News as a Service: Adoption of Web 2.0 by Online Newspapers

News as a Service: Adoption of Web 2.0
by Online Newspapers

Soley Rasmussen*

Abstract This paper presents a study of the adoption of Web 2.0 by Danish on-
line newspapers and discusses the future of the newspaper in the light of contem-
porary shifts from mass media and printed products to social media and web ser-
vices. First the context of the study is presented. Then a methodology for
collecting and analyzing data on Web 2.0 adoption is suggested. Data from two
surveys carried out with an interval of 14 months (2008/2009) is discussed.
These data reveal that most online newspapers have adopted blogs and comment-
ing and many have adopted other interactive features such as voting and sharing of
user-generated content, e.g. photos and video. The most significant development
in the period between the two observation sets is a rapid diffusion of article tools
for bookmarking and sharing of content via social networks or aggregation sites.
The main conclusions are that the news industry will have to embrace the emerg-
ing “media-as-a-service” paradigm and that the future challenge for web services
will be to leverage informational and social connectivity.

Context of the Study

Global providers of content and services have entered the media market, disrupt-
ing established value chains and business models of national, regional and local
media companies. Google, Facebook, Flickr, YouTube etc. have long surpassed
most national websites in terms of unique users and Google is currently outper-
forming many a national advertising channel. Printed newspapers (Western) are
bleeding billions of dollars as consumers and advertisers are replacing print with
web. Newspaper have been replaced by search engines and paid traffic and other
traditional advertising channels are becoming obsolete, as more and more compa-
nies conduct business activities in the virtual space interacting directly with cus-
tomers. Moreover, media content providers are not only challenged by the so-
called “new media” companies, but by a new mode of producing and disseminat-

*   Copenhagen Business School, Center for Applied ICT, Copenhagen, Denmark, sr.caict@cbs.dk

A. D’Atri et al. (eds.), Management of the Interconnected World,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-7908-2404-9_2, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

12     S. Rasmussen

ing informational and cultural goods, the non-market or commons-based produc-
tion that is often associated with a new generation of web technologies, often re-
ferred to as Web 2.0.
   For national, regional and local newspapers the virtualized and globalized me-
dia landscape seems to offer more threats than opportunities and the current finan-
cial crises seem merely to amplify the media revolution set in motion by ubiquit-
ously available cheap processors and broadband. A recent study from Annenberg
School of Communication [1] show that about 20% of American internet users
stop buying printed newspapers, as they can get the same product online. The con-
clusion from Annenberg is clear:

     We’re clearly now seeing a path to the end of the printed daily newspapers - a
     trend that is escalating much faster than we had anticipated. (…) Their cu-
     shion is gone, and only those papers that can move decisively to the Web will
     survive.

The first survey of the adoption of Web 2.0 by Danish newspapers was conducted as
part of a Nordic research and innovation project, eMedia, funded by the Nordic In-
novation Center [2]. This project was carried out from 2006 to 2008 and included
five Nordic research institutions and seven Nordic media and/or e-business compa-
nies. The main aim of the project was to create new innovative products and service
forms for e-business companies by utilizing existing media channels and to identify
new business models in the broader area between media and e-business.
    Recognizing that existing value chains and media channels might not exist in a
few years time, we set out to explore the new paradigm that had become so popu-
lar in the blogosphere, the Web 2.0. The first survey of the adoption of Web 2.0 by
traditional Danish newspaper was conducted to establish a better understanding of
the impact of Web 2.0 on the media sector [3]. The second survey to be presented
was carried out in April/May 2009 in order to consolidate and/or ex-
pand/dismantle the first survey.

The Survey Methodology

Web 2.0 is an umbrella concept that embraces technologies, applications and ser-
vices, and a philosophy or a vision of the Web [4–9]. In the absence of common
definitions, the process of finding a useful comprehensive framework for collect-
ing data on adoption of Web 2.0 has to be iterative. While some features are wide-
ly accepted as Web 2.0 (e.g. RSS, blogs, tagging, multimedia sharing), others are
less obvious. However, as Web 2.0 is considered the “second generation” of the
Web a starting point is to look for features that distinguish a site from “Web 1.0”.
In this case it means that the feature must add something that distinguishes the site
from an electronic version of the printed newspaper; an information silo. While

News as a Service: Adoption of Web 2.0 by Online Newspapers   13

the printed paper is a product, Web 2.0 is about platforms and services [4]. The
registered features are not “back-end technologies”, but those Web 2.0 features
that can be registered by surfing on the site, i.e. those Web 2.0 features that the us-
er will meet when visiting the site.
   Thus, by starting with one of the online newspapers and registering which ele-
ments could be considered Web 2.0 a number of features were discovered. When
looking for these features on the next online newspaper new features were found,
and the first website had to be reviewed again and so on, until all the websites
were examined and all potential Web 2.0 features registered. Categories were de-
veloped during the process of the survey. If a new feature was discovered that did
not fit into the previous categories, the categories were changed or an additional
was added. The result is categories that frame different aspects of the Web 2.0
umbrella (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Examples of Web 2.0 features and categories and their Web 2.0 characteristics

   The two surveys covers the thirteen largest Danish newspapers with national
distribution for print, excluding two niche papers for specific sectors (agriculture
and engineering). It includes the websites of five traditional morning newspapers
(Jyllands-Posten (JP), Politiken, Berlingske, Information, Kristeligt Dagblad), one
business morning paper (Borsen), one weekly paper (Weekendavisen), two tab-
loids (B.T., Ekstra Bladet), four free daily papers (24timer, Urban, metroXpress,
Nyhedsavisen (Avisen)). The free papers only publish in print during weekdays
and are primarily distributed in larger cities. During the 14 months between the
two observation sets one of the free papers, Nyhedsavisen, have closed down print
activities and the international free paper MetroXpress have bought 24timer, for-
merly owned by JP/Politikens Hus. The four free papers do, however, still have
online editions, and are still in the top 200 of Danish websites and as all but one of
the online newspapers studied also the free papers’ websites are clearly growing.
Figure 2 is a count of unique visitors of the thirteen websites in the study (Official
statistics March 2009, Association of Danish Interactive Media, fdim.dk).

14    S. Rasmussen

Fig. 2. Growth in unique visitors Feb. 08–Mar. 09 (Source: fdim.dk)

Survey Data

The aggregate results of the two surveys are shown in Fig. 3, where the distribu-
tion of the 20 features identified in 2008 are compared to the 2009 distribution.

Fig. 3. Web 2.0 features of Danish online newspapers Feb. 2008/Apr. 2009

   In February 2008 all except one of the sites (Weekendavisen) had adopted Web
2.0 features. Most sites had adopted new forms of delivery, interactive features,
such as blogs and commenting, and different kinds of search options.

News as a Service: Adoption of Web 2.0 by Online Newspapers      15

    By 2009 all sites have adopted Web 2.0 features and the overall adoption has
increased. The most significant development in the period between the two obser-
vation sets is a rapid diffusion of article tools for bookmarking and sharing of con-
tent via social networks or aggregation sites. By April 2009 all sites but one have
an “ Add This”-button – a web application that enable one click sharing to social
networks, aggregation sites etc. Another remarkable development is the growth in
the number of sites that display ads from Google or similar.
    Just one of the little adopted features have spread in the period as two more
sites have adopted Open Source (Berlingske.dk and B.T.), but new features have
been adopted. By April 2009 five sites have a “Connect to Facebook” button and
two sites a “Follow us on Twitter” button. In February 2008 just one site had “Add
This” and none connected to Facebook/Twitter.
    Without going into the details of the surveys, some conclusions from the com-
parison can be drawn. The main conclusions from the 2008 survey were that (1)
the websites of the traditional newspapers seem to be far from reaching their po-
tential for Web 2.0 adoption, (2) Changes are driven by the “new media compa-
nies”; traditional media adopts and promotes these changes, but are not drivers
themselves, (3) the current adoption seems random and driven more by fashion
and fascination than strategic implementation of business models [3]. This picture
seems not to have changed. The rapid adoption of bookmarking tools is closely
linked to the vast increase in the number of users of social networks. In the period
between the two surveys Facebook has been booming in Denmark (see Fig. 4) and
even if Twitter still has few Danish users, Twitter global growth rates in the period
were about 1,400% [10].

Fig. 4. Percentage of the Danish population using Facebook distributed on age groups (Period:
Week 46, 2008 – Week 7, 2009. The average is about 45% in Feb. 2009 (Source: WeMind.dk)

16   S. Rasmussen

Discussion and Outlook

Web 2.0 is an excellent example of one of the main characteristics of our time:
That the cultural digitalization process moves faster than our ability to analyze it
[11–13]. While traditional media companies and academia struggle to adapt to the
2.0 phenomenon, the electronic grapevine twitter about Web 3.0 or Web n.0.

Fig. 5. Web evolution overview (Source: N. Spivack [14])

   The development in the adoption of Web 2.0 by Danish Newspaper may be ex-
plained by looking at Spivack’s model of Web-evolution (Fig. 5). Put somewhat
simply Web evolution may be taken to develop in waves – an evolutionary shift
between back-end and front-end innovations. New back-end or infrastructure
technologies enable new front-end or user-technologies – and vice versa. Accord-
ing to Spivack [15, 16] and Davis [17] Web 2.0 is a front-end revolution that has
created an explosion of content and social connectivity. The enormous amount of
information created on this user friendly Web has necessitated a new Web infra-
structure, the Web 3.0, a new back-end revolution that will enhance machine-
machine and human-machine interaction. The evolutionary approach implies a
Web of potential infinite informational and social connectivity, a Web n.0.
   Applying these ideas to the two surveys indicate that even if the features
adopted by the online newspapers have Web 2.0 characteristics (see Fig. 1) there
is a great focus on informational connectivity. The services offered are not en-
hancing social connectivity, except perhaps for blogs and commenting in the cate-
gory “participation and sharing”. Adding bookmarking tools may increase traffic

News as a Service: Adoption of Web 2.0 by Online Newspapers   17

and informational connectivity, but it does not necessarily enhance social connec-
tivity. This points to need for analyzing the phenomenon of social connectivity
from the perspective of the user. This may have been understood better by the new
media than by traditional media.
   The question is whether newspapers – print or online – will survive the era of
the service-oriented social Web. The adoption of new forms of delivery indicates
that the core offer of traditional newspapers – the news – is shifting from being a
product to becoming a service [18, 19]. Thereby the media companies may be un-
dergoing “a paradigmatic shift as they are moving from the logic of exchange of
‘goods,’ which usually are manufactured output, to one in which service provision
rather than goods is fundamental to economic exchange. The key assets in the con-
text of the emerging paradigm of business are e-services like interactivity, connec-
tivity, uncovering customer needs and providing customized offerings” [20].
   Tapscott and Williams [21] argue that the border between producers and con-
sumers is blurring, and emphasize that the power self-organizing prosumer com-
munities are gaining leads to especially strong tensions in the media sector. Tradi-
tional producers and copyright owners will have to adapt to conditions under
which open networks, open licenses, copying, remixing and even hacking are the
rules of the game. This is a world where content is not merely user-centered, but
created, managed and controlled by users. Similar conclusions can be found in
Rheingold [22], Lessing [23], Anderson [24], Turow and Tsui [25]. Benkler [12]
argue that a new mode of production is emerging: Non-market- or commons-based
peer production. Throughout the industrial period the physical and financial costs
of fixing information and cultural expressions in a transmission medium were high
and increasing. The means of mass communication (the mechanical print press,
photo-, film-, radio and television equipment etc.) were reserved companies (or
states) that had the necessary capital. Today cheap processors have replaced the
mass media technologies of the industrial society and this great reduction of cost
has enabled a radical restructuring of our informational and cultural production
system; a shift away from heavy reliance on commercial, concentrated business
models and towards greater confidence in business strategies not based on intel-
lectual property rights. In this system the access to existing information is almost
cost free. As the costs of information management and communication also de-
crease the “human factor” becomes the only “scarce resource”. As in the pre-
industrial period, Benkler argue, the production of information and cultural goods
no longer takes place on the market.
   Thus, user-generated content and social networking are only the tip of the ice-
berg. The main outlook is that the media industry will have to embrace the emerg-
ing “media-as-a-service” paradigm and that the future challenge for web services
will be to leverage informational and social connectivity.

18    S. Rasmussen

References

1. Lindqvist U et al (2008) New business forms in e-business and media “e-Media”. Final re-
    port of the NICe Project 06212. VTT, Finland
2. CDF (2009) Annual internet survey 2009 – Highlights. Center for the Digital Future: An-
    nenberg School of Communication. http://www.digitalcenter.org/pdf/ 2009_Digital_Future_
    Project_Release_Highlights.pdf. Accessed 10 Nov. 2009
3. Rasmussen S et al (2008) Web 2.0 adoption by Danish news papers – urgent need for new
    business models? Proceedings of international conference on new media technology, 2008.
    Graz, 185–193
4. O’Reilly T (2005) O'Reilly network: what is Web 2.0. http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/
    a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-Web-20.html. Accessed 10 Nov. 2009
5. O’Reilly T (2006a) O'Reilly radar > Web 2.0 compact definition: trying again.
    http://radar.oreilly.com/2006/12/web-20-compact-definition-tryi.html. Accessed 10 Nov.
    2009
6. O’Reilly T (2006b) Web 2.0 Meme Map. http://www.oreillynet.com/oreilly/tim/news/
    2005/09/30/graphics/figure1.jpg. Accessed 10 Nov. 2009
7. Anderson P (2007) What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education.
    JISC Technology and Standards Watch. JISC, Bristol, Feb. 2007
8. Vickery G, Wunsch-Vincent S (2007) Participatory web and user-created content. OECD,
    Brussels
9. IAB (2009) Social media Ad metrics definitions. Interactive advertising bureau.
    http://www.iab.net/media/file/Social-Media-Metrics-Definitions-0509.pdf. Accessed 10
    Nov. 2009
10. Nielsen (2009) Nielsen NetView, 2/09, http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/
     twitters-tweet-smell-of-success/. Accessed 10 Nov. 2009
11. Castells M (2001) The internet galaxy. Oxford University Press, Oxford
12. Benkler Y (2006) The wealth of networks. Yale University Press, New Haven
13. Beer D, Burrows R (2007) Sociology and, of and in Web 2.0: some initial considerations.
    Sociol Res Online 12(5)
14. Spivack N (2007) http://novaspivack.typepad.com/nova_spivacks_weblog/2007/02/steps_
    towards_a.html. Accessed 10 November 2009
15. Spivack N (2006) The third-generation web is coming. http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/
    frame.html?main=/articles/art0689.html. Accessed 10 Nov. 2009
16. Spivack N (2008) The semantic web. Video: bonnier GRID 2008 conference, Stockholm.
    http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1803302824?bclid=1811464336&bctid=181
    2111640. Accessed 10 Nov. 2009
17. Davis M (2008) Semantic wave 2008 report (executive summary). Project10X
    (www.project10x.com), Washington
18. PEJ (2008) The state of the news media 2008. Project for excellence in journalism.
    http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2008/. Accessed 10 Nov. 2009
19. Lenatti C (2009) How can publishers join the social networking conversation? Futur News-
    papers, The Seybold Report, 9(5)

News as a Service: Adoption of Web 2.0 by Online Newspapers      19

20. Sheth JN, Sharma A (2007) E-services – a framework for growth. In: Evanschitzky H, Iyer
    GR (eds) E-services – opportunities and threats. (pp. 8-12). New York: Springer
21. Tapscott D, Williams AD (2006) Wikinomics. Portfolio, New York
22. Rheingold H (2001) Smart mobs: the next social revolution. Basic Books, Cambridge
23. Lessing L (2004) Free culture. The Penguin Press, New York
24. Anderson C (2008) Long tail, the revised and updated edition: why the future of business is
    selling less of more. Hyperion, New York
25. Turow J, Tsui L (ed) (2006–2008) The hyperlinked society: questioning connections in the
    digital age. University of Michigan Press, University of Michigan Library, Ann Arbor