All about reporters

Xbox 360 defects: an inside history of Microsoft's video game console woes

The Big Conference Launch: How to Stand Out from the Crowd

- 1 days and 3 hours ago

Editor’s Note: This post represents the professional advice of Brian Solis who is not formally affiliated with TechCrunch50. If you are a participating TC50 company, resident TechCrunch PR expert Sarah Ross is available to share and review the public relations guidelines with you. It is important to work directly with Sarah to ensure you are in compliance with these guidelines to maximize your PR opportunity while also avoiding disqualification.

——————————————————————————————-

How do you launch a startup at a big tech conference without getting lost in the crowd?Â With TechCrunch50, Demo and several other major tech conferences around the corner, this question is on the minds of more than one entrepreneur.Â How do you create visibility for your startup, and do you need PR to do it, or just a great demo?

The coming days and weeks will be filled by some of the industry’s most anticipated, attended and watched conferences. They’re all competing for mind share and they are attracting influential attendees and spectators who will report their experiences and observations far and wide. In the next two to three weeks, over 150-200 companies will vie for attention and precious blog and media real estate.

Your story, as wonderful as it is, will need help rising above the flurry of news that will jockey to reach the ears and eyes of bloggers, press, customers, investors, and partners.

Even though some A-list bloggers and high profile entrepreneurs (Jason Calacanis, cough) have publicly implied that any good product or eloquent and outspoken CEO will easily traverse the roads cluttered with inferior startups to quickly rise to stardom simply by existing, the reality is, you really do need a strategic launch plan and some level of PR.Â Most importantly, you need a polished, professional, and creative demonstration that will resonate with attendees and compel them to want to learn more.

Public Relations

This advice may seem 101, and in some cases it is. Nonetheless, it’s an important refresher for those companies who are using TechCrunch50 and other conferences to debut their company or new products.

For those 52 companies presenting at TC50,Â there is a clear and prevailing rule to participate in the event and it will make the difference whether or not you launch to accolades or you’re disinvited before you hit the stage:

You have to introduce your new company or product, for the first time, on stage at TC50.

Some people are debating the merits of this requirement.Â But given this rule, let’s explore a few ways to ensure a successful launch.

What’s Your Story?

Let’s start by determining who your customers and users are and where they go for information and insight. Identifying these groups will humanize the process of crafting your story. It forces you to adapt what you’re introducing specifically to the people you’re hoping to reach.

The next step is to summarize not only what you’re introducing, but distill the value, benefits and extraordinary features that differentiate you from your competition and also highlight how you’re solving real world problems and challenges. This process will impact your press materials, your stage demo, your pitch, and ultimately the perception that conference attendees form.

Demonstration

You have an obligation to attendees and also to your development team to present your company in a way that makes people remember who you are and why you were invited to participate in the first place.

This isn’t a local meetup for startups. This isn’t just another opportunity to practice your everyday company pitch. This is a major production that requires an entirely new level of presentation, probably of the caliber that you may not have experienced previously. The world will literally be watching.Â (TC50, for instance, will be streamed live on Ustream, photos will appearon a special Flickr page, and stories will be organized by the audience at large on a dedicated Mixx community site).Â And the live audience will be sitting through dozens of demos.Â So what are you going to do that will make everyone in the room stop checking email or updating Twitter, pay attention to your time on stage, and more importantly, remember you after the event?Â This is your first and best chance to create enthusiasm and support in order to ignite referrals and potential word of mouth for being one of the hottest companies to debut this year.

Ditch the Powerpoint presentation. No one wants to see bulleted lists that say what you do or endure a series of slides that detail your professional credentials and career experience. They want to see what you do and how it was selected over the hundreds of other companies that were hoping to make the cut. Quickly explain the pain that your solving, make us empathize with it. But, get to that demo as quickly as possible. Show, don’t tell.

You may need help and coaching to become an incredible presenter to maximize your time on stage and that’s OK. It’s how we become more incredible public speakers.

As TC50 co-founder and co-host Jason Calacanis (yes, the same one who does not think much of formal PR) has recently emphasized in his email newsletter, companies need to attach their brand to a movement, a trend, something bigger than just the next shiny new object, search engine, widget, or next new social network.Â He also suggest the following rules for startup demos: Show your product within the first 60 seconds; Talk about what you’ve done, not what you’re going to do; One driver, one navigator; Short answers are best; Leave people wanting more.Â It is good advice.Â (Read his full list of demo tips here and here).

Have charisma. Express how much you care about your product. Speak clearly with authority and confidence. Move around the stage as you demo your product. Get someone to run the notebook computer and don’t lock yourself in that comfort zone behind the podium. Please don’t subject us to a dry demo of you staring at you notebook screen, clicking buttons and talking monotonously.

Breeze through the frontlines of your demo and and get into crux of what it is you’re launching. We don’t need to see the registration process. We don’t need to endure the discomfort of watching you fumble through typos as you enter unnecessary data to support your presentation.

Have everything ready to go and have it rehearsed and polished. You don’t need slides. You don’t need 3×5 cards. Connect with the audience. Grab and hold their attention. This is your baby and you know it better than anyone. Passion and enthusiasm are contagious and the audience is there because they want to be amazed.

They are there for you, so help them remember why you’ve been singled out from hundreds of applicants to tell your story.

Lobbycon

At any major industry event, there are always scores of people who don’t have passes who want to participate in the can’t-miss excitement and action and also promote their agenda. This adds a new layer of dynamics to an already incredible environment. When combined with the onsite PR and marketing activity of all the presenting companies (both onstage and off), it also creates an additional possibility to promote your company among those networking in the event lobby.

Last year, PowerSet served delicious “branded” shots in test tubes to attendees as well as the huge contingent that formed the unofficial lobbycon. Other promotional items and clever memorabilia were also freely distributed all in the hopes of striking a chord with attendees and rising above the fray.

Make no doubt that there will be an influx of companies competing for attention, whether or not they’re part of the official event. You do need to offer something that helps you stand out. So think of this as your chance to create and distribute something memorable that also correlates with your brand so that attendees not only remember you after the conference is all said and done, but are also reminded to test, and hopefully use, your product.

Put It in Writing

After you’ve run through your messaging exercises and presentation development, document the story in a convincing press release, product/company overview, and unpublished blog post that officially announce the product or service.

Make sure that the solution and the value is upfront.

Assume that the people who will ultimately read your story are short on attention span, whether they’re a blogger, reporter, customer, partner, investor, or potential acquirer. Just because you’re selected to launch out of the hundreds of companies that applied, doesn’t mean your story is a guaranteed success.

In PR, writing usually follows an inverted pyramid format, which recommends that you pack all of the pertinent information at the beginning and conclude with the supporting details. In today’s highly competitive Web economy, solely relying on traditional press releases to tell your story greatly restricts its potential. Time and attention are precious commodities.

Find a way to tell your story as quickly and as compelling as possible. If it’s one thing that Twitter has taught us, it is how to say something significant in 140 characters or less. Twitter and the onslaught of emerging micromedia communities are reinforcing this process of sharing updates and insight through brevity and clarity. In PR and marketing, the study and practice of saying more with less online, is referred to as MicroPR

With every sentence, description, or statement we verbalize or write effectively, we can earn the chance to open the next door.Â The goal is to continue to tell the story progressively, gaining momentum and increasing resonance along the way, and continue to open enough doors to tell our story completely.Â This helps you tell the story quicker and more persuasively. Just in case someone stopped listening at any point, the important information and market opportunity should have already been communicated.

While paper press kits are long gone, or , digital press kits are still alive and well. Pull everything together in one place, such as a USB key, a downloadable zip file, an online press room, and consider experimenting with a social media press kit or a >social media release.

For instance, a Social Media Press Kit, a.k.a. online press kit/press room, is a dedicated, one-stop destination for your specific news event. This landing page contains embedded objects that help reporters and bloggers assemble the news their way. It can feature an embedded version of the press release and all other related social objects, for at-a-glance viewing and also for quickly grabbing the necessary embed codes.

There are other ways, beyond press releases, summaries and blog posts to break news. With Web video production and screencasting tools readily available, affordable, and easy to use, producing a visual demonstration will only help convey your story and fortify the integrity of your message when you’re not present to personally explain it. Also, short videos and demos are shareable and embeddable to expand the story across the social Web.

The Launch Is Only The Beginning

Many of the industry’s most influential bloggers, analysts, and reporters will attend these conferences, with many more observing and reporting on the highlights from all over the world.Â Remember what your mother said: you only get one chance to make a first impression.Â But if you do your job right, you will be repeating your demo many times over in the weeks and months ahead.Â What you want to do is stand out so that people will ask you to see it again and again and again.

Good luck to all the startups everywhere who will be stepping onto a stage for the first time next week.Â We’ll all be watching.

Crunch Network: CrunchBoard because it’s time for you to find a new Job2.0

Add a comment

public relations,literally,visuals,passion,conference attendees

Nadal-Murray reporté

Spike Lee Moves Forward on 'Inside Man 2'

Cours magistral de communication politique au Campus de l'UMP à Royan. Travaux dirigés : l'Unité

16h52 : Chine: un reporter arrêté pour s'être masturbé nu en public

Store ~~ Three Cheers Letter: Act of kindness very impressi

3 petits headshots by µ¤£[H]eLL$Knoc[K]£¤µ

Microsoft explains weird Windows Vista ad

Releaselog | RLSLOG.net » Tech News

- 1 days and 12 hours ago

This article has been published at RLSLOG.net - visit our site for full content.

Did you “get” the new Microsoft commercial? Apparently, some people didn’t, so Microsoft officials were calling reporters Friday to explain it. The Redwood, Wash., company started airing a commercial Thursday night in which comedian Jerry Seinfeld encounters Bill Gates shopping for real leather shoes at Shoe Circus! - “quality shoes at discount prices, why pay more?” - and helps Gates squeeze into a pair. As they walk out of the store together eating churros, Seinfeld asks Gates if he and the other great brains at Microsoft “are ever going to come out with something that will make our computers moist and chewy like cake so we can just eat them while we’re working?” In response, Gates wiggles his bottom.

The ad barely mentions the word “Microsoft” and never mentions Windows. Nevertheless, the Microsoft officials who phoned reporters Friday said it is indeed a campaign to brand Windows, “the start of a conversation … easily the largest marketing campaign we’ve ever had.” Microsoft plans to hire 155 “gurus” by the end of the year to work in Circuit City, Best Buy and other retailers to help customers pick out PCs, said Eric Hollreiser of Microsoft - presumably the way Seinfeld helped Gates pick out shoes. Microsoft is also working with PC manufacturers to deliver “a compelling Windows experience” - to study how long it takes, for example, for Windows to start up and shut down. Mobile phones and Microsoft’s Web site are also part of the plan. Hollreiser said Microsoft will do “a terrific job of delivering consumer information.”

Source: SF Gate

more at RLSLOG.net

Add a comment

rlslog,discount prices,barely,best buy,apparently

Groland, le mag, si autant pareil et si tellement différent

Are Demo and TechCrunch50 fragmenting their audiences? (Daniel Terdiman/CNET News)

Wash. Post's Weisman ignored actual criteria used in study finding McCain voted with Bush 90 percent of the time

Media Matters for America

- 1 days and 23 hours ago

In a September 5 online chat, Washington Post national political reporter Jonathan Weisman claimed of the finding that Sen. John McCain voted in line with President Bush 90 percent of the time, "The 90 percent figure is true, but I cover Congress. The vast majority of those votes are procedural, and virtually every member of Congress votes with his or her leadership on procedural motions." In fact, Congressional Quarterly's finding that McCain had voted with Bush 90 percent of the time was based on an analysis of "votes where the editors of Congressional Quarterly determined that President Bush had taken a clear position prior to the vote." CQ gave no indication that the "vast majority" of the votes it analyzed to determine presidential support were procedural votes.

CQ separately analyzed how often members of Congress voted with the majority of their party in "all roll-call votes where an absolute majority of one party voted against an absolute majority of the other party." According to CQ, McCain voted with his party 81 percent of the time.

CQ, a nonpartisan publication, describes its process for determining presidential support as follows:

Presidential Support: This analysis uses all votes where the editors of Congressional Quarterly determined that President Bush had taken a clear position prior to the vote. There were 443 such votes in the House during the period (9 percent of the total) and 564 such votes in the Senate (22 percent).

On average, House Republicans supported Bush on 80 percent of such votes and Democrats supported the president on just 20 percent. In the Senate, where votes on confirmations tend to elevate presidential support scores, Republicans voted with Bush 88 percent of the time, and Democrats gave him their support on 51 percent of the relevant votes.

CQ describes its party unity score as follows:

Party Unity: This analysis looks at all roll-call votes where an absolute majority of one party voted against an absolute majority of the other party. There were 2,675 such votes in the House during the period (52 percent of the total) and 1,505 such votes in the Senate (58 percent).

From Weisman's September 5 washingtonpost.com chat:

Anonymous: Sen. Obama says a McCain Administration would not represent a change from Bush administration policies since Sen. McCain has voted in favor of Bush 90 percent of the time. Is this true?

Jonathan Weisman: The 90 percent figure is true, but I cover Congress. The vast majority of those votes are procedural, and virtually every member of Congress votes with his or her leadership on procedural motions.

That said, on the two fundamental issues of the campaign -- the Iraq war and economic policy -- McCain and Bush are indeed pretty much on the same page.

Add a comment

john mccain,senate,republicans,cq,confirmations

"Media Matters"; by Jamison Foser

Media Matters for America

- 1 days and 23 hours ago

A test for the media

On MSNBC on Thursday, Time's Jay Carney offered an assessment of the McCain campaign's most recent assault on the media: "Clearly, the campaign has decided that one way to win is to attack the media. Now, that could work. It does not have a great history of working. 'Annoy the Media: Re-Elect George Bush,' 1992 -- Bush got, I think, 39 percent of the vote or 37 percent of the vote."

Carney didn't explicitly say it, but he seems to be under the impression that the point of the McCain campaign's attacks on the media is to win support from voters who dislike the media. And he seems to think the Republicans only occasionally wage a war on his profession.

In fact, it is a constant war, the point of which is not to merely win a few votes from people who dislike the media. The point is to make voters distrust the media, to make them believe the media are out to get conservatives and thus cause them to discount news reports that are unfavorable to conservatives, and to cow the media themselves into running fewer such reports. (It serves another purpose, too: It helps a nominee whose heiress wife shows up at the convention in an outfit estimated to cost $300,000 pretend to be a man of the people raging against the "elites." But that's a story better told elsewhere.)

And it does indeed have a great history of working. No, it has a spectacularly successful history of working -- of helping conservatives win both short-term and long-term victories. Don't take my word for it: Longtime Washington Post reporter Tom Edsall, now of The Huffington Post, has explained:

The conservative movement has been very effective attacking the media (broadcast and print) for its liberal biases. The refusal of the media to disclose and discuss the ideological leanings of reporters and editors, and the broader claim of objectivity, has made the press overly anxious, and inclined to lean over backwards not to offend critics from the right. In many respects, the campaign against the media has been more than a victory: it has turned the press into an unwilling, and often unknowing, ally of the right.

Take one example of right-wing media bashing contributing to short-term electoral success: Under fire from the White House and conservative activists, CBS News spiked a report questioning the Bush administration's case for the Iraq war that was supposed to air shortly before the 2004 election.

During that year's presidential debates, Bush told Americans, "I'm not so sure it's credible to quote leading news organizations" -- a direct assault on the media from the president of the United States in the biggest forum he had. But that was only a small drop in the steady stream of media criticism that came from Bush and his allies during the 2004 election.

If Jay Carney is going to point to election results to assess the success of the GOP's assault on the media, he can't simply cherry-pick the elections the Republicans lost; they've been doing this every election cycle for 40 years.

But the conservatives' attacks on the media aren't simply about the next election. They recognize that each such criticism makes voters and the media more likely to believe the next -- so even if the 2004 attacks hadn't worked, they still would have been successful.

And there would be nothing wrong with any of that -- if the Republicans' complaints had significant merit. But they frequently do not -- and they often don't even pretend that they do.

A few weeks ago, for example, there was a frenzy of conservative whining that Barack Obama had gotten more media coverage than John McCain. Now, the amount of coverage each candidate has gotten, by itself, tells us virtually nothing. What was the content of the coverage? Was it positive? Negative? True? False? Fair? Balanced? The conservative complainers made no attempt to assess this -- they just yelled that Obama was getting more coverage. Well, O.J. Simpson got considerably more coverage than Mother Teresa in 1994 -- anyone want to argue he got more favorable coverage? Anyone want to argue that, by covering Simpson too much, the media were demonstrating that they were in the tank for him?

Still, despite glaring flaws with the Republicans' criticism, the media took them seriously, and many journalists adopted the complaints as their own.

The past week provides a useful case study of how the Republicans' assault on the media works.

Last Friday, John McCain announced that he had chosen Sarah Palin to be his running mate. The media had a few questions -- basically, who is she, and is she ready to be president? So the McCain campaign threw a tantrum, insisting the media were being unfair. As usual, the complaints were short on details and merit -- but the media still took the complaints seriously, treating them as one of the most important topics of the past few week.

Perhaps the best example of how phony the GOP's complaints were: the McCain campaign's cancellation of an appearance by McCain on Larry King Live because, they said, CNN anchor Campbell Brown had behaved improperly in interviewing campaign spokesperson Tucker Bounds the night before. They didn't really say what Brown had done wrong -- probably because all she had done was ask simple questions that Bounds couldn't answer. After Bounds said that as governor of Alaska, Palin leads the state's National Guard, Brown asked him for an example of a decision she had made in that capacity. He didn't answer. So she asked him again. That isn't inappropriate; that's exactly what she should have done -- that's journalism.

And that drove the McCain campaign crazy.

So, did all the complaints work?

Consider this: Wednesday night, Sarah Palin falsely claimed she had told Congress she did not want funding for the "bridge to nowhere." She didn't; that was a lie. Congress had said a year before Palin became governor that Alaska need not spend the federal funds on the bridge. And Palin had initially supported the bridge, not opposed it. And once she became governor, Palin kept the money. Palin's false claims Wednesday night were not new: She had said the same thing in previous campaign appearances since McCain picked her -- and several media outlets, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times had debunked the boast. But when Palin told the lie during her convention speech -- after days of McCain complaints that the media had been too hard on Palin -- those newspapers ignored the lie.

That wasn't the only false claim in Palin's speech that went un-debunked by the media. She falsely attacked Barack Obama's legislative record -- and media uncritically quoted the false claims. She lied about Obama's tax plans -- she said he "wants to raise" them, even though John McCain's own economic adviser has admitted that is false -- and, again, the media repeated her claim without debunking it.

Instead, much of the media gushed over her speech. If you watched MSNBC yesterday, you would have seen reporter after reporter talk about the McCain complaints that the media were too hard on Palin. And you would have seen reporter after reporter lavish praise on Palin's speech. But you wouldn't have seen them say much about the actual content of Palin's speech -- certainly not about whether she told the truth in it. At one point, Andrea Mitchell declared that "what came through" in Palin's address was "the authenticity."

Nonsense. "Authenticity" doesn't consist of doing a good job of delivering a speech -- not if the speech is riddled with falsehoods. But most of the media didn't tell you about the falsehoods, they just fell all over themselves praising the speech -- even praising the "authenticity" of someone who stood before the nation and repeated lies she had already been caught telling.

So, did the McCain attacks on the media work? They certainly didn't hurt.

And this isn't the first time a McCain assault on the media has appeared to pay off. He and his campaign have spent much of the year attacking the press.

And it seems to have worked: McCain still hasn't faced the media scrutiny reporters kept insisting would come eventually.

The media have told us a lot about Barack Obama and Tony Rezko, for example -- but kept key details about John McCain's relationship with Charles Keating a secret. Did you know that Cindy McCain was business partners with Keating around the time John McCain was meeting with regulators on Keating's behalf? Probably not: The Washington Post hasn't told readers that fact during this campaign; The New York Times has made only brief mention of it. ABC, CBS, NBC -- nothing.

Or how about the fact that John and Cindy McCain would save nearly $400,000 a year under John McCain's tax plan -- a tax plan that includes the extension of Bush tax cuts McCain once bashed as unfairly skewed towards the wealthy? Have you seen any media mention to that lately? It wasn't long ago that news organizations thought John Edwards' wealth was important to keep in mind in assessing his policy proposals -- but that apparently doesn't apply to John McCain.

The McCain campaign's war against the media shouldn't be surprising; this is what conservatives do. The only real question is what reporters are going to do about it. Are they going to fall for the absurd argument that John McCain -- arguably the national politician who has received the most favorable media coverage over the past decade, if not longer -- is being unfairly treated by reporters who still haven't given him any serious scrutiny? Are they going to cower in the face of right-wing bullying as they have so many times in the past?

It's hard to imagine that they won't. But there have been some encouraging signs this week. Time's Carney seems legitimately irritated that the Republican vice-presidential nominee refuses to face reporters. And colleague Joe Klein -- who has, in the past, been awfully kind to McCain -- urged fellow reporters not to back down in the face of the barrage of criticism from the right:

There is a tendency in the media to kick ourselves, cringe and withdraw, when we are criticized. But I hope my colleagues stand strong in this case: it is important for the public to know that Palin raised taxes as governor, supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it, pursued pork-barrel projects as mayor, tried to ban books at the local library and thinks the war in Iraq is "a task from God." The attempts by the McCain campaign to bully us into not reporting such things are not only stupidly aggressive, but unprofessional in the extreme.

The next two months will constitute a test for reporters: If they fall for the idea that they're treating unfairly a candidate who has long referred to them as his "base," what won't they fall for? If they won't stand up to these attacks, what will they stand up to?

Add a comment

cancellation,hard to imagine,john mccain,allies,spokesperson

CNN's Bennett falsely said McCain "hasn't recanted his position on ... McCain-Kennedy" immigration bill

Media Matters for America

- 2 days and 1 hours ago

During CNN's September 4 coverage of the Republican National Convention, CNN contributor Bill Bennett stated: "On the issues, the immigration debate, a lot of people thought would derail John McCain. He hasn't recanted that position. He hasn't recanted his position on McCain-Feingold or McCain-Kennedy." In fact, McCain stated during a Republican primary debate that he would not vote for the immigration reform bill he co-sponsored with Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA). While McCain previously took the position that border security could not be disaggregated from other aspects of comprehensive immigration reform without being rendered ineffective, he has since reversed himself, now saying that "we've got to secure the borders first."

Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted examples of the media falsely using immigration reform as an example of McCain breaking with Republicans, without mentioning his reversal.

From CNN's September 4 coverage of the Republican National Convention:

BLITZER: You heard Carl Bernstein say, Bill, that the John McCain that we're going to see tonight, that we've been seeing recently, is not the John McCain that so many reporters and others knew over the years. You want to respond to that?

BENNETT: Yeah. I would like to, thanks. First, I think they need to get the message -- the critics need to get the message clear. Is John McCain in a full embrace of the Republican conservatives and George Bush, or all are they all mad and yelling at him like, you know, [Sen.] Mitch McConnell [R-KY] and George Bush? Because I think probably John McCain has been yelled at and had more temper tantrums with Republican leadership than anybody else. But on the issues, the immigration debate, a lot of people thought would derail John McCain. He hasn't recanted that position. He hasn't recanted his position on McCain-Feingold or McCain-Kennedy. John McCain's last name, conservatives were saying, is causing a lot of trouble.

Remember Gary Bauer? Family Research [Council ex-president] and all of that. When he dropped out of the 2000 race, who did he endorse? He endorsed John McCain. John McCain has been pro-life all his life. He is not in favor of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. I think it's been pretty consistent.

CAMPBELL BROWN (CNN anchor): Well, but he's refined his position on immigration during his -- during the campaign.

BENNETT: He's emphasized securing the borders.

BROWN: During -- building the wall first --

BLITZER: Marsha Blackburn is a congresswoman from Tennessee. Let's listen to her.

Add a comment

john mccain,republicans,blackburn,immigration,republican

Kirk Schuring on infrastructure needs

Digging Deeper::Lessons from Katrina Help Media, Volunteer Efforts in Gustav Coverage

MediaShift

- 2 days and 3 hours ago

map%20of%20evac%20routes.jpg

When Hurricane Gustav hit the Gulf Coast, the evacuation of the area went much more smoothly than during Hurricane Katrina three years ago. This time, the local, state and national agencies were more prepared for a potential disaster.

Similarly, online media outlets and volunteer efforts were also better prepared for this hurricane, having learned their lessons from the Katrina disaster, when they were scrambling to deal with the chaotic scene of widespread destruction and mass evacuation.

The New Orleans Times-Picayune’s NOLA.com website, for example, spent the past three years optimizing its site for breaking news coverage, adding blogs, increasing opportunities for citizen contributions and arming staffers with videocameras. And NPR social media strategist (and fellow PBS blogger) Andy Carvin was able to quickly mobilize volunteers online to create the Gustav Information Center hub and wiki thanks to his experience covering Katrina, the Southeast Asian tsunami and 9/11 — not to mention the wiki templates from these earlier projects.

In both cases, previous experiences helped inform a more mature response to the oncoming storm.

How Things Have Changed

In 2005, NOLA.com editor in chief Jon Donley told me in an OJR story that his staff had to radically redesign the site to effectively cover Katrina, as New Orleans became a one-story town, and the site was inundated with 30 million page views in one day.

“Our website got a complete redesign [on the fly],” Donley said. “By the time we evacuated we (had) a completely different design.”

jon%20donley.jpg

Ultimately, NOLA.com forums and blogs actually helped rescue teams find stranded people in homes, and the site helped the newspaper win a Pulitzer Prize for its Katrina coverage. Today, not just the site’s features and design, but also its editorial processes, reflect lessons learned during Katrina.

In a recent interview, Donley told me that the paper’s reporters all file stories online first; editors then decide which stories to pull and put into the print newspaper each day. This makes it much easier for print reporters to consider the web as their primary publishing platform during breaking news coverage, such as Gustav, when the newspaper couldn’t be printed because of power outages. Plus, NOLA.com staffers all carry videocameras with them around town in case they see breaking news. So it was easy for them to file video reports of damage and rescue operations as they traveled around New Orleans after Gustav hit.