What do they say it is?
“iNorden.org is a joint Nordic citizen journalism initiative inviting bloggers, writers, aspiring and experienced journalists to contribute in the creation of a Nordic news portal.”
What do we say it is?
iNorden is yet another citJ experiment. The difference here is that it’s driven by a sort of pan-Scandinavian post-nationalism rather than profit.
What’s great about it?
Its wide network of semi-professional editors brings cohesion to the nascent community of contributors. A two-tier, pro-am-like structure like this allows for real brand image development while remaining very open to audience-generated content.
A fully grown website running on WordPress also makes great economic sense (and, incidentally, exemplifies the uselessness of Instant Journalism).
What could be better?
Its much-advertised modesty is palpable in the web0.2 design. The site’s activity suffers, maybe as a result. iNorden ranks 2 millionth on Alexa. (That’s still significant, even when we take into account Alexa’s 110% error margin.)
It needs better positioning, moving further away from traditional, old-media brands to develop its own identity. Looking at the stories in English, it still seems iNorden follows the same leads. Competing with AP isn’t a good idea when you have no capital to start with.
How is it going to make money?
It’s not going to and it doesn’t want to. iNorden is non-profit and proud of it. That gives the brand a lot of credibility at a time where everyone tries to milk users for their content. User experience could very well be enhanced as a result.
Should I pay it any attention?
Yes, if you want to check on the web’s ability to deliver fresh ideas. With all its sincerity and, maybe, naiveté, iNorden’s getting the success it deserves would prove, once again, that the web has crushed the barriers of the offline world.
Online Journalism Blog 
Thanks a lot for your interesting view on iNorden. It would seem that you’ve got it all covered, pretty much, except maybe, from a few minor details:
iNorden launched a month and a half ago, which means that it so far is everything but what it’s intended to be (well, we’re beginning to get an idea, but…). That very much applies to the design, too, although I think we’re onto something, in terms of framework — and the way we’re about to organise the site (sections with dedicated section fronts are in the making).
We’ve decided that, for now, we don’t want ads on our site, simply beacause we think it’d be devastating for our credibility. Too many mainstream media corporations have ventured into civic journalism in order to profit on the hype — financially.
Should we at any time consider allowing ads, it would have to be because we’d need to make money in order to practice citizen journalism, not practicing citizen journalism in order to make money, as is the case in the established media.
As for improved positioning, you’re spot on. We need it desperately. It’s all a little Catch 22-ish, really, that on one hand we’re unwilling to generate an income, while on the other, we could really use funds for marketing purposes. When it comes to positioning content-wise, I think you’d find there’s plenty of that in the national editions (www.iNorden.dk, http://www.iNorden.no and http://www.iNorden.se), where most of what is considered citizen journalism is found, whereas the international edition serves as a means of providing Nordic news to a foreign audience only, as such an offer is in effect non-existing elsewhere. Surely, there are various national news outlets in English, but none representing the Nordic region — or Scandinavia — as such. Which is why very little of what might be considered traditional citizen journalism is found in that particular edition, which, I take it, is the only edition you’ve been able to review — given the other editions’ language(s).
There’s yet a dimension to iNorden.org, apart from promoting citizen journalism in the region; namely that of creating a common Nordic ground of sorts, as there have been no alternatives in that respect either.
Finally, I’d like to draw everyone’s attention to this. The thing is: We haven’t, so far, been able to mobilise a correspondent corps for the international edition — which probably explains some of its obvious shortcomings, as of yet. We’d be overjoyed if anyone out there would be interested.
But for now: Thanks a million for an interesting review — and a very merry Christmas to you and your readers.
Thanks a lot for your interesting view on iNorden. It would seem that you’ve got it all covered, pretty much, except maybe, from a few minor details:
iNorden launched a month and a half ago, which means that it so far is everything but what it’s intended to be (well, we’re beginning to get an idea, but…). That very much applies to the design, too, although I think we’re onto something, in terms of framework — and the way we’re about to organise the site (sections with dedicated section fronts are in the making).
We’ve decided that, for now, we don’t want ads on our site, simply beacause we think it’d be devastating for our credibility. Too many mainstream media corporations have ventured into civic journalism in order to profit on the hype — financially.
Should we at any time consider allowing ads, it would have to be because we’d need to make money in order to practice citizen journalism, not practicing citizen journalism in order to make money, as is the case in the established media.
As for improved positioning, you’re spot on. We need it desperately. It’s all a little Catch 22-ish, really, that on one hand we’re unwilling to generate an income, while on the other, we could really use funds for marketing purposes. When it comes to positioning content-wise, I think you’d find there’s plenty of that in the national editions (www.iNorden.dk, http://www.iNorden.no and http://www.iNorden.se), where most of what is considered citizen journalism is found, whereas the international edition serves as a means of providing Nordic news to a foreign audience only, as such an offer is in effect non-existing elsewhere. Surely, there are various national news outlets in English, but none representing the Nordic region — or Scandinavia — as such. Which is why very little of what might be considered traditional citizen journalism is found in that particular edition, which, I take it, is the only edition you’ve been able to review — given the other editions’ language(s).
There’s yet a dimension to iNorden.org, apart from promoting citizen journalism in the region; namely that of creating a common Nordic ground of sorts, as there have been no alternatives in that respect either.
Finally, I’d like to draw everyone’s attention to this. The thing is: We haven’t, so far, been able to mobilise a correspondent corps for the international edition — which probably explains some of its obvious shortcomings, as of yet. We’d be overjoyed if anyone out there would be interested.
But for now: Thanks a million for an interesting review — and a very merry Christmas to you and your readers.
A lot of thanks for every one of your labor on this web page. My niece delights in working on investigation and it’s really obvious why. We all know all of the compelling tactic you render precious guides via your web blog and in addition attract response from people on this subject matter plus my princess is always discovering a lot of things. Take pleasure in the rest of the year. You have been performing a wonderful job.