First they nailed the acquisition of Tumblr – complete with the great “we won’t screw it up” soundbite – and now they’ve kicked their photographic rivals to touch with a new offering on Flickr.

Flickr has long been the home to my photos and I had a real decision to make when I heard they were handing out 1TB of space free to every user (that’s storage of up to half-a-million pictures!).

They’ve also rolled out a vastly improved new app for android users – an aspect of the service that has long been neglected given the volume of imagery that is now uploaded on the move.

But it will be the storage which could become the game changer. Previously, non-paying users were limited in terms of uploads so essentially lifting the limit is going to be a huge attraction to even the most casual of photographer.

Yahoo are even offering existing Pro users the chance to trade in their subscription for the new storage option.

So why aren’t I letting my Pro account lapse and taking advantage of this offer? As a subscribed user I like the thought of an ad-free experience and also the fact that this may (although it probably won’t) give me more leverage if ever anything should go wrong in the long term.

There’s also the fact that the stats option, showing where your photos are used and by whom, is being limited to high-rate account options unless you are an existing pro user.

Many comments have suggested that this is Yahoo steering their business away from the more traditional photographer with the aiming of capturing the Instagram market. I’m probably somewhere between the two in terms of the volume I take, if not the quality, so I’ll keep my Pro account in my sweaty palms for the time being.

But it’ll be a situation I keep an eye on – and who knows, I might yet get myself fully immersed in the Flickr free-for-all.

But it was disappointing to see the ‘Blogger of the Year’ category looking strangely empty.

The official line on the website is: “There are no nominations in this category.”

How can that be? In a region packed with independent talent, producing wonderful sites and rich content?

Part of the problem appears to be in the label.

I’ve been asked why I didn’t put LichfieldLive forward this year. Much of it was to do with the categories. I don’t see myself as a blogger at all so why would I enter a category for this? Had there been a website or hyperlocal site of the year then perhaps I might have. Similarly, news website of the year wasn’t something I felt was aimed at sites like mine.

I’m not sure whether this ‘am I in or am I out?’ debate was being had by some of the other hyperlocals in the region, but it can’t have helped.

There’s also the question of whether the message is getting through to those one-man-band operations who perhaps aren’t even considering themselves as part of the media industry. Yes, the newspapers, radio stations and TV reporters will enter because they and their contemporaries know all about it. But will Joe Bloggs who writes a wickedly funny blog really go looking for awards?

From conversations with other people on the subject, there does seem to be a feeling that the awards are aimed at the full-time, professional journalists. If so then perhaps the title should be Midlands Journalism Awards, because if it is Midlands Media Awards then it should reflect the wider range of outlets that exist.

The only real category that might fit hyperlocals is the News Website of the Year gong, but why not simply go with Website of the Year? Why does it have to be news?

Hopefully, those behind the awards will take feedback from some of the sites that are out there who seem to be falling between the cracks of their categories and identify a better way to fully reflect the rich media landscape in the Midlands region next time around.

But in the meantime, good luck to everyone who did get nominated.

I met Mike on a couple of occasions during my time at Staffordshire University and, while it’s fair to say our thoughts on the role of digital in a newsroom were pretty opposite, it was always interesting to hear his well-informed views on regional news.

His departure will leave a big void at The Sentinel where he was well-respected by staff and readers alike. But the next move in Stoke-on-Trent could tell us a lot about the real sentiment behind Local World’s plans for their newly-acquired titles.

Back in 2012, David Montgomery spoke about the group’s plans to provide a better harmony between digital and print as part of a radical restructure of the way their newspapers operate.

A large part of this will look at the way the digital section of the newsgathering process works.

Shortly before leaving Stoke, I went to one of Local World’s briefings about their planned changes to their online provision. Some bits were encouraging, others looked like a rehashing of old ideas – but it was at least a step in the right direction.

However, it’s now time for Local World to really show their colours.

The Sentinel is a proud title based in an area where the local media still is at the heart of the community, but like the rest of the world, they are an audience who have plenty of alternative ways of getting their news.

So will the new man at the helm reflect the new ambitions of the masterplan? Or will it be a member of the old guard brought in to ensure consistency instead of much-needed reform?

Actions will speak far louder than words on this one.

As reporters we’re pretty good at spotting people who have ‘borrowed’ bits of our work. You know the sort, where the story has perhaps been given a bit of a makeover but turns of phrase stick out like footprints in the snow.

I’ve had quite a few full on cut and paste jobs done to me over the years and it’s annoying.

Generally, I have no real issue with people using my stuff, but it’s nice to be credited (a system that has worked really well with my FlickR content under Creative Commons) or at least informed where it will be used.

The full on Ctrl C/Ctrl V stuff is almost flattering, but the one that really bugs me is the ‘we’ve nicked your stuff but we’re going to fool no-one by changing the odd bit here and there’ mentality.

You’re not fooling anyone.

As someone who is in the world of hyperlocal, I’ve had plenty of conversations with journalists about the future and I’ve always said it’s about partnerships.

I was a full-time journalist once upon a time and I understand the pressure reporters, particularly at a local level, are under. That’s why I’ve almost always agreed to help when they’ve asked to send quotes over or let them use some material I’ve gathered that they might have missed.

But it’s this charade of not really lifting work that is really ridiculous.

Perhaps the local media might do better to engage with – rather than ride roughshod over – people who are helping tell the story of local communities?

Back in December, I was interviewed for a job at Birmingham City University (BCU) and in January I decided to take them up on the offer. When I write it like that, it seems like such an easy, quick and painless move, but that doesn’t do justice to the scale of the decision I made.

I’ve been at Staffordshire University for four-and-a-half years and it was my first job outside of full-time journalism. For that reason alone, I have to be eternally grateful to them for allowing me to develop my career in a direction I have thoroughly enjoyed. I’ve always stated that I’ve discovered more about journalism outside of it than I did inside, and it’s a sentiment that still lives true as I prepare to pack up my desk for pastures new.

My colleagues will probably testify to the twisting road they’ve been down with me as I’ve tried to introduce students to some of the concepts and ideas behind digital journalism. I have to thank them for their patience, particularly in getting me up to speed with the world of academia and also for letting me loose on their students and trying to convince them to do things differently from time to time.

People at Staffordshire like Pete Leydon have been a huge influence on my career going forward and I hope that in some small way I’ve been able to repay him (although his wife probably despises me!) by introducing him to the world of hyperlocal, so much so that his NantwichNews site is one of the best examples of what a one-man-band can achieve in terms of content and audience reach.

But the one thing I’ve learned about education is that the most enjoyable journey is that taken by the students.

I’ve been really privileged to work with some fab young people who have braved the Stoke-on-Trent weather with me. There have been too many to list, but seeing the likes of Andy Scott, Danny Milligan, Michael Marsh, Stuart Hodge, Natalie Clarkson, Amy Edwards, Katie Robinson and many, many more take their first steps on the journalism ladder and seeing how quickly they advance through the ranks has been hugely rewarding.

Then there’s StaffsLive – the all-consuming beast of my time at Staffordshire University. Some students will have fond memories of plying their trade on it, while others will still have my gripes about online first ringing in their ears! I’ve put in more hours looking through submitted work than I care to tally, but it has been worthwhile to see the light come on for our young journalists when they see their work out in the public domain.

So why am I leaving? Well, everything has to end at some point. BCU is a huge opportunity for me to go and work at a great university with some fabulous people in a city I know and love. The university also has great plans for the media and journalism areas with the final touches being put on a new home next to Millennium Point in the city centre.

I’ll still be keeping a close eye on the progress of the umpteen students who’ve gone on to enjoy huge success during my time at Staffs, but I’m also hugely excited about getting my teeth into a new challenge at Birmingham.

See you in Brum!

This is mainly down to the fact I’ve been watching SxSW from afar as it celebrates 20 years of bringing together the interactive community.

My trip to join the masses at the Austin Convention Centre in 2012 was one of the most valuable weeks I’ve had throughout my career. As well as identifying new ideas and reinforcing existing ones, I was also able to take some much needed time out and reflect.

Sadly, a number of factors meant going this year wasn’t an option. So instead, it was time to stop, look and listen from afar.

I had thought this approach might allow me to spread my attention further as being there meant getting caught up in the whole hustle and bustle of talks, discussions and general SxSW fun.

But actually, that’s what was really missing. Even from the masses of social media conversation going on from those who are in the heart of Texas, there’s always been a feeling that by not immersing yourself, you might just be missing something.

It’s quite ironic that for a conference which prides itself on being full of tech – and therefore having the ability to be there without being there – that part of its appeal is in the age old art of talking to people face to face.

This idea of being there rather than being connected is one the organisers clearly recognise too.

Nevertheless, I’ve still managed to keep across quite a few interesting sessions.

One that initially caught my eye was a talk by Stephanie McMahon and John Cena of World Wrestling Entertainment fame. Yes, the child in me got quite angry at missing out on seeing wrestlers talking social media, branding and all things in-between, but the adult in me was really interested in some of the messages coming out of their conversation.

Regardless of whether you think men launching themselves around in glorified speedos is valid entertainment or not, there can be no doubting that WWE is a brand that works. By adapting to the tastes of its audience and the technology used by those customers, they have been able to create a relevant and highly profitable business (there’s a lesson there for newspapers!).

The @wwe doesn’t let viewers use commercial breaks as a break. It keeps them connected on social and glued to the couch. #wwesxsw #sxsw

— Russ Martin (@russless) March 9, 2013

The above tweet says it all. Despite live shows and TV networks being the original driver of the WWE’s rise to business stardom, they’ve recognised that they cannot own the attention of their audience on one platform. Instead, they’ve recognised the need to port their brand across multiple devices, ensuring that wherever the customer goes, the company is with them.

“Unlike other sports, WWE truly gets action all the time. The fans are a part of the show.” Another line that shows how the red-button, on-demand society are able to integrate and influence the content they want. So why would they opt for a product that doesn’t give them the freedom they need?

There’s often a belief – usually misguided – that social media follower lists or page likes don’t have any real value. In newspaper circles, they are often seen as the customers who don’t pay.

But as explained above, the wrestling business recognises the hidden value such interaction brings to the core platform. There’s also plenty of evidence that their stars can rally the social media troops when necessary:

In one month @johncena raised over a million dollars for breast cancer through social media. #sxsw #wwesxsw twitter.com/RAPP/status/31…

— RAPP (@RAPP) March 9, 2013

So the WWE are reaping the rewards of engaging their audience across platforms. But this hasn’t happened by accident, it’s something they have clearly had to work at and put some time – and no doubt financial investment – into.

But when you hear that:

• their Facebook page network has more fans than the NFL and the 32 teams combined
• they have more fans/followers than Pepsi
• their YouTube channel had 1.5billion views in 2012
• John Cena is the third most followed American athlete on Twitter

…you start to realise that they have recognised the value in digital integration.

It was stats such as these and the business they have that led McMahon and Cena to a desk in Austin in what was one of the most-anticipated sessions of this year’s event.

This idea of social TV is one that British networks could do with remembering – and it’s more than just flashing a hashtag up before you go to the break.

There is a caveat to all of this though – and it was an admission made by the WWE themselves.

Yes, you can have all that social media traction and, yes, you can build a global brand around it. But underlying it all was great content that audiences wanted to consume.

And if I – and all those who attended the session in person and remotely – take anything from that, it’s that even in a digitally transient world, content is still king (although it has to be supported by a cast able to promote the Royal court!).

Pictures from the WWE social TV session at SxSW are available here.

At a regional level there are plenty of examples of aggregators springing up and few have thrived quite as well as TheYamYam and its younger brother TheStaffie.

Collating news, information and views from across a spectrum of blogs, regional newspapers and other sources, they have found themselves at the crossroads of an ever-increasing debate:

Are news aggregators a good or bad thing for local media?

For sites in their infancy, aggregation can be a much-needed opportunity to boost traffic and bring their content to a bigger audience. But for traditional media, the rise of such portals has been difficult to balance. After all, newspapers have been accustomed to ensuring any value from their content goes directly into their coffers – and definitely does not pass go.

TheYamYam

But like those who so often sneer at such sites, The YamYam has been on its own rollercoaster ride of near-closure and regrowth, culminating in a new redesign.

In a statement about the move, Mark Blackstock said: “We reached a point where the old design and production systems had run their course and left little room for manoeuvre.

“We needed a new format to help us create opportunities for advertisers and sponsors and manage the increasing variety and amount of web generated news, sport and blogs in each of the towns we aggregate.”

It’ll be that last paragraph that probably sends a shiver down the spine of those driving traditional news outlets.

And it’s an uncomfortable situation which Mark and TheYamYam team clearly recognise.

“The media establishment may prefer to misrepresent aggregation as a dirty trade; those in public office may resent the call to account and criticism directed by local independent voices, but the party machines will still want our soapbox,” he explained.

“Publishers and newspapers may tolerate us for the traffic we send them whilst their journalists scour our websites for new stories. But most important to us is that our growing readership, appreciates what we do and visit our sites in increasing numbers.

“So, for those who may criticise, unlike many on the web we aim to take an ethical and transparent approach to our aggregation by selecting only a small extract of unedited content to indicate what a story is about, then provide a direct, deep and specific hyperlink off to the source website which we aim to credit in full.

“We see this as an appropriate way to profile and then direct local web traffic to local news and blog websites which we believe will facilitate debate around local matters and help strengthen local online communities be it through campaigning issues, sporting activities or specialist pastimes.”

As a hyperlocal site owner, you might think TheStaffie’s Lichfield page would fill me with dread. It doesn’t.

Aggregation – when conducted well – is the digital equivalent of the newspaper billboard, directing readers to content and sources they might enjoy.

Yes, it might drive some traffic and therefore potential revenue away from our homepage, but as long as there is a firm link and only an excerpt of stories posted then I see it more as an opportunity for people to stumble across our content in the same way they do when links appear on Twitter.

I also believe that if a user is interested enough in a particular town to dig through an aggregation site then they are likely to have enough of a desire to dig through our own digital home too.

So should we be using aggregators as a growth tool and working with them rather than against them? Mark clearly thinks so.

“Despite closures and declining circulations, we are fortunate to still have some terrific newspapers in the West Midlands providing essential routine reporting,” he explained. “Reading online news is all very well but if we don’t buy newspapers it is difficult to see how investigative reporting will survive in a world of PR driven news. And newspapers have a responsibility to connect with their readership too and provide relevant web services – still so often poor.

TheStaffie

“At the other end of the spectrum we have the blogging community in all its diversity and passion. Whilst local blogs can often provide more informed local comment around specific concerns, and unearth new stories and investigate difficult issues too, they lack the infrastructure to deliver consistency.

“Our activities sit somewhere between the two, hopefully facilitating each to respectfully communicate and work with and credit the other and stay focused on the matters of concern to our communities.”

While each aggregator will have its own quirks, I tend to agree with Mark’s placement of his own products.

But I can also see the argument organisations with more to lose than I would have. But we have to consider what the alternative is.

A paywall? Great, but is there really a market for regional and local news at that level in the UK? The Express & Star’s experiment would indicate not.

Perhaps it is more a case of needing to understand the wider benefits of staging posts for our content across the digital spectrum.

Some newspapers are dipping their toes into the two-way street aggregation can offer too.

The Birmingham Mail’s Your Communities initiative is pulling in headlines from the wealth of hyperlocals in their region. Granted, it probably isn’t changing the earth in terms of their page impressions or ad revenues, but it is an acceptance that we can drop the kayfabe and admit that other news outlets do exist, because in an age of media choice people will look elsewhere.

Yes, that means we may not have the stranglehold on squeezing cash from our content cow, but the bigger picture could be an increased audience with a more defined focus. How news makes money out of those increased eyeballs is, however, a question only they can answer.

But if they don’t find a solution, the blame can’t be laid solely at the door of aggregators.

One presenter for a national TV channel has found himself in hot water this weekend after making reference to the Irish famine to a friend. The tweet was promptly picked up by various users who instantly took him to task.

Despite apologising and deleting the offensive message, it seems plenty of users are still demanding action from his employers, while others say they are intending to take his message to the police.

Whether or not this incident will blow over remains to be seen, but it just goes to show the danger of being permanently on air to your audience.

Striking the balance between personal and professional is always difficult on Twitter. A good account should engage, but is there a limit to how much we should be giving away?

The answer to this really depends on your starting point. Defining the type of social media user you are is often a good area to begin.

Loyalty management firm Aimia identified six different user-types (highlighted here via Social Media Today). They break down the average user well and individually we can all probably pick a category to put ourselves in.

But where should journalists sit in that sphere?

I often speak to students about the need to get a professional head on when it comes to social media. This doesn’t mean diluting and sanitising your posts – every avatar should have a personality behind it.

However, the need to be careful about what you say has never been more evident.

One of the replies defending the aforementioned reporter was that no-one would have raised an eyebrow if he’d have made his comment in the pub. But that’s the point about social media – it doesn’t have the safety net of four walls and a warm beer.

An increasing number of journalists have fallen foul of a Twitter sacking or backlash. There are plenty who suggest that the audience can’t have it both ways, by wanting increasingly ‘real person’ access to reporters, but crying foul when that human side does shine through.

Part of me agrees that social media’s ability to show a personal side to journalists has been an enriching experience – but while we still have people with Twitchforks at the ready, journalists need to make sure they think before they type.

Many are trying to change their business to reflect this shift in focus while others are sticking to their guns.

Professor Jay Rosen from New York University is one of those who is looking at ways journalism can move forward. His tweets offer a range of insights into his thinking so I won’t repeat it all here.

But one particular message over the weekend sounded pretty familiar from a personal point of view (my response beneath the original tweet):

@jayrosen_nyu what they don’t get is that the idea isn’t always wrong, it’s the way it’s being applied

— Ross Hawkes (@rosshawkes) February 16, 2013

Anyone who has examined and debated the future of the traditional media will be able to play bingo with those phrases – I’ve certainly had three or four of them mentioned in discussions.

But as I later replied to Prof Rosen, such responses are symptomatic of the many problems media is facing by trying to find a ‘one size fits all’ solution in such a complex and diverse industry. After all, it could be argued that the lemming mentality of replicating rivals in the industry is behind many of the problems we see today (centralisation/loss of editions/overnight prints etc).

I’ve debated the money question before and given my views on that reply, but when gathered with the others identified in the tweet above it shows that we are still looking for a single golden goose. The reality is that what works for one won’t necessarily work for others. Every marketplace is different, every business is different. Yes, we can learn from each other but we also have to accept that not everything will work for everyone. After all, a McLaren F1 engine might be the best in the world, but you wouldn’t stick it in a Fiat 500.

There is no doubting that we need a stronger mix of ideas and application – and a wider recognition that the solution isn’t necessarily an off the peg one.

So it is the demise of hyperlocal as we know it?

Erm, not really.

The key comes from a statement to the Poynter Institute by Vivian Schiller, the NBC chief digital officer, who suggested that Everyblock “wasn’t a strategic fit with our growth strategy and – like most hyperlocal businesses – was struggling with the business model”.

The interesting term in her phrase was “hyperlocal businesses”. This is where we might be seeing some defined split in what hyperlocal really is.

As someone who runs a site that lives under the ‘H-umbrella’, I’ve never really seen it as a business and haven’t run it as such. Others I’ve spoken to have taken the same view. Yes, it may become a money-maker at some stage (and we wouldn’t rule it out), but certainly not in the forseeable future.

I’ve written before about whether finance is the key metric for hyperlocal success and – personally – the answer is not always.

Part of the success of such sites and projects have been the diversity and the fact they challenge the norm. They don’t all run for financial profit and why should they?

The problem comes for those sites – such as Everyblock – where the owner is in the business of making money (and big amounts of it at that). Goodwill simply won’t pay the bills.

Rather than the beginning of the end for hyperlocal, perhaps we are starting to see the early stages of a rethink for big hyperlocal businesses who have found that large overheads matched with smaller audiences and advertising revenues don’t make sense.

Guardian Local (now replaced by n0tice), Trinity Mirror’s postcode sites in Coventry and now Everyblock have all faded away. Patch, for now at least, are sticking by their gameplan.

But regardless of the failure of some of the more traditional news providers to make hyperlocal work on the scale of newspapers, there’s plenty of evidence that smaller scale, one-man band sites are continuing to thrive.

Hopefully, the one thing we are seeing is some definition to what hyperlocal is rather than throwing everything under the umbrella term and hoping it sticks. The fact is that the word doesn’t have a solid definition. All of the examples mentioned in this post are very different and show why each site needs its own identity and to find a model (not necessarily a business one) that works for them on an individual level.