News on the move
The future of news is mobile, or so it seems. If you read the right blogs, it seems we’re all already picking up news on our phones. Forget laptops, those things are antiquated. Wait, don’t tell you me you still read newspapers? With paper and everything? Bizarre.
The upturn in mobile apps and more affordable smartphones has undoubtedly made it easier to get news on the go.
I have around 8 news apps on my phone, and based on my experiences, I’ll try to decode why some apps are more successful than others, and why the mobile news haven isn’t quite with us just yet.
1. Not everyone has a flashy phone yet.
You’d be forgiven for thinking that everyone and his dog is carrying with them a phone that does everything but make breakfast. The reality is that smartphones still make up only 15% of the mobile market. So 85% of people with a mobile phone can’t use apps for the internet, recreation or to get their news.
This effect of this small market share is twofold. Firstly, it means that when we’re talking about a general desire to get news on the move we still prefer to read crumpled newspapers on the train. Secondly, those who own a smartphone are more likely to be wanting news anyway. That is, people in media, business and politics. So it’s only natural that they choose phones like these. Smartphones are currently preaching to the converted.
2. Apps need to be personable and unique to work.
It’s staggering how many companies just get this wrong. Imagine it, you’ve approached the boardroom, they say to go right ahead with a mobile app. You consult advertisers, developers and coders, spend a truckload of company money, and then finally release your shiny new app for the world to see…
…only to find that it looks exactly the same as another news organisation.
For all the creativity that some developers bring to apps, news apps can be tediously generic looking, and this won’t help long term development. Take the comparison of my Evening Standard and Reuters apps, for example:
They both work well, they both do the job, but it generally feels like an opportunity for so much more. The world wide web has been around for 20 years now, so websites are relitively old hat. Here’s a chance for a company to make their mark on an entirely new platform, but both opted for a very dull layout, with no real incentive to use the app.
If you compare them to the Huffington Post app:
Or the New York Times: (Simple layout, but has every section from the paper, as well as added video)
So with that in mind…
3. Make sure your app has a unique selling point.
The idea of a usp is something familiar to news as a whole. People read certain newspapers because they reflect and reinforce their own views. Others like to be challenged. But all have something that make them unique in the eyes of the readers, that forces them to part with their money (or, more pertinently, press “download”).
Sky News is a well known news provider. It doesn’t have big viewing figures, but almost everyone knows it for its emphasis on breaking news and ahem, colourful presenters. I don’t like Sky News. It’s difficult to watch, the presenters all look like Spitting Image puppets, and the graphics hurt my eyes.
But I use their news app. Why? Because it ticks every requirement on the mobile news checklist. Regular updates, video content, discussion forums, rss feeds, audio. It’s all here, singing and dancing on my phone. It even has a “Your Report” function (I have quibbles with “citizen journalism” but it’s a unique feature) for sending in your own news footage.
The approach that Sky News took to mobile news is in stark contrast to that of the Telegraph. It looks fairly good, with a simple layout and some nifty animations, but is basically irrelevant because of its lack of usp:
The problem lies in the fact that nothing you get on the Telegraph’s app is unique to the Telegraph. News can be got quicker from a number of sources on an rss reader. There are plenty of sports and travel apps. Reuters does better business news. Engadget and mashable both have very good apps for their expert field, technology. So what does that leave? Motoring? Is that the first thing you think of when someone mentions the Telegraph? While it’s not the end of the world, the lack of adaptability and unwillingness to think things through before making an app means that you’re lumped with a pretty pointless product.
So not quite a mobile revolution yet. Most people who readily use a smartphone now are still ahead of the curve. That means there isn’t a great incentive for companies to invest, because they haven’t yet got anywhere near the audience reach they might command in the future. However, those who are early developers will be sure to reap the rewards once the boom happens.
