Journalism

As PR professionals, we have become accustomed to changes in the media landscape, including the consolidation of media and the shifts of reporters from one news organization to another.

However, over the last few months, we have noticed a particular isolated shift among personal finance reporters, which we thought might be useful to view as a top 10 list. Below is our list of top 10 personal finance reporter changes we’ve noted over the last few months. Please consider the list more of an “informational draft pick list” versus a “Jay Leno list,” or you will be sorely disappointed!

Top 10 Personal Finance/Investing/Wealth Management Moves and Changes:

  1. Mary Pilon moves from The Wall Street Journal (personal finance) to The New York Times’ sports desk.
  2. Reuters: Jilian Mincer moves from Dow Jones/SmartMoney (a personal finance veteran at the shop) to the Reuters personal finance team. Jessica Toonkel has joined Reuters as a reporter on the wealth management team. She was most recently a reporter at InvestmentNews. Jessica will be covering issues related to the sale of retirement products, mutual funds, and other products sold through brokers and investment advisors. Jed Horowitz has been appointed a senior correspondent at Reuters. He previously served as a financial companies editor at Reuters, building coverage of retail brokerage and leading an initiative in wealth management. Suzanne Barlyn has joined the wealth management team at Reuters covering compliance, regulatory and oversight developments affecting financial advisers.  She was previously the “compliance watch” columnist at Dow Jones and a frequent contributor to The Wall Street Journal.
  3. AOL Daily Finance: Catherine New is now a real estate and personal finance staff writer. Sheryl Nance-Nash has been named a staff writer at AOL Daily Finance. She has previously written for Money. Laura Rowley has joined AOL DailyFinance as a senior writer covering retirement, money and happiness and other personal finance topics. Rowley had been a columnist for Yahoo! Finance since 2005, is a former reporter and producer for CNN Business News and author of five business books.
  4. Stan Rosenberg, a special writer who covers public finance and municipal bonds at Dow Jones Newswires, is retiring from DJN but will remain open to freelance assignments and / or blogging about those areas. His last day at Dow Jones will be June 30.
    Read the rest of our "Top 10" after the jump.
    Read the rest of this entry »
Share:
  • email
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
No Comments » Written on November 10th, 2011 by
Categories: Journalism, Public Relations
Tags: , , ,

In Ad Age’s AdStat column published Aug. 1st, Stephen Kraus and Bob Shullman write “Among Affluent Americans, Print Media Is Tops.” Of course, this headline immediately grabbed my attention.

The Affluency column appears monthly on AdAgeStat.

It seems for years, we’ve been attending print media's funeral and online’s débutante ball; however, according to the Mendelsohn Affluent Barometer survey, reports of the death of traditional media “are greatly exaggerated and equally premature.” America’s wealthy prefer traditional to other newer forms of media (online, mobile devices, etc.).

Here’s a recap of the Mendelsohn Affluent Barometer survey:

Contrary to popular belief, print media is not dead.

  • How the rich read magazines? 93% said they read hard-copy print versions; in contrast, less than a third read them on computers, and no other format garnered more than 10%
  • How the rich read newspapers? 86% read in print, compared to the 39% who read them on computers, and 14% who read them via smartphone
  • How the rich watch TV shows? TV shows are watched on TVs by 94%, followed by 23% who watch them on computers
  • Computers or mobile devices to view content? Websites are viewed on computers by 94%, followed by 32% viewing them on smartphones

Methodology: The Mendelsohn Affluent Barometer tracks new and traditional media use among American affluents. This monthly survey consists of more than 1,000 online interviews with respondents making at least $100,000 in annual household income—in other words, the 20% of Americans who account for about 60% of U.S. income and approximately 70% of U.S. net worth. The survey was conducted between March and May 2011.

So in PR, even though we all know the power and massive reach of online media, the print clip is still is very much a valuable currency—especially  if your clients are targeting the affluent. CJP

Share:
  • email
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
No Comments » Written on August 10th, 2011 by
Categories: Advertising, Journalism, Public Relations, Social Media
Tags: , , ,

Photo Credit: billadler

Recently, a colleague of mine needed an escort out of the doctor’s office because the doctor did not want him to be on his own. After all, he’d been anesthetized and, despite the comically-wobbly-wonder moment this procedure can at times permit, it’s always safe to accompany one who has yet to “come down” from the ethers. I arrived relatively early so I decided to peruse one of three magazines, most of which I had not seen outside of a doctor or dentist’s office in years.  The particular magazine I chose to read was Time.

Initially, I was struck by a headline that claimed to be offering some clarity as to how the drug cartels in parts of Juarez and its bordering towns in Mexico have managed to continuously evade if not attack authority, murdering thousands along the way. The truth is that they do, and have for some time, outnumber and muscle authority; often, though I myself don’t have the facts and can only glean (and thus trust?) further information from articles such as the one in Time, some of the authority moonlights for the cartel, so it isn’t difficult to understand how and why better things are not being done to protect innocent citizens. But, and even if reading the article was a daunting reminder of how it’s more than a war down there, this is far from the gut of what I wish to examine.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share:
  • email
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
4 comments Written on July 26th, 2011 by
Categories: Journalism, Miscellaneous Musings
Tags: ,

Over the last three weeks, I have heard no fewer than six people utter some derivation of the following: "The proliferation of [insert name of social media platform here] allows everyone to be a journalist." This is not a new concept, but it's the frequency with which it is repeated that has piqued my interest.

Each time I hear it, I cringe. I react this way not just because it is an insult to good journalists everywhere, but it is a clear indication about how we as a society have come to view journalism.

With respect to this topic I think the most important distinction that we can draw is between experiential observation and actual journalism. Sharing your experiences via Twitter, updating your status on LinkedIn, or sharing how intense you six mile run was on Facebook does not constitute journalism. I would even make the argument that real time video of a demonstration or a revolution in progress is interesting and even impactful, but it is still not journalism.

Here's the rub: If you claim to be journalist, you have responsibility for what you share. You have to be accurate. You have to be thorough. You have to be well-researched. Case in point, in the hours following the revelation that Osama Bin Laden had been killed, the Twitterverse was inundated by quotes from Martin Luther King, Jr., Albert Einstein, Aristotle and Mark Twain most of which were incorrectly attributed.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share:
  • email
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
No Comments » Written on May 27th, 2011 by
Categories: Journalism, Social Media
Tags: , , , , ,

For you fans of morning TV out there, you've heard the speculation for weeks, but today it was made official, Meredith Vieira is leaving NBC's TODAY. While  the news was not a complete shock (it's been known for some time that Vieira desired more time to spend with her family and ailing husband) many TODAY enthusiasts anticipated a bit more fanfare and anticipation surrounding who would succeed the host and earn a place on morning television's most coveted couch. But as it stands, Katie Couric fans will have temper their excitement of a potential reunion because the job has been awarded to long time TODAY news anchor, Ann Curry.

The decision by the NBC brass is a bit of a gamble as TODAY represents a $500+ million asset to the network and Curry tends have a love her or loathe her following. The show is a shining point for a network that has been battered by the competition in prime time. But the decision has been made (which we're sure has nothing to do with the fact that Curry could have opted out of her current contract had she been passed over for the job again).

While Curry has the experience for the gig, I can't say that I'm sold. I fall into the category that finds her to be obnoxious, difficult to watch and a bit patronizing. I'm willing to give her a chance, but NBC needs to tread lightly. GMA and The Early Show will be circling, waiting for their opportunity to capitalize on the transition.

So what do you think? Are you a fan of Curry? Will she fill Vieira's shoes? Take the poll below and tell us in the comments who you would have liked to see take the reins on TODAY. CJP

Share:
  • email
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
No Comments » Written on May 9th, 2011 by
Categories: From the News, Journalism
Tags: , , , , ,
Older Entries » « Newer Entries