What exactly does it take to make a special feature on the Web utilizing new media journalists, Web developers and print staffers?
A lot of hard work and rethinking of content.
I was the lead developer of my paper’s latest special feature on Heroes in the military, and the project was our first really major online special feature (in conjunction with a print version that had 1 million circulation). We had done several special features this year so far (I joined the paper in January), but this one has 40+ written stories on medal recipients, audio clips, a flash component and is having extra content added regularly.
So, how did it turn out?
Pretty well, but there are several lessons to be learned from this project. The lessons learned are more important than accolades, because our next big project will be even better if we learn from this one.
1) You get the best possible Web product when Web people are involved from the start.
Typically, this is not the case for most newspapers. Usually, Web people are brought in during the middle of the project or sometimes at the end.
My paper is fairly new to Web special features, and it shows at times. With Heroes, the end product was pretty good, but it was hectic getting there. It was largely a case of print people getting content and then handing it to us. There simply wasn’t enough synergy between the staffs. Luckily, everyone at my paper realizes this, and we have been getting better each time we try something.
It’s not easy, however, because it largely takes a rethinking of newsroom roles. Also, you’ll have the inevitable clash of print and Web editors over content and direction.
2) Print people shouldn’t promise features on the Web before the Web people agree to them, especially for quality reasons.
We did audio with this feature. Unfortunately, much of the audio isn’t high quality, but we had to use it because it was promised in the print version. There are multiple reasons for getting poor quality out of an audio recorder (it’s not that easy to get good, consistent audio), but the most important thing is that staffs need to OK features with each other.
Ultimately, I didn’t mind the less-than-stellar audio quality, because it was some really powerful audio. Hearing Silver Star recipients tell tales of heroism under fire is riveting.
Also, the Web staff did some additional interviews with our high-end equipment, and it turned out well.
Still, everyone needs to be on the same page on what can and cannot be delivered on the Web. What if something was promised that we physically couldn’t do?
3) Most print staffers won’t have much to say before the feature is launched, but everyone will throw in his or her two cents once it’s completed.
Before this feature was launched, we didn’t hear a lot from the print people, except for a few key editors who were in on the feature, but as soon as it launched it seemed like everyone had an opinion.
The enthusiasm is good, but it’s best before a project launches, not after. If more people shared opinions and ideas before it was launched, who knows what other additional feature we might have had.
4) Hindsight is 20-20.
Learn from your mistakes. We had a couple of issues with the launch of the feature. First, we only had two Web people working on it. So, we were overloaded with work for the project and still had day-to-day duties to complete.
We had some early compatibility issues with the site rendering under Internet Explorer 6. This was solved once we got a copy of IE 6 on our computers (We run IE 7 because it is a lot better and more secure than 6. Plus, it’s free).
Everything has been worked out, but we didn’t have a good testing work flow before then. We used ajax and javascript to make this special feature stand out and really feel like a complete package. It took a lot of work, we made some mistakes, but it was worth it in the end.
The big lesson is efficiency. Have everything you need before set up and try to get more help. One extra Web developer would have made a huge difference. I did all the coding and audio editing for this project, and I was overwhelmed.
5) Don’t let non-Web people tell you how to do your job.
At the end of the day only two departments can really have say over this project — print editorial and Web editorial. We got a lot of feedback (sometimes a little more than that) from non-editorial people.
That’s not exactly how a newspaper works. We stood our ground and made the feature how we wanted it because at the end of the day we control editorial content.
That’s not to say we don’t listen to good ideas from non-editorial people, but it is to say that non-editorial people aren’t in the business of making editorial decisions or thinking of editorial ideas. They have their own projects and work to worry about.
What does the future hold for this project?
The launch of any modern special feature is just the beginning.
I am trying to make Heroes into an evergreen feature where we add more heroes as the year goes on.
We are getting some resistance from a few people at the paper, because some fear this will take away from the print edition. Well, it might (or it might make it even better), but this is the year 2007.
We shouldn’t be crippling our online product for print.
That’s so 1997.
We want to add more features. A blog where people can nominate heroes, talk about heroism and discuss our current heroes would be great. We are putting audio on the site, but I’d like to see us extend that and also put video on it.
Taking a print special feature and putting it online isn’t easy. You need to think of features that really fit online. We have some of those, but we need to add more.
Special features on the Web allow journalists to tell stories in unique ways.
The challenge is finding the best way to tell each story.
