Category Archives: Journalism

Streaming video of committee hearing

Posted on by
1

I took the little BT-1 Bluetooth webcam back to the Missouri capitol yesterday for a hearing. Used twitcam to stream. The audio was poor to marginal and the video about what you’d expect from a $150 camera. It was basically a final field test and I was pleased.

If you look closely (red arrow) in the top left corner of the photo above, you can see the aluminum legs of the small tripod holding the camera. I was about 20-25 feet away. The camera was very unobtrusive and it was convenient to be untethered and out of the way.

One of these days there will be a high-profile news conference we’ll want to stream live and I’ll just grab the BT-1 and the MacBook Pro. We don’ need no stinkin’ satellite truck.

PS: I have no idea why Wilfred Brimmley is on the committee (top center)

“Writing skill no longer enough to sustain journalists”

Posted on by
10

The headline above drew my attention to a post by Robert Niles in the Online Journalism Review. Mr. Niles has worked as an editorial writer and reporter for several newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times, Rocky Mountain News, Omaha World-Herald and the (Bloomington, Ind.) Herald-Times.

“As the 21st century progresses, going to school to major in writing and shooting stories will become like going to school to learn breathing. What’s the point? It’s a ubiquitous activity that everyone learns on his or her own long before college. With so many more people getting their 10,000 hours of writing and shooting early in life, more people than ever are able now technically to report to others the news that they encounter. What’s the value in being a journalist when everyone is doing journalism? [emphasis mine]

“Yes, news organizations must find new production models that allow them to remain profitable in a competitive publishing market. But news publishers must also reconsider whom they’re hiring. Journalism schools must also reconsider the instruction that they provide.”

“There’s no longer any use in merely teaching people to write to a formula and conform to a specific style book. While those skills had enough value a generation ago for an individual to build a career, the new, hyper-literate media marketplace has rendered those skills – in isolation – as practically worthless.”

I remember when the number one requirement for getting an on-air job at a radio station was a pleasant speaking voice. A “good set of pipes.” If you could think while speaking into a microphone, better still but not a deal breaker.

If you were going to work in the news department (yes, radio stations used to have entire departments for news gathering), you also needed to know how to write a story (IN ALL CAPS) that included “sound bites.”

In an earlier post I referred to the RTNDA (Radio and Television News Directors Association). That was incorrect. It’s now RTDNA: Radio Television Digital News Association. An acknowledgment that news is happening some place other than on radio and television. When any website can have audio and video (that would be called “now”), one has to wonder if DNA might be the more apt acronym (already taken).

And when ALL news is digital, will it be the News Association. And when everyone is producing news…

I’ve struggled to understand why so many of the journalists I know resist learning the new skills Mr. Niles refers to. I’ve concluded it would be an acknowledgment that the skills they’ve worked so long to hone are no longer enough. It would be –in some sense– like starting over. No thank you.

We have an opening in one of our newsrooms now. I won’t be involved in recruiting and filling the position. For that I am grateful.

Disclaimer: I am not a journalist. I did not go to journalism school. I went to keep-my-deferment-and-stay-out-of-Viet-Nam-school.

“The Future Journalist”

Posted on by

Found these (and much more) at Mashable. Specific digitally-oriented skills and traits a future journalist would need. These include being:

  • a multimedia storyteller: using the right digital skills and tools for the right story at the right time.
  • a community builder: facilitating conversation among various audiences, being a community manager.
  • a trusted pointer: finding and sharing great content, within a beat(s) or topic area(s); being trusted by others to filter out the noise.
  • a blogger and curator: has a personal voice, is curator of quality web content and participant in the link economy.
  • able to work collaboratively: knowing how to harness the work of a range of people around him/her — colleagues in the newsroom; experts in the field; trusted citizen journalists; segments of the audience, and more.

If you are a working journalist, could you get the job you have today based on the requirements above?

RTNDA Guidelines for Social Media and Blogging

Posted on by
Reply

Several Learfield (the company I work for) employee are members of the Radio and Television News Directors Association, so I was pleased to come across their recently published guidelines for social meida and blogging. A few snippits:

“Social media and blogs are important elements of journalism. They narrow the distance between journalists and the public. They encourage lively, immediate and spirited discussion. They can be vital news-gathering and news-delivery tools. As a journalist you should uphold the same professional and ethical standards of fairness, accuracy, truthfulness, transparency and independence when using social media as you do on air and on all digital news platforms. “

Ahem. This is where it would be tempting to remind some of my colleagues how ferociously they fought the very concept of blogging.

On Accountability and Transparency:

“You should not write anonymously or use an avatar or username that cloaks your real identity on newsroom or personal websites. You are responsible for everything you say. Commenting or blogging anonymously compromises this core principle.” [Emphasis mine]

“Be especially careful when you are writing, Tweeting or blogging about a topic that you or your newsroom covers. Editorializing about a topic or person can reveal your personal feelings. Biased comments could be used in a court of law to demonstrate a predisposition, or even malicious intent, in a libel action against the news organization, even for an unrelated story.” [Emphasis mine]

Reporters who forget that second point could face dire consequences.

Image and Reputation

“Remember that what’s posted online is open to the public (even if you consider it to be private). Personal and professional lives merge online. Newsroom employees should recognize that even though their comments may seem to be in their “private space,” their words become direct extensions of their news organizations. Search engines and social mapping sites can locate their posts and link the writers’ names to their employers.”

“Avoid posting photos or any other content on any website, blog, social network or video/photo sharing website that might embarrass you or undermine your journalistic credibility. Keep this in mind, even if you are posting on what you believe to be a “private” or password-protected site. Consider this when allowing others to take pictures of you at social gatherings. When you work for a journalism organization, you represent that organization on and off the clock. The same standards apply for journalists who work on air or off air.”

I don’t belong to RTNDA (or any association, if you don’t count the Order of the Fez) but I like these guidelines. Sort of, “Everything You Need to Know About Social Media You Learned in Kindergarten.”

Poll: 2 in 5 Americans read paper daily

Posted on by
Reply

One of the findings of an Adweek Media/Harris Poll taken in December 2009. Only 43% of US adults say they read a daily newspaper – either online or in print – almost every day, while 72% read one at least once a week and 81% read one at least once a month. The study found that one in ten adults say they never read a daily newspaper.

“Daily newspaper readership skews heavily toward the older age groups. Almost two-thirds of those ages 55+ (64%) say they still read a daily newspaper almost every day. Younger Americans read newspapers less often. Just more than two in five of those ages 45-54 (44%) read a paper almost every day as do 36% of those ages 35-44. However, less than one-fourth of those ages 18-34 (23%) say they read a newspaper almost every day and 17% in this age group say they never read a daily newspaper.

Though many newspapers are exploring the possibility of charging a monthly fee to read a daily newspaper’s content online, the poll results suggest this tactic is unlikely to work. Three-fourths of online adults (77%) say they would not be willing to pay anything to read a newspaper’s content online. Among the minority willing to pay, one in five online adults (19%) would only pay between $1 and $10 a month for this online content and only 5% would pay more than $10 a month.

The average monthly amount consumers are prepared to pay ranges from $3 in the US and Australia to $7 in Italy.

I want to be depressed by these findings but must confess that I do not read a hold-it-in-your-hands newspaper and I’ve never been better informed. I spend the first two hours of every days gobbling up news from dozens of sources. And much (most?) of the real news comes from newspapers that are bleeding red ink.

What will I be reading if/when those traditional sources are no long? I have no idea.

“The Age of Media Agnosticism”

Posted on by
Reply

In an essay titled The Age of Media Agnosticism, Steve Rubel cites a study by the Poynter Institute that identifies seven classes of news consumers and the beginning of a “new era of media agnosticism.” First, the 7 types:

  • Traditional: those who devote a set amount of time to their news habit every day;
  • Passive: multi-taskers who don’t devote time to news but have an “ambient awareness” and tune in as their interest is piqued;
  • Pursuit: people who seek out a specific piece of information, such as the full version of a story they heard about;
  • Social: under 30-types who rely on the news to “find them” via social networks;
  • Partisan: individuals who turn to select news providers based on their own outlooks (e.g. DailyKos or FOX News);
  • Continuous: “information addicts” who are always plugged in; and
  • Post-traditional: news consumers who get it all online and have “loose loyalties” for certain sites.

I’ll put myself in one or both of the last two types. And for those of us in or near the news “business,” Mr. Rubel’s final takeaway:

“Faced with infinite choices, powerful search tools and equally helpful friends, we’re adapting our habits and becoming less loyal to general sources than we once were. Many rely on the news to find us rather than our needing to seek it out. Those who do hunt for news are likely to do so via a single outlet of their choosing and/or a search engine, or even YouTube.”

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.