1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Patch 2.0

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Tucsondriver, Jul 26, 2012.

  1. Tucsondriver

    Tucsondriver Member

    Whether what they've been doing the last two years actually is journalism is questionable. But their parent company's CEO says they won't even be doing that much longer. Armstrong's vision for the company is a listings site, kind of like craigslist for people who live in white burbs. Letting this thing die with dignity is probably too much to ask...

    Mr. Armstrong also told Ad Age that the new iteration of Patch coming later in 2012 will unlock “the vitality” of towns “for a much deeper, richer engagement level.”
    (Anybody have any clue what the fuck this means?)

  2. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Open bar?
  3. Mystery Meat II

    Mystery Meat II Well-Known Member

    Either he got the accomplishment he needed to unlock it or he spent 400 Xbox Live points.
  4. britwrit

    britwrit Well-Known Member

    Patch-sponsored swinger clubs.
  5. Tucsondriver

    Tucsondriver Member

    Sounds like this plan is already in motion. I've heard that West Coast local editors are being ordered to generate sales leads and they're understandably livid. Can't imagine doing shit like that. I'd think at least a few will be telling their corporate masters to shove it.
  6. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    I'm curious if SGreenwell has heard anything about this yet.

    For as much crap as Patch gets, I know at least four hard-working journalists who are employed by AOL at Patch sites and I'd hate hear of them getting the axe or getting stuck doing something they didn't sign up for.
  7. podunk press

    podunk press Active Member

    I almost begged with the people who left our place for Patch to reconsider because I worried they were signing up for only a one- or two-year gig.

    And they all said they knew that was probably all it would be, and they were willing to do that anyway to take the $10K bump in salary.

    So they all knew.
  8. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    I don't think anybody signed on with Patch assuming it was there for the long haul. More a matter of hoping for the best. I know a few editors there, but they were either unemployed or kids just getting started. Leaving a more established place for a pay jump at Patch? That sounds pretty damn risky in this economy.

    That said, I still think people are making a lot of assumptions here, as they have done from day one about Patch.
  9. Tucsondriver

    Tucsondriver Member

    Many of us, myself included, assumed they'd be gone by now. The company's CEO is reporting spikes in revenue and traffic for what it's worth (take with a grain of salt, it's the CEO's assessment, not an independent auditor's) so assuming there's some truth to what he's saying, by that measure, they've proved many of us here wrong. The product is worse than I think most of us thought it would be, and nobody ever thought it was very good.
  10. TheHacker

    TheHacker Member

    Is there such thing as a "spike" in traffic for a site that does hyper-local coverage? And I don't say that to be disparaging toward Patch, I'm talking about community papers on the web as well. My place is a community paper and we've got Patch sites in our area. We've been around forever and people know who we are, but we can't gain any traction on the web -- so I can't imagine the Patch sites are doing well at drawing traffic.

    I try not to be cynical about it, but I now openly question whether local news makes sense on the web. I don't feel like it's what people are looking for online. How many people can we reasonably expect to click on a city council story, or a high school game story? I guess a lot of it is a function of the market, but most of the time it seems like an uphill climb. We keep pouring effort and resources into the web "because we have to," but when the traffic is light we don't step back to wonder if it's worth it. We just keep blindly doing it and waiting for it to work. Or at least that's what it feels like sometimes.
  11. Tucsondriver

    Tucsondriver Member

    11.7 million users last month, they claim. That's for 850-plus sites. The numbers sure sound good, but at the end the day, doing well depends on whether you're drawing enough traffic to make it worth advertisers while to cover expenses and satisfy shareholders. An uphill climb for a company that's spending $150 million a year, I would think.

  12. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    That last bit is subjective and unfair. There is a wide range of quality among Patch sites, but these threads are dominated by certain posters digging for the crap only.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page