Cross-post: Ragan.com article on Twitter spam

Published: 7/10/2009 Minimizing spam (or coping with it) in Twitter feeds By Ari Adler Screening your follows is a good first step, but other methods can help protect you, too Spam—a nefarious word that sends shivers down your spine whenever you sign up for something online or are asked in a store to share your e-mail address. It’s gotten so pervasive on e-mail that some estimates suggest 90 percent of all e-mail traffic is composed of unsolicited junk. Now, spammers are stalking you on Twitter, too. The microblogging site known for its 140-character tweets and meteoric rise in popularity has become a place for spammers and get-rich-quick artists to seek you out. The same basic rules of thumb you follow to protect yourself anywhere online apply to Twitter as well. Don’t give out personal information involving your financial accounts, and don’t share your Twitter password with a third party. Note that there is third-party software out there that is legitimate, and Twitter is trying to help by putting verified, reliable products on its Downloads page. Even if it’s not a product or a follower that’s been officially blessed by the little blue bird, you can usually tell the good, the bad and the ugly quickly. A few things that should raise a red flag are when someone has zero updates, does nothing but provide links or is following thousands with few or no people following them back. If you end up being followed by someone, there’s a natural urge to follow them back. Many people will tell you that’s the proper etiquette in a social networking environment, but those same people are probably getting a lot more spam than safe tweeters. Plenty of references have been made comparing Twitter to a cocktail party. You should think about new followers in that way, too. The first time someone says hello to you at a cocktail party, do you hand over your business card and invite them to come by your office any time unannounced? Of course not—so use the same common sense on Twitter. Unfortunately, too many people starting out on Twitter don’t take it seriously enough to engage fully, so their profiles can be misleading and may make you think they are a spammer. A recent study by HubSpot, creators of Twitter Grader, found that a little over 9 percent of Twitter accounts are dormant. Even for those accounts that aren’t dormant, HubSpot found that 80 percent of users failed to provide a home page and 76 percent have not entered biographical information in their profile. Can you avoid spammers? Protecting yourself from spam on Twitter is not difficult, but then it’s not foolproof either. No matter how careful you are, spammers and marketing scammers can find you. When that happens, you can report them with a direct message to @spam, the official reporting account for Twitter. They’ll check out alleged bad guys and deal with them appropriately, if it’s determined they indeed are causing trouble. In addition to Twitter’s own enforcement, there’s a new sheriff in town called TwitChuck. Using this new system, you can type in a user’s Twitter handle to get a score that will help determine whether they are “good follows” or “bad follows.” You could do the same thing yourself by simply viewing their tweet stream before clicking the follow button, but TwitChuck is there if you need an authority figure in your life. The bigger issue from which there is no real relief yet is the marketing schemes being dreamed up by companies looking to get attention on Twitter. Often enticing your friends with dreams of a free product, they encourage them to tweet often, using a word or phrase they can track. It’s not really spam, because it’s a tweet from someone you usually want to follow. But it can be annoying just the same. If a friend ends up doing this too much, you could always raise the issue with them or simply unfollow for a while. Or you could put their name on a sign-up sheet for a time-share condo sales meeting and call it even. Maybe then, they’ll get the message. Ari B. Adler is a media relations professional with experience as a newspaper reporter and editor as well as a government and corporate spokesperson. He is the communications administrator for Delta Dental of Michigan and an adjunct instructor at Michigan State University. You can follow him on Twitter at @aribadler.

RIP 5Ws, Here Comes Later

Between a Facebook status update and a blog post I wrote for Digital Pivot, I’ve ended up using the phrase “here comes later” several times today — and it really stuck with me.

I’ve wondered for some time about whether to change the title of this blog from 5Ws because it’s such a well-used phrase that my little blog gets lost in a sea of Google searches on the subject.

5Ws was a great blog name to start with, especially when you consider that I’m a former journalist and that I started the blog to focus only on the facts and stay away from having too much opinion interjected. But, alas, that has changed. As my friend Julielyn Gibbons at i3Strategies likes to say, “I blog because not only do I have an opinion, but I cannot keep it to myself.”

I have found over time that I post to this blog when I am struck by inspiration. More routine, fact-based and link-laden posts regarding the online world end up over at Digital Pivot — where they belong. But this space is mine, to do with as I please and, hopefully, encourage others to do the same either via their own blogs or by joining a discussion on this site.

I suppose you could say I changed the name on a whim, but so what. As I said in my DP post this morning, the Internet is an awesome testament to anarchy. And what better way to celebrate anarchy than to change the name of my blog and its theme just because I had an urge to?

So RIP 5Ws, you served me well. And now…here comes later.

The Declaration of Independence 2.0

With all due respect to Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, a morning spent frustrated by Microsoft Windows, Internet Explorer and my work PC in general gave rise to a lunch hour creativity streak and an updated version of the Declaration. Besides, what better time than right before Independence Day to release “The Declaration of Independence 2.0?” 

When in the course of computing events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the operating system which has connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Computing entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of Windows users requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that not all operating systems are created equal, that some are endowed by their programmers with certain inexplicable flaws, that among these are a Start button, Internet Explorer, and the Blue Screen of Death. That to secure personal files, operating systems should be instituted for users, deriving their just powers from the consent of those users; that whenever any form of operating system becomes destructive of these users’ files, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish that operating system, and to institute a new operating system, laying its code on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to serve users in ways most likely to affect their file safety and computing happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that operating systems long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that computer users are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same bottom line for Microsoft, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such operating systems, and to switch to new operating systems for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of Windows users; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former operating system. The history of the present King of Computing is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over Windows users. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world and LONG LIVE THE MAC!

(Portrait of Jefferson by Charles Willson Peale, 1791 — source: Wikipedia.)

Personal customer service is dead…or is it?

Guest post by Jessi Wortley

I had a great customer service experience the other day and want to thank the company publicly for it. A great experience can’t be possible, you say? Maybe not very often, but apparently it still happens.

We all know what has become, unfortunately, the “typical” customer service experience. You encounter a problem and need assistance with a product/service/account and realize the only way you’re going to get anywhere is to call for help. And who are you going to call? Unfortunately, not Ghostbusters. You’re going to have to call the dreaded 1-800 customer service hotline. The one where you go through an endless maze of automated numbers, option prompts, “I’m sorry, I didn’t understand your request,” a few choice expletives, and maybe, just maybe, you’ll reach a real person on the other end who is probably six time zones away, barely speaks English, yet refers to himself as “John.”

“John” will not actually be able to help you, and will refer you to his supervisor, who again will transfer you or better yet promise to look into it and call you back. End result: you are frustrated and usually no better off than where you were before you picked up the phone.

But not this time. I use Constant Contact to send e-mails to a group I belong to and I needed to send one Monday morning. Upon logging in, I was greeted with a message informing me that our account had been suspended because the bank card on file was no longer valid and our monthly bill could not be processed. Perfect. What a way to start my day, and I decided to vent via Twitter: “Everyone’s having Internet issues today. Blocked sites, e-mail down, Constant Contact inaccessible…it’s just another typical Monday!”

After making a few phone calls to our other board members, it was determined  the bank had canceled our card and issued us a new one but, a) didn’t inform us and b) never actually sent the new card. A call to the bank only resulted in them saying they would immediately send a new one, but it wouldn’t be here for five to seven days — not what I wanted to hear. So, anticipating the worst, I decided to bite the bullet and call Constant Contact, beg for mercy and have them sign us up for direct debit to avoid this in the future.

Boy was I ever surprised! I called the 800 number and listened to a short list of prompts, pushed 3 for billing and after a few seconds was connected to a live person who spoke perfect English! I explained the situation and asked about direct debit. Unfortunately, that was not an option. However, the customer service representative pulled up our file and in less than a minute told me she’d put an override on our account valid for one week until our new card arrived. I couldn’t believe it! She not only went out of her way to make sure I could access my account, but she didn’t even have to check with a supervisor to do so.

It’s not often you find a company that has empowered its employees to take the initiative themselves to go above and beyond. I was very impressed and an extremely satisfied customer to boot. But, the story isn’t really done there. After hanging up the phone, I realized I had a message on Twitter from Constant Contact (@CTCTHelp) saying “Apologies for any inconveneince (sic). Send us a tweet or call 866-289-2101 if you need any help.” They’d seen my tweet and contacted me. Again, I was very impressed. It felt good being able to write back and say thanks for the offer, but my problem was already solved by one of their great customer service representatives.

I guess personal customer service isn’t totally dead yet. It might be on life support, but maybe with the advent of Twitter and other immediate connectivity options we can revive it. What do you think? Are there other positive stories out there, or was mine an isolated incident?

Jessi Wortley is a communications professional in Lansing, Michigan. You can offer her great customer service via Twitter at @minij.

(Cartoon courtesy of Shafeen Charania and his blog Synthesis.)

We the knowing, led by the unwilling…the copy

I don’t usually do this, but I’ve decided to copy a post I wrote for Digital Pivot over here to 5Ws because the issue is important and I want to share it with as many audiences as possible. Please consider joining the fight!  ~ aba

————————

Fear-mongering IT specialists and clueless executives just don’t get it. When it comes to social media, sticking your head in the sand just makes it easier for people to kick you in the ass.

There’s an old quote attributed to an anonymous author that goes, “We the unwilling, led by the unknowing are doing the impossible, for the ungrateful. We have done so much, for so long, with so little, we are now qualified to do anything with nothing.” It’s time to update the quote.

Every day, you hear people complaining about companies doing their best to shut off their employees from the electronic world that is growing by leaps and bounds around them. It is these companies that will be left behind, wandering around, scratching their heads, wondering how their competitors got so far ahead of them.

Shel Holtz has started a tremendous web site dedicated to bringing an end to this nonsense. The description at StopBlocking.org says it best:

Companies everywhere are blocking employee access to the Net, fueled by questionable research and irresponsible pronouncements of self-serving individuals and organizations. This site is designed to serve as an information resource for those who believe the benefits of providing access far outweigh the risks.

It appears to be an incredibly useful resource and I encourage you to check it out and get involved. Of course, even though it’s designed to help you help your employer, you may have to access it at home since I know the site is now being blocked at some companies!

In honor of such a farcical management tactic as blocking access to the Internet and all its power, I give you my updated version of that famous anonymous quote:

“We the knowing, led by the unwilling are not doing what’s possible, for they are ungrateful. We have done so much work, for so long a workday, with so little support, we are now more qualified to do anything online but are doing nothing because we are blocked.” ~ Ari B. Adler

“Everything’s on the table” in this list of cliches

When you’re writing for yourself, your boss or your client, trying to get them quoted in the news, are you giving in and just using tired, old cliches because it’s easier? Or are you trying to come up with some new way of saying something that’s clever and quotable and — gasp! — original?

Out of nowhere yesterday on Twitter, Sara Metz (@Sara_Metz) said she thought the word “boondoggle” should be retired from around the state Capitol in Michigan for a while. Jessi Wortley (@minij) quickly agreed — and they should know since they both work in that domed home of cliches. Their conversation led to comments from me and others about having a list of words banned from politicians’ mouths.

I made a few suggestions on Twitter and Facebook and found out I’m not alone. It appears there is quite a bit of support for some originality when it comes to politicians and corporate leaders.

I’ve compiled the list below and welcome your additions. But before we get there, let me show you why being original matters.

In a random act of weirdness and unbeknown to me, I was being quoted yesterday in a Grand Rapids Press columnist’s work about Michigan’s teacher strike law, which people are still trying to fix several years after a former boss of mine tried doing something about it and couldn’t. These days, I’m not involved with anything in the Legislature even remotely connected to the teacher strike law, so the Google News alert really threw me.

Apparently, the reporter couldn’t find a better way to describe the problem than with the quote I gave him back in 2006 while I was working for the Michigan Senate majority leader. The reporter said he’d spoken to both state representatives currently working on the issue. But he pulled up a three-year-old quote from me instead of giving the ink to them. When I was with the Senate, I got a reputation for saying funny or pointed things that hit home with reporters and, occasionally, riled people up. But it’s because I was willing to take a chance and be original.

You should try it some time. Who knows, three years later, the quote you create may get recycled. And even if it doesn’t, it sure beats using a word or phrase that makes people roll their eyes and want to recycle you. Words and phrases like the ones below, courtesy of me, my friends and colleagues on Twitter and Facebook:

• “Everything is on the table.”
• “Hurting/Protecting/Affecting/Caring for the most vulnerable citizens…”
• “We’ve already cut the budget to the bone.”
• “Take the initiative…”
• “We have to live within our means.”
• transparency
• ensure
• revenue enhancement
• hold harmless
• give some teeth to
• draconian
• playing politics
• outraged
• roll up our sleeves
• cutting-edge
• benchmark
• empower
• mission-critical
• value-added
• incentivize

What’s missing? What’s on your eye-rolling list of government and corporate cliches that should be banned?

(Image courtesy of Fenestra, Inc.)

Facebook vanity URL: Did you get yours?

Here’s an opinion piece I wrote for Ragan.com regarding the mad dash for Facebook vanity URLs:

Posted On: 6/15/2009

Facebook vanity URL: Did you get yours?
By Ari Adler

The rush to choose a personalized Facebook address was anticlimactic for some and thrilling for others

The countdown was excruciating.

I knew that as every second ticked away until 12:01 a.m. on Saturday, June 13, my level of nerdiness was growing. But I did it. I went to www.facebook.com/username and I joined the line of lemmings headed over the Facebook vanity URL cliff. When the clock ticked down to zero, I pressed continue and shouted, “Here we go!”

I’m not sure where we were going. Were we going to a place that MySpace has been for a long time with the ability for users to have vanity urls? Were we going to a place Twitter has dominated lately with people being able to find me just by putting my name at the end of an online address? Were we headed to an apocalyptic crash of servers and the resulting torrent of hateful comments directed at a company that dares to provide us with subpar customer service for a free product?

In the end, it seemed to work just fine and “Your user name has been set” appeared on the screen. A number of my Facebook friends agreed with my subsequent status update that noted the whole thing seemed anticlimactic somehow. As one person replied, “From the way people were talking about it, weren’t you expecting a ball dropping and fireworks?”

So, now, I’m the Facebook user formerly known as profile.php?id=733701081. According to Facebook, in the first 15 minutes, more than half a million people joined me on my quest to become something besides a number.

The reaction to the new feature was interesting to watch. As Facebook status updates and Twitter posts came filing in after midnight there was the expected mix of reactions. People jumped for joy over having claimed their name and were astounded at how easy it was to get what they wanted. Others were frustrated over just having missed the one they needed, or perturbed that anyone should suggest change is a good thing and wished Facebook would stop messing with them. Facebook warned people that you only get one shot at naming yourself.

It makes me wonder how many vanity URLs were chosen based on the amount of alcohol consumed since this feature went live just a couple of hours after the Stanley Cup playoffs ended. That’s bound to be someone’s hangover story to be shared for years to come.

Facebook says they made the change to “make it easier for people to find and connect with you.” I guess typing my name into the search box on Facebook was a lot of work?

Ah, but that’s not the end of it. Facebook also reports, “We expect to offer even more ways to use your Facebook username in the future.”

I suspect there are several more ways already in the works and you can bet they aren’t all about making things easier just for users but for advertisers as well. After all, vanity always comes with a price.

Notes from Schmoozapalooza ‘09

I recently attended the Detroit Regional Chamber of Commerce’s Mackinac Policy Conference. It’s an annual event where elected officials and business leaders around the state converge for three days of policy discussions, networking and fudge on Mackinac Island. I coined a phrase this year to describe what it really is: Schmoozapalooza.

In all seriousness, though, it is important to find out occasionally what’s on the minds of policymakers and business leaders and there are few places as easy to do some comparison thought-shopping than on an island.

Edsel Ford II (yes, from that Ford family), presented a report from the One D initiative about collaboration in Southeast Michigan and how those efforts are progressing. I’d say not too well based on Mr. Ford’s comment that “it’s time for some tough talk for those who have not been able to move past the baggage of the past.” He had a top 10 list of things that make leaders good collaborators and I think it’s safe to say that most of the leaders in Southeast Michigan wouldn’t be able to check off even half of the list for themselves. “Stubborn silos in our region are holding us back from recreating ourselves,” Ford said. He then encouraged the regional leaders about to come on stage after him for an annual panel discussion to make it “less about theatrics this year.” The panel traditionally consists of the top elected official from Oakland, Wayne and Macomb counties and the city of Detroit. We also had the CEO of a bank on there this year to bring a business perspective into the discussion.

In the picture below, you can see Detroit Mayor Dave Bing (foreground), Wayne County Executive Bob Ficano (leaning forward) and Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson as they were listening to Ford’s report.

A question from host Paul W. Smith of WJR 760 AM about collaboration resulted in an awkward silence, one that lasted long enough for Smith to say, “Well, don’t everyone jump in to answer at once.” When the leaders did answer, you got a mixed response. Wayne County Executive Bob Ficano said the old silos don’t exist and the region is competing as one entity against the world. Of course, that didn’t stop the city of Warren from trying to convince General Motors to move its headquarters there instead of staying in downtown Detroit. And Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson may have had the quote of the conference when he said he would always put the interests of his county first, but that he fully supports regionalism. That would be an interesting magic trick to see, wouldn’t it?

On the statewide agenda, several leaders of the Michigan Senate and House were on a panel that got some instant feedback from their audience, which used clickers to vote on issues.

The first question had to do with balancing the state budget, and 96 percent of the audience said federal stimulus money should be used for job creation rather than balancing the state budget. Speaker of the House Andy Dillon said his “preference” would be to use the federal stimulus money for job creation. He didn’t say he would or could though. And Sen. Mark Jansen noted that using the federal money for the state budget just creates a big cliff that the state will fall off of someday. Newsflash: if the cliff we’re on were any higher, we’d all have nosebleeds, considering next year’s budget is in the red by about $2 billion.

The other issues discussed at the legislative panel included charter schools, how to fix our roads, term limits and job creation.

Fifty-eight percent of the audience felt that failing public schools should be turned into charters. Sen. Jansen asked why we should wait until they are failing. Sen. Mike Prusi said he doesn’t see charter schools as a punishment but also don’t believe they are some kind of magical panacea. As for Michigan’s roads, Dillon said his first priority is to end Michigan’s status as a donor state, which means we send more federal gas-tax money to Washington than we get in return. There seemed to be support from the Republicans and the Democrats on the panel for increasing road taxes somehow, but I didn’t get the sense that they know whether they could get the votes for it. Dillon did mention that if we don’t address the issue in Michigan by the end of 2009, we risk losing federal money because we won’t have state money available for matching funds.

Part of the problem with getting anything done, Prusi would argue, is term limits. He said term limits have “completely polarized the population in the Legislature.” A good percentage of people in the audience agreed, voting to have some change made to extend term limits.

Finally, the big question of the day was asked of the legislators: how does Michigan create more jobs? The answers ran the gamut, but here are their main ideas: economic diversification, job training, faster government reactions (for permits, etc.), improved education infrastructure and a simpler business tax.

There was a question raised during the conference several times and afterward by folks who wondered why there wasn’t a sense of urgency by policymakers for dealing with Michigan’s problems. I’ve been to a few of these conferences and I’ve never really seen or felt any sense of urgency. Maybe it’s because when you’re on an island where horse and buggies are still the primary method of transportation, it’s too easy to say, “See, we’ve already come such a long way – what’s the hurry now?”

The Honorable Congressman Spammer — the story continues

Here’s the latest update to the discussion regarding blog comment spam, as posted over at Digital Pivot:

As you’ll recall from Chapter 2, I reached out to the staff member of the congressman who I felt was leaving blog spam by posting comments unrelated to the blog but fishing for supporters. I offered to enter into a discussion about the merits or detriment of taking such a tack and wondered whether the response had been positive or negative.

I’m going to let the staffer’s response speak for itself, but I’d also like to get a discussion started on whether blog comments need to be kept strictly to the topic at hand or if that section should be used for outreach. I think it’s pretty clear how I feel about it — that blog comments should be related to the blog post and not just some random method to conduct outreach. After all, bloggers generally offer at least one way to reach them other than posting a comment.

I have calmed down enough that I’m going to honor the staffer’s request not to identify which congressman this is involving because it’s not about calling someone out anymore — it’s about using it as a learning tool for all of us. In addition, I think the staffer is sincere in his desire to learn from this, too. Here’s the response I received:

Thanks for replying to my (spam) blog post.   It is good to get feedback on what methods we are using to reach out to new media and hear what annoys or pleases people.  I had no idea this was an issue with bloggers so it’s good you pointed this out.  I figured the only way to actually contact bloggers such as yourself is through the comments section as most (smartly) do not post their e-mail addresses on their blogs and so ways of connecting are limited.  That being said, no one wants to receive spam, either through e-mail or blog comments.  We get plenty of that from MUCH less reputable sources on our YouTube pages, as an example, and must constantly be checking the comments sections for such spam. I did not mean to provoke outrage by any means.  This is virtually the only method to reach out to new media right now.  As for your question as to whether or not I receive positive responses, yours is the first which could be termed negative.  Either the posts are ignored or the bloggers do e-mail me back asking to be sent regular updates and videos from our office, and many do post these as well!  It is not all in vain that I use this method, though your e-mail is of course making me rethink this.

So, what do you think? Should they rethink their method of outreach or should I just learn to relax and be happy that anyone posts any kind of comment on my blogs? 

If you build it, they will read it

The world of newspaper journalism has been turned on its head lately with bankruptcies, layoffs, the discontinuation of print editions, the discontinuation of papers altogether — and many people seem to be struggling with how to help the industry survive.

I’ve been to several meetings in the past few days talking about the new, digital face of newspapers and how this is the way to be successful. I’m not sure I buy it, though, because I’m not sure newspaper publishers have figured out their problem: if you don’t give people a product they want to read, they won’t read it, no matter what flashy format you deliver it in.

There was a great blog entry posted recently about the 16 things people learn in journalism school. It is an awesome reminder to those in the industry about their responsibilities in wielding the power of the pen, which we all know is truly mightier than the sword.

Unfortunately, it seems to me that the 16 basic rules outlined in that blog are often pushed aside lately. I’ve seen it in the journalism schools themselves, as the basic concepts of excellent reporting and writing are ignored to make room for the teaching of delivery methods.

While I was at one of the aforementioned meetings, I was tweeting about changes occurring at the Detroit News and the Detroit Free Press, which both have recently scaled back home delivery to three days per week, have launched E-editions and are working on E-reader versions to be available on the Kindle within a few weeks. As I like to do while tweeting events, I started posing questions to start some discussions.

I thought one of the most compelling comments was this one, from @yasky:

They can’t control delivery method as they are no longer the gatekeepers of information. We may transition, but by choice only.

Perhaps that’s the biggest problem newspaper publishers are dealing with. They are faced with increasing expenses and decreasing advertising revenue. They are faced with a 24-hour news cycle that won’t wait for the ink to dry on the paper anymore. And they are faced with a fickle audience that will not pay for news when it’s available for free in so many other places. But, the harsh reality is just as @yasky said: they are no longer the gatekeepers.

Journalists as a whole, be they in print or broadcast, used to be the primary sources for news and information across the globe. Now, I often don’t hear about news first from a professional journalist, I hear about it from someone who has posted it on Twitter or Facebook or a blog. Certainly, that first person to post a news item may be directly involved, but often they are initially hearing the news from a professional journalist. However, that’s where the control stops. The spreading of news and information has gone global, it has gone viral, it has gone out of the hands of newspaper publishers and into the hands of their (former) readers.

So, the big question is, how do they turn those former readers back into subscribers? First, they need to remember the 16 things they learned in journalism school from the blog post linked above. Then, they need to learn to produce stories so well-written and compelling that people want to read them. They need to build a newspaper that, regardless of delivery method, people feel they cannot do without because it is offering information not found elsewhere. They need to, once again, become the gatekeepers of information that no one else has the time or the talent to uncover and write about.

I’m certainly not professing to have all the answers that are going to save the newspaper industry — no one should be foolish enough to claim that talent. But I am willing to suggest certain steps that newspapers should consider taking immediately:

– give the readers what they want and need;

– give the readers something they can’t find elsewhere;

– create a mecca for news and information that is credible and reliable.

If you build it, they will read it.

(Image courtesy of the BBC.)