20
Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I Analytical Framework and Report Workshop Finnish Forest Research Institute May 19-21, 2008 Joensuu, Finland

Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture!

Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service

Forest C&I Analytical Framework and Report WorkshopFinnish Forest Research InstituteMay 19-21, 2008Joensuu, Finland

Page 2: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

2

Canada’s C&I report widely distributedProducts

2005 report (print, pdf, HTML)Key trends and conditions booklet

Distribution and AnnouncementMailed report to ~700 readersMailed booklet to ~4000 readersProvinces distributed within their jurisdictionsAnnounced via e-distribution lists, blogs, Digg.com,Linked from Montreal Process web site, Wikipedia

Page 3: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

3

But the report is not widely usedPreliminary feedback suggests that readers like the overall content, but have difficulty using the information:

Report is not clearly targeted at key audiences – hence low awareness of utility of C&I Too hard to find the information they are looking forWant access to source data to perform their own analysisInformation not up to date – reporting too infrequentToo many indicators –confusingLack of benchmarks - No integrated assessmentSimilar info is more easily accessible from other government and NGO reportsToo many reporting requirements – eats up resources

Page 4: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

4

Reporting must change to be relevantImprove utility and delivery of C&I info by engaging readers and understanding their needsIncrease accessibility to information by readers by using simple, interactive and highly adaptable or tailored reporting formatsReduce reporting burden by improving linkages to other reporting mechanisms (produce once – use many times)Encourage stakeholder participation in SFM debate – a conversation, not a lecture from government

Adapting to an evolving WWW may be part of the solution

Page 5: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

5

Current C&I web use: “Post & browse”

Page 6: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

6

But hard to find, hence not browsed!

C&I?

Page 7: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

7

Web 2.0 users are much more sophisticated

Post and browse collaborative co-creationInfo silos sources of content and functionality

Page 8: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

8

Examples of Web 2.0Blogs – Don’t publish, participate!Tagging, folksonomy

Social networking

Page 9: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

9

WEB 1.0WebshotsBritannicaCNNConsumer ReportsEviteMapquestMonster

WEB 2.0FlickrWikipediaBloggerEpinionsUpcomingGoogle MapsCraiglist

Defined reader experience & published info for people to observe

Created platforms for readers to co-create their own services, communities and experiences

Page 10: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

10

What can we learn from Web 2.0 sites?1. Shift thinking – the web is a platform to provide a

service, not a document archive2. Provide unique data sources that get richer as more

people use them3. Readers want control – make it easy to

remix/mashup/hack data4. Harness collective intelligence5. Trust readers as co-developers (perpetual beta web

site)6. Plan for multiple devices

Page 11: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

11

Shift Thinking – provide a service, not a document archiveIf the service is to provide info on SFM, then you need to think

about how to increase the use of your info by readers.1. More visitors to your site2. Your info used on other sites

# of web sites

# of

Vis

itors

• well designed site• easy to find• easy to use

• useful info• easy to share and manipulate data

Page 12: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

12

Provide unique data sources that get richer as more people use them

Readers add value/contentHarder for others to compete using same base dataMore visitors because of rich experience

Examples:Barnes and Noble vs. Amazon.comMapquest vs. Google Maps

Page 13: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

13

Provide unique data sources that get richer as more people use themIncorporate ancillary data

sourcesE.g.

Background materialLinks to most popular indicators Links to other sites

Page 14: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

14

Readers want control – make it easy to hack data

Page 15: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

15

Harness collective intelligenceWe, the media – Readers decide what’s importantMake it easy to blog, digg, tag, or send info to a friend

Alert readers to new information with news syndication

Page 16: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

16

Trust readers as co-developersAllow readers to co-create contentAdd functionality to web site all the time –perpetual betaInclude tracking metrics to see if new functions are working

Page 17: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

17

Plan for multiple devicesDesktop computersBlackberriesCell phones

Page 18: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

18

Common Barriers to overcomeOrganizational culture (process vs. outcome)Multilingual requirementsProprietary software contractsFear of giving up controlFear of failureProving return on investment

Page 19: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

19

Examples of reports that are adaptingQuebec (http://www.mrnf.gouv.qc.ca/publications/enligne/forets/criteres-indicateurs/accueil.asp)

British Columbia (http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/sof/)

Page 20: Forest reporting on Web 2.0 · 2008-06-10 · Forest reporting on Web 2.0: A conversation, not a lecture! Simon Bridge Natural Resources Canada –Canadian Forest Service Forest C&I

May 19-21, 2008 C&I Report Workshop, Finland

20

Concluding RemarksMedia execs on “threat” posed by the Internet

Give readers access to raw content as a means of providing greater transparency and accountability;Provide tools and become a platform for reader generated rather than firm generated content;Redesign all content to be a conversation, rather than a monologue;Treat advertising as content too;Use new distribution forms, including peer-to-peer networks;Adapt content forms and schedules to reader demands.