave it at that.

IRE60

It's true that someone has to push the button. That's really not the issue. Look across the pond. The Sunday Times has a circulation (total) 812,000 and a total of 80,000 subscribing to its digital edition (tablet). That's roughly a 10% conversion.

The Into has a circulation of 121,000 and the Irish Times 84,000..... the numbers wont stack up in the domestic market.

C

Mr Pseudonym

Evan DietrichSmith wrote: »

Very interesting post Mr P. and thanks for putting it out there.
I'll confine myself to comments on the Podcast itself and the one I listened to which seemed to cover consumer confidence.

Pity the gentleman from Consumer & Attitudes hadn't that skill as he put a 'yeah' after almost every sentence where he wanted to emphasise.

One word of caution though, as an experienced commercial and economic watcher and participant myself,be carefull about 'talking heads'.

I think you probably chose the worst episode to listen to! I found the IT's personal finance editor more difficult to bear, to be honest! Btw, they have just begun another podcast called World View, presented by Denis Staunton, former Foreign Editor. Haven't listened to it yet, but I've seen Staunton before, and he's clearly bright.

I'm not sure that I agree about your caution regarding "talking heads". The Sindo has clearly decided that that is what people want: lots of assertive opinion. We see in America that personality-presenters who have forceful and divisive opinions (Beck*, O'Reilly, etc) are in vogue.

*I'm aware his standing has fallen

IRE60 wrote: »

It's true that someone has to push the button. That's really not the issue. Look across the pond. The Sunday Times has a circulation (total) 812,000 and a total of 80,000 subscribing to its digital edition (tablet). That's roughly a 10% conversion.

The Into has a circulation of 121,000 and the Irish Times 84,000..... the numbers wont stack up in the domestic market.

C

I posit that the majority of Times digital subscribers are past, present, or would-be readers of the daily. Therefore, one should compare digital sales subscriptions with the ~400k figure. A quick Google search seems to suggest that there are now 150k+ digital subscribers to the Sunday/Times digital edition.

There are also more alternatives in Britain, be it the freely-available-online Guardian and Independent, or the BBC (to name but a few - they also have an incredibly vibrant blogging community). On the other hand, if the trio of INM titles and the IT were to go behind a paywall tomorrow, there would be no broadsheet-quality analysis of Irish current affairs available.

Btw, C, when do the JNLRs come out - I can hardly contain myself?!!

Evan DietrichSmith

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

I think you probably chose the worst episode to listen to! I found the IT's personal finance editor more difficult to bear, to be honest! Btw, they have just begun another podcast called World View, presented by Denis Staunton, former Foreign Editor. Haven't listened to it yet, but I've seen Staunton before, and he's clearly bright.

I'm not sure that I agree about your caution regarding "talking heads". The Sindo has clearly decided that that is what people want: lots of assertive opinion. We see in America that personality-presenters who have forceful and divisive opinions (Beck*, O'Reilly, et







I posit that the majority of Times digital subscribers are past, present, or would-be readers of the daily. Therefore, one should compare digital sales subscriptions with the ~400k figure. A quick Google search seems to suggest that there are now 150k+ digital subscribers to the Sunday/Times digital edition.

There are also more alternatives in Britain, be it the freely-available-online Guardian and Independent, or the BBC (to name but a few - they also have an incredibly vibrant blogging community). On the other hand, if the trio of INM titles and the IT were to go behind a paywall tomorrow, there would be no broadsheet-quality analysis of Irish current affairs available.



Btw, C, when do the JNLRs come out - I can hardly contain myself?!!

I think you may have misinterpreted my comment on 'talking heads '.

I'm putting forward the stance that they need to be taken with a large grain of salt by the 'listeners '

Kind of 'talk is cheap' attitude, deeds and implementation are far more important.

In other words,don't take gobby and opinionated people at face value.

Patrick Rabbitte @ 1215 on Marzie Finucane kind of agrees with me:eek:

Loafing Oaf

IRE60 wrote: »

It's true that someone has to push the button. That's really not the issue. Look across the pond. The Sunday Times has a circulation (total) 812,000 and a total of 80,000 subscribing to its digital edition (tablet). That's roughly a 10% conversion.

The Into has a circulation of 121,000 and the Irish Times 84,000..... the numbers wont stack up in the domestic market.

C

Plus we have an actual case of an indigenous paper that has put up a paywall in the Sunday Business Post. I seem to remember a while ago that they had something like 1000 subscribers to what by all accounts is a high-quality digital offering, targeting a section of the market that international experience suggests should be willing to pay for online news. So the omens aren't too bright...

Mr Pseudonym

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Plus we have an actual case of an indigenous paper that has put up a paywall in the Sunday Business Post. I seem to remember a while ago that they had something like 1000 subscribers to what by all accounts is a high-quality digital offering, targeting a section of the market that international experience suggests should be willing to pay for online news. So the omens aren't too bright...

I'm not suggesting that Irish print media, as it currently is, is sustainable under a digital-only strategy. But, drawing unqualified parallels between the SBP is wrong, I think.

The SBP's decision was based around the fact that it was close to unsustainability. As bad as the S/Indo and, especially, the IT are, there are still substantial cost-cutting measures they could take. Therefore, it was unable to trial various models, advertise it, etc. I get the impression that people are becoming more willing to pay for online content. Also, the Post is a weekly paper, and its online offering of business news (free during the week) plus content from the print edition is not enough to attract subscribers. The only attraction to online subscription is that it is 35-50% cheaper than the print.

Speaking from personal experience, I have several online subscriptions to daily papers, but I really enjoy the experience of picking up "the papers" on Sunday morning. As far as I know, the SBP doesn't have a digital edition; one just logs-in. Therefore, I think your average SBP reader doesn't rub their hands together thinking, "I'm looking forward to this"; maybe if they could they could read it on a tablet it would be different.

On what you said about international experience: I don't think the SBP is an equivalent to the FT and WSJ. I suspect most buy it for it's current affairs coverage. Finance and business being international requires that, for in-depth analysis of those, Irish readers subscribe to one of the substantially better London and New York rivals.

I'm interested in your responses.

IRE60

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

Btw, C, when do the JNLRs come out - I can hardly contain myself?!!

Too Funny! Thursday at 5:00pm - i'll post links over on the radio forum.

Loafing Oaf

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that Irish print media, as it currently is, is sustainable under a digital-only strategy. But, drawing unqualified parallels between the SBP is wrong, I think.

The SBP's decision was based around the fact that it was close to unsustainability. As bad as the S/Indo and, especially, the IT are, there are still substantial cost-cutting measures they could take. Therefore, it was unable to trial various models, advertise it, etc. I get the impression that people are becoming more willing to pay for online content. Also, the Post is a weekly paper, and its online offering of business news (free during the week) plus content from the print edition is not enough to attract subscribers. The only attraction to online subscription is that it is 35-50% cheaper than the print.

Speaking from personal experience, I have several online subscriptions to daily papers, but I really enjoy the experience of picking up "the papers" on Sunday morning. As far as I know, the SBP doesn't have a digital edition; one just logs-in. Therefore, I think your average SBP reader doesn't rub their hands together thinking, "I'm looking forward to this"; maybe if they could they could read it on a tablet it would be different.

On what you said about international experience: I don't think the SBP is an equivalent to the FT and WSJ. I suspect most buy it for it's current affairs coverage. Finance and business being international requires that, for in-depth analysis of those, Irish readers subscribe to one of the substantially better London and New York rivals.

I'm interested in your responses.

I don't see why as you clearly know far more about the subject than me.:P All your points suggesting why the SBP's experience with a paywall should not be taken as determinative for other Irish papers are entirely valid. But even as a very approximate ballpark figure, that 1,000 subscribers (if it's accurate) must be massively dispiriting for Times and INM execs. Presumably if they had ten or even twenty times that number of subscribers, they would still be nowhere near digital-only viability. I also seem to remember reading somewhere that my home local paper the Western People had something like 19 subscribers when it's online version went behind a paywall. Again clearly a totally different market to the Times and the Indo, but another figure that does not augur well for a digital-only future for Irish newspapers, to put it very mildly.

Mr Pseudonym

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I don't see why as you clearly know far more about the subject than me.:P All your points suggesting why the SBP's experience with a paywall should not be taken as determinative for other Irish papers are entirely valid. But even as a very approximate ballpark figure, that 1,000 subscribers (if it's accurate) must be massively dispiriting for Times and INM execs. Presumably if they had ten or even twenty times that number of subscribers, they would still be nowhere near digital-only viability. I also seem to remember reading somewhere that my home local paper the Western People had something like 19 subscribers when it's online version went behind a paywall. Again clearly a totally different market to the Times and the Indo, but another figure that does not augur well for a digital-only future for Irish newspapers, to put it very mildly.

Trust me, I'm an amateur observer!

What you say about viability is interesting. As the current model stands, media groups can either publish content online for free and rely on advertising (which is based on traffic) for revenue, or they can go behind a paywall, sacrifice a lot of traffic (and, therefore, advertising), but have the subscriptions provide revenue. It's, ofc, difficult to determine which would be the correct strategy. Until the latter part of last year, INM thought the paywall strategy was appropriate; subsequently, ostensibly because of improved traffic on their website, they have decided to postpone that indefinitely.

I heard the Observer editor John Mulholland say that ~60% of the paper's overheads relate to printing and distribution. So, if the Post were at 20 000 online subscribers, they would be close to the point of being able to switch to an entirely digital offering, with the concomitant reduction in revenue.

Thanks for response.


PS I think I was wrong about the Post not having an iPad app, which gives more support to your position

Mr Pseudonym

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

I think I was wrong about the Post not having an iPad app

These are un-dated reviews from iTunes:

A joke of an app

By the looks of this app, I would say the SBP requested at the initial design meeting that the app be cheap and easy for them to manage. And it certainly hit the mark on both of those...

For a national news paper app this serves the award for worst app on offer. I've had this app on my iPad since it came out and was instantly put off by the layout and look. However, I decided to give it a go, and bought a Sunday issue. Unlike its counterparts, it's nothing like reading the newspaper. Instead you get a website style about that links to their articles. It's lazy, unattractive and just not accessible or true to the newspapers format.

Honest,y, avoid it. Is a waste of a download and even worse, a waste of an issue if you end up being foolish enough to buy one.

Woeful - do not subscribe

This app is truly woeful. I feel cheated. I wrongly assumed I was subscribing to an on-line version of the Sunday paper. What I got is a confusing website (little distinction between articles from the sunday paper and the 'daily post' website). There is no 'paper' to read - its simply a collection of article titles from the paper categorised into sections with absolutely no feel of a paper. You are left with a sense that you have neither 'read the paper', 'seen the paper' or even 'read a section'. No front page, no photographs, captions etc.
I really want my money back. I should have read the reviews prior to subscribing. I just assumed.....

Mr Pseudonym

IRE60 wrote: »

Makes Ciara O’Brien’s video you pointed out look like it came from the Cohen Bros!

O'Brien is at it again! It's a sixty second review (preceded by a thirty second ad - which cannot be skipped) in which she asks, "Just how tough is technology?" There then follows about thirty seconds of 'on-board' footage from someone who is completing the Hell and Back obstacle course. She concludes with, "So there you go - the (camera) went through hell and back ... and lived to shoot another day." Again, it's a piece which illustrates nothing, other than that the camera works when splattered in mood. There was no comment about the specs of the camera. I don't know if it's my connection, or something, but the IT player often pixelates slightly when playing a clip. I don't really understand why they bother...I suppose, she probably need something to do.

Tech tools: GoPro Hero 3+ Black edition (video review) | Irish Times

jmcc

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Plus we have an actual case of an indigenous paper that has put up a paywall in the Sunday Business Post. I seem to remember a while ago that they had something like 1000 subscribers to what by all accounts is a high-quality digital offering, targeting a section of the market that international experience suggests should be willing to pay for online news. So the omens aren't too bright...

Even earlier than that, the Irish Times went PPV and made a complete mess of it. They got clueless people (when it came to PPV services) to do it and naturally the whole thing bombed. They ran right into the canniblisation problem (where paid content from the newspaper was being published to try to get online subscribers).They ended up with approximately 38K subs but it wasn't clear if they were day subs or annual subs or sub to the ireland.com e-mail service. The subscription model only works if there is something to which people want to subscribe. The problem for newspapers is that syndicated content makes up a large segment of each edition and real journalism (rather than the talking monkey op-eds and press release recycling) costs money. The syndicated content is often available for free elsewhere. Few people care what most talking monkey op-eds contain and apart from a few columnists with a decent readership, most columnists are irrelevant. However Irish newspapers added columnists because they were cheap sources of content. On the internet, everyone has an opinion and these op-eds are mostly bypassed. That's not good for advertising. And that's where the real business of newspapers lies. Google Adwords has almost destroyed traditional newspaper advertising because unlike with print advertising, the advertiser only pays if the reader clicks on the advert. No more full page adverts or quarter page adverts that might bring in just one sale.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

Mr Pseudonym wrote: »

I don't really understand why they bother.

The Irish Times technology/lifestyle section is legendary for all the wrong reasons. Looks like you found one of them.

Regards...jmcc