Category Archives: Journalism

Augmented reality and the annotated world

Posted on by
1

The following is from a post by Jeff Jarvis in which he talks about augmented reality and the annotated world and the ever-changing definition of journalism and local news.

“Every address, every building, every business has a story to tell. Visualize your world that way: Look at a restaurant and think about all the data that already swirls around it — its menu, its reviews and ratings and tags (descriptive words), its recipes, its ingredients, its suppliers (and how far away they are, if you care about that sort of thing), its reservation openings, who has been there (according to social applications), who do we know who has been there, its health-department reports, its credit-card data (in aggregate, of course), pictures of its interior, pictures of its food, its wine list, the history of the location, its decibel rating, its news…

And then think how we can annotate that with our own reviews, ratings, photos, videos, social-app check-ins and relationships, news, discussion, calendar entries, orders…. The same can be said of objects, brands — and people.”

His post includes a few videos but this is my favorite:

When I think about the implications of this technology, and what it means for news organizations, I have what I have come to think of as Wile E. Coyote moments. The realization most will never catch the Road Runner (Beep, Beep!) The future –which is here– belongs to small, flightless birds that refuse to play by our cartoon rules.

PS: If you’re satisfied seeing the world through emails and text messages, your BlackBerry will be fine. If you want to augment your reality (and you will), it will be with an iPhone or similar device.

Who owns the interview?

Posted on by
1

I find this a very interesting question, asked and answered by Paul Bradshaw on E-Media Tidbits:

“Some time ago I was interviewed via e-mail for an article and, as I often do, after providing answers to the nine questions, I asked the following: “Mind if I republish these answers in full on my blog after the piece goes live?”

It turned out that the journalist actually did mind. In fact, in the correspondence that followed, the journalist explicitly refused me permission to publish my own answers before changing her mind and saying I could — but without the accompanying questions she had supplied. So who owns the interview?”

The thinking behind the question and Mr. Bradshaw’s post are worth a read for any reporter. And raise another question (in my mind):

Do I need your permission to publish an email you send me? Sure, it might be tacky… but once it hits my in-box, isn’t it mine, to do with as I please? Is there a legal answer to this question?

At a more pragmatic level, shouldn’t I just assume that anything I write and “release into the wild,” can and will wind up online? Are there enough lawyers to stop that?

Note to self: In the unlikely event someone asks to interview me, inform them that I reserve the option of publishing the full interview. If they don’t like that, don’t do the interview.

“My news feed on Facebook”

Posted on by
Reply

“Your honor, the defense will stipulate that Senator McCaskill’s Facebook page is in no way an act of journalism and might be self-serving and total horse shit.”

“So noted. The page will be entered as Exhibit F.”

facebook-twitter

Something about “my news feed on Facebook” made me stop. Politicians have been grinding out news releases since the dawn of time but same-day video news feeds? My natural instinct is to scoff at the idea of a “news feed” by a politician. But do I trust the senator more or less than Fox News? Hmm.

I’m old enough to remember when just being on TV meant you were honest and trust-worthy. Now whom do we trust?

My point here is that from now on, we’ll get the “news” from lots of people in lots of ways. Trust will trump the medium.

“The Death of Local News”

Posted on by
1

LocalNewser: Michael Rosenblum on the Death of Local News from Mark Joyella on Vimeo. “Michael Rosenblum’s been around the local news biz for decades, along the way helping create New York’s all-news NY1 and Al Gore’s Current TV. Rosenblum’s consulted for stations across the country and around the world, and yet he believes the model that’s kept local news alive since the 1950s is broken, and the only way to repair it–drastic changes in the way news stations operate–just won’t happen. Rosenblum tells LocalNewser’s Mark Joyella local news is like GM: sticking with a recipe that put them on top five decades ago, but will drive them to bankruptcy today.”

My favorite line: When Google does news in New York, it aint gonna start in the CBS building with a chopper. Or something to that effect. Video runs about 2 1/2 min.

“Journalism is like skiing in the 50s or 60s”

Posted on by
7

An interesting analogy by Dave Winer:

“Previously it had been a sport that very few people enjoyed, and they were all very good. But now the doors are opening to amateurs. The pros have to share the slopes with people who don’t take the sport as seriously as they do. They’re still going to be able to ski, but the rest of us are not just going to admire them for how skilled they are, we’re going to do it too. They can earn a living as ski patrol and ski instructors. Or lift operators or more mundane jobs like people who work in hotels and drive the shuttle bus. There are still jobs in skiing after the arrival of the amateurs. But the exclusivity is gone.”

I think he might have nailed it. Oh, for the days before the lift lines were long and the slopes clogged with morons who didn’t know the right way to come down the hill.

“A luxury we can no longer afford”

Posted on by
Reply

“New Business Models for News” was the title of a conference held by the City University of New York’s Graduate School of Journalism. You can read the full post by Dorian Benkoil at E-Media Tidbits but the goal of the (3rd annual) conference was “…to try to find ways that the news business can survive.”

“The 150 to 200 people there were a diverse audience — local bloggers and independent journalists trying to make a living, reps from big media companies like The New York Times and Gannett, venture capitalists, foundation funders, educators, consultants, students, technologists, advertising salespeople, ad network experts.”

“You’d better take an interest in the spreadsheets that represent your income and expenses, and cash flow statements that will determine if you can meet payroll every week — even if that payroll is just you, working alone. You may even have to consider, in the words of NYU’s Jay Rosen, that “there may be no business model to replace the old business model” — but you’ll still have to find a way to pay for it all.”

“But being unaware of anything having to do with the cash flows that support the news operation is a luxury we can no longer afford.”

nama-trends-nafb-09-7Reading and thinking about this conference brought to mind my many chats with Chuck Zimmerman, a former Learfield employee who struck out on his own (with wife Cindy) and has created a small but successful business as an ag journalist (specializing in agriculture marketing).

Over the course of the last several years, I’ve heard Chuck talk about dealing with finances, ad sales, server problems, and a bunch of other stuff that had not much to do with reporting a story but a lot to do with putting bread on the table.

“How Twitter is changing the face of media”

Posted on by
Reply

This post by Soren Gordhamer (at Mashable.com) resonates for those of us who followed/participated in the “reporting” of “the hostage situation that wasn’t” here in Jefferson City.

“Sure, in the past, you could always email or call a friend to inform him or her of a quality news story or TV show; now, however, in a matter of seconds you can share this information on your broadcasting network via Twitter or Facebook, with tens, hundreds, or even thousands of people. It’s not my or your media anymore; it’s our media, and we can all broadcast it.” [Emphasis mine]

“In the past, what people thought of as “news” was what was reported that day in the New York Times or CNN. In an age where we all possess our own broadcasting network, though, smaller stations have greater power. Of course, a post on Twitter from CNN, which has over two million followers, will get more views than one from Joe Smith who has 20 followers will, but Joe Smith is at least in the game now, where he was not previously.”

“In the new media landscape, the task of defining what is the news that matters to people lies less with a few major media outlets, and much more with the millions of small outlets like you and I who each choose what to talk about. Increasingly, lots of littles, in aggregate, are becoming more powerful than a handful of bigs.” [Emphasis mine]

“Media is also becoming more personal. More and more people expect their broadcasting networks to be people with personalities, not simply sources of news. We want to know as much about the person reporting news as we do the news they are reporting. [Emphais mine] Broadcasting is more a personal act than ever, as users seek to have connections not just to content but to people.”

Mr. Gordhamer is the author of the book, Wisdom 2.0 and the organizer of the Wisdom 2.0 Conference.

This tweet just in…

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday’s dust up in Jefferson City provided a good look at how local news media (and civilians) would use Twitter to “cover” a breaking news story. I haven’t seen all the tweets posted by @misourinet but during the few minutes I was in the newsroom, our reporters we’re being cautious about what they posted. I think we did retweet some stuff that turned out to be inaccurate but I’m not sure about that. I did get he sense they were trying to be restrained and confirm information.

Some news outlets were posting corrections as fast as updates. And the public was under no constraints at all. Missouri Lt. Governor Peter Kinder had his BlackBerry hotter than Tim Pawlenty’s wife. Unfortunately, much of what he tweeted was wrong.

Old news dogs will decry such Twitter frenzy but I didn’t have any trouble sifting the wheat from the chaff. And this kind of rumor wildfire has always been there, it just wasn’t up where we could watch it. It was one-to-one, not one-to-the-universe.

At one point, I saw a young woman –a reporter, I assumed– with a Marantz recorder and microphone (I had one just like it). The plan was, I suppose, to record an interview or some “nat sound,” go back to the radio station (?), “cut up” the audio, write a story and hope to get it done in time for the next newscast. Or post it to the station website.

I don’t know if that’s enough –or fast enough– any more.

All I had was the iPhone but if I could have gotten an interview, I could have posted audio and/or video immediately. From where I was standing.

Back on Twitter for a minute… people like Tony Messenger and Chad Livengood long ago established their Twitter cred. Following their updates was as close to real-time updates as you’re gonna get in a situation like this (one of the local radio stations did cut into syndication natioal shows with updates a couple of times).

I think our network (@missourinet) picked up 50 or 60 new followers yesterday, on the stength of frequent, accurate posts.

Was there a “better” way to follow yesterday’s events? I’m not sure what it would be. Will we get better at using this tool (both to monitor events and to report them)? I’m sure we will.