The New York Times, doing what all smart newspapers should have been doing years ago (and some were), is finally jumping into the hyperlocal game. It's launching community sites in two communities in Brooklyn and three in New Jersey.
Called The Local, the sites will offer neighborhood-level coverage of crime, schools, government, restaurants and real estate, supported by local advertising. The content will largely be written by community members themselves, with supervision by Times staffers. In other words, the usual user-generated hyperlocal model. One of these days, somebody is going to make it work–based on the glimpses we saw at Backfence, there's no question that there's content, an audience and advertising for such hyperlocal sites. It's just a matter of finding the right formula.
What may be most interesting is how the Times picked the communities in New Jersey. There's a new hyperlocal startup called Patch, founded and backed by some Google alums, that recently launched three sites in New Jersey to cover community news with a mix of staff- and user-generated content. Which three New Jersey communities is Patch in? South Orange, Maplewood and Millburn–exactly the same three the Times has chosen for its New Jersey hyperlocal rollout. What a coincidence.
There's another interesting common thread between Patch and the New York Times effort. The Times sites in Brooklyn will be aided and abetted by journalism students at the City University of New York, under the direction of long-time hyperlocal champion Jeff Jarvis–who also happens to be an advisor to Patch. (Jeff has more detail here.) Small towns sure can be small worlds.
The NYTimes experiment might be worthwhile--Lisa Williams and I were talking about the Times this week, saying that it's not just a newspaper, but a media company. A *smart* media company. With a good amount of prestige to make it worthwhile for "citizens" to contribute to it. Everyone in New York reads the Times, so its hyperlocal experiment may work.
But, as for other newspapers trying the same thing? Hasn't worked all that well for some of the Advance properties (that I know of...I'm just sayin'....)
As for Patch: I'm dubious. It's a corporate model, again, trying to get citizen content. Sounds a bit similar to YourHub, which also had journalists helping community contributors. Which had mixed results.
IMO the best models for good hyperlocal coverage happen when downsized journalists who are known in their communities, start their own hyperlocals. In many ways, that's a better model than a corporate entity trying to get warm-fuzzy-hyperlocal. Hyperlocal needs people, not new platforms.
Posted by: Tish Grier | February 28, 2009 at 08:14 AM