Article in the Guardian today by Victor Keegan discussing the merits of blogging in comparison to traditional journalism.
"CBS's admission that its story of George Bush's special treatment when with the Texas air national guard was deeply flawed is being seen as a key victory for the new "blogging" community of the internet against old media.
This is mainly true. Although papers such as the Washington Post were on the case, the retraction would not have happened when it did but for the efforts of an army of bloggers - writers of online journals - in exposing the documents as fraudulent, including some who authoritatively questioned the authenticity of the documents almost as they were released....."
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Sunday, September 19, 2004
Technorati
Technorati is a website that monitors weblogs - currently more than 3 million. It also ranks the top 100 blogs. It also has an "Election 2004 watch" link. It also has an interesting 'blogging basics' page in the form of an FAQ. For example, here is ist comparison of blogging and journalism:
What's the relationship between blogging and journalism?
"Weblogs are different from traditional media. Bloggers tend to be more opinionated, niche-focused, and partisan than journalists, who strive for editorial objectivity. Blogs encourage dialog with readers, which is why many traditional journalists now also have blogs. The relationship between blogging and journalism can be characterized as symbiotic rather than competitive. Bloggers are often sources for journalists, and many blogs contain commentary and riffs on what journalists wrote that day. Frequently newsmakers use blogs to respond to what journalists write about them. And by linking to traditional media, weblogs can introduce new readers to journalists and their publications. "
What's the relationship between blogging and journalism?
"Weblogs are different from traditional media. Bloggers tend to be more opinionated, niche-focused, and partisan than journalists, who strive for editorial objectivity. Blogs encourage dialog with readers, which is why many traditional journalists now also have blogs. The relationship between blogging and journalism can be characterized as symbiotic rather than competitive. Bloggers are often sources for journalists, and many blogs contain commentary and riffs on what journalists wrote that day. Frequently newsmakers use blogs to respond to what journalists write about them. And by linking to traditional media, weblogs can introduce new readers to journalists and their publications. "
Saturday, September 11, 2004
weblogs and established media
Relationship of weblogs to the established media
A list of reasons why weblogs are innovative and do things that established media (particularly conventional journalism) cannot necessarily do, is available on a weblog, the BuzzMachine, produced by Jeff Jarvis, who concludes that weblogs are complementary to established media, not a replacement:
"1. Weblogs are meant to be read. The first, best thing a reporter, editor, publisher, producer can do is read weblogs -- not write them, read them. We in established media have had printing presses for hundreds of years. Now it's everybody else's turn. Now the people formerly known as "they" have a voice and we should listen. We should put the spotlight on "them" and stand back. See what we will learn.
2. Weblogs add information. Established media are in the information business. And weblogs bring in more information, often from new sources. If the big guys learn how to take advantage of that, then weblogs will not replace them; they will enhance them. That is why I am trying to bring blogs to towns, so citizen journalists can gather information no institution can afford to gather on its own (especially these days).
3. Weblogs bring perspective. See the Howell Raines post below. We, the people, formerly known as the audience, want to express our opinions and know the opinions of those talking to us. Weblogs allow anyone to become a pundit.
4. Weblogs target. They are a great way to reach and serve specific audiences with content -- and advertising (and to find out what those audiences want to know).
5. Weblogs capture buzz. If you want to know what the people are saying and thinking, you can (a) hire a company to perform very expensive surveys and focus groups and hope they're right, (b) go to the nearest Dennys and eavesdrop and hope you like patty melts, or (c) read weblogs. Weblogs are good at capturing and predicting buzz.
6. Weblogs produce story ideas. I know of one reporter on one paper -- Maureen Ryan at the ChiTrib -- who is dedicated to finding great stories online. There should be more. And, for that matter, every reporter should be mining weblogs for ideas. They're there to be had, ripe for the plucking. Just go get them.
7. Weblogs find (and filter) news. Remember agents? Those little virtual PacMen (well, actually, they used to bring to mind the Scrubbing Bubbles commercial) were supposed to go out into the vast, wired world and and find news and other good stuff for you. Science fiction, it was. Agents died. But weblogs live. Weblogs -- and their agents, aka their readers, that is, real people -- fan out and find all kinds of wonderful stuff.
8. Weblogs fact check our ass. It's wonderful to have this world of natterers and naysayers out there, for they will fact-check (and even copy-edit) blogs and newspapers, magazines, and broadcast. That is a good thing. That adds to the credibility of all media. If Howell Raines (see above and below) had heard what people were saying about him and his paper before his own staff screamed it in his ear, he might have held onto his job.
9. Weblogs add speed. During the war, no single media outlet, print or broadcast, or online, could keep up with the news-gathering power of Command Post. I didn't say reporting. I said gathering. The weblogs brought together the best of reporting from every available outlet -- all around the world -- with incredible, impressive speed. That's valuable. A wise news organization will harnass that. Come the next war (God forbid) I'd license not only AP content but also Command Post links.
10. Weblogs breed talent. And, lo, Denton begat Gawker and Gawker begat Spiers and Spiers begat TheKicker. I just recommended another blogger to a magazine editor looking for new talent. And there are more where they came from (just ask Denton). A wise editor should be looking to bloggers to find new and fresh (not to mention cheap) voices. Mind you, some people are better at writing for blogs than for print; they thrive in the immediacy and may wilt in the smokehouse of editing. But there is great talent to be found here. All you have to do is read.
11. Weblogs experiment. Weblogs find new ways to use photos and audio and I've played with video weblogs. Weblogs will innovate and if we watch, old media can learn new tricks.
12. Weblogs are cheap. You want to find an easy, inexpensive, fast, geek-free, hassle-free way to publish and manage content? It's here. It won't put out the New York Times Online. But it will put out breaking news or reports from correspondents in the field or, soon, reports from the Little League game.
13. Weblogs interact. Once old-media people (as opposed to an old media people) have read weblogs and learned from them and milked them for news and perspective and buzz and talent and then started weblogs themselves, there's one, last, most important value be be derived from having and reading weblogs: They will help you gain an entirely new relationship with the people we used to call the audience, the folks we are trying to serve. We talk to them and now they talk back and not just to yell at us now but to say something. We get to know them; they get to know us. That's new. That's exciting."
Source: BuzzMachine - http://www.buzzmachine.com/archives/2003_10.html#004900
A list of reasons why weblogs are innovative and do things that established media (particularly conventional journalism) cannot necessarily do, is available on a weblog, the BuzzMachine, produced by Jeff Jarvis, who concludes that weblogs are complementary to established media, not a replacement:
"1. Weblogs are meant to be read. The first, best thing a reporter, editor, publisher, producer can do is read weblogs -- not write them, read them. We in established media have had printing presses for hundreds of years. Now it's everybody else's turn. Now the people formerly known as "they" have a voice and we should listen. We should put the spotlight on "them" and stand back. See what we will learn.
2. Weblogs add information. Established media are in the information business. And weblogs bring in more information, often from new sources. If the big guys learn how to take advantage of that, then weblogs will not replace them; they will enhance them. That is why I am trying to bring blogs to towns, so citizen journalists can gather information no institution can afford to gather on its own (especially these days).
3. Weblogs bring perspective. See the Howell Raines post below. We, the people, formerly known as the audience, want to express our opinions and know the opinions of those talking to us. Weblogs allow anyone to become a pundit.
4. Weblogs target. They are a great way to reach and serve specific audiences with content -- and advertising (and to find out what those audiences want to know).
5. Weblogs capture buzz. If you want to know what the people are saying and thinking, you can (a) hire a company to perform very expensive surveys and focus groups and hope they're right, (b) go to the nearest Dennys and eavesdrop and hope you like patty melts, or (c) read weblogs. Weblogs are good at capturing and predicting buzz.
6. Weblogs produce story ideas. I know of one reporter on one paper -- Maureen Ryan at the ChiTrib -- who is dedicated to finding great stories online. There should be more. And, for that matter, every reporter should be mining weblogs for ideas. They're there to be had, ripe for the plucking. Just go get them.
7. Weblogs find (and filter) news. Remember agents? Those little virtual PacMen (well, actually, they used to bring to mind the Scrubbing Bubbles commercial) were supposed to go out into the vast, wired world and and find news and other good stuff for you. Science fiction, it was. Agents died. But weblogs live. Weblogs -- and their agents, aka their readers, that is, real people -- fan out and find all kinds of wonderful stuff.
8. Weblogs fact check our ass. It's wonderful to have this world of natterers and naysayers out there, for they will fact-check (and even copy-edit) blogs and newspapers, magazines, and broadcast. That is a good thing. That adds to the credibility of all media. If Howell Raines (see above and below) had heard what people were saying about him and his paper before his own staff screamed it in his ear, he might have held onto his job.
9. Weblogs add speed. During the war, no single media outlet, print or broadcast, or online, could keep up with the news-gathering power of Command Post. I didn't say reporting. I said gathering. The weblogs brought together the best of reporting from every available outlet -- all around the world -- with incredible, impressive speed. That's valuable. A wise news organization will harnass that. Come the next war (God forbid) I'd license not only AP content but also Command Post links.
10. Weblogs breed talent. And, lo, Denton begat Gawker and Gawker begat Spiers and Spiers begat TheKicker. I just recommended another blogger to a magazine editor looking for new talent. And there are more where they came from (just ask Denton). A wise editor should be looking to bloggers to find new and fresh (not to mention cheap) voices. Mind you, some people are better at writing for blogs than for print; they thrive in the immediacy and may wilt in the smokehouse of editing. But there is great talent to be found here. All you have to do is read.
11. Weblogs experiment. Weblogs find new ways to use photos and audio and I've played with video weblogs. Weblogs will innovate and if we watch, old media can learn new tricks.
12. Weblogs are cheap. You want to find an easy, inexpensive, fast, geek-free, hassle-free way to publish and manage content? It's here. It won't put out the New York Times Online. But it will put out breaking news or reports from correspondents in the field or, soon, reports from the Little League game.
13. Weblogs interact. Once old-media people (as opposed to an old media people) have read weblogs and learned from them and milked them for news and perspective and buzz and talent and then started weblogs themselves, there's one, last, most important value be be derived from having and reading weblogs: They will help you gain an entirely new relationship with the people we used to call the audience, the folks we are trying to serve. We talk to them and now they talk back and not just to yell at us now but to say something. We get to know them; they get to know us. That's new. That's exciting."
Source: BuzzMachine - http://www.buzzmachine.com/archives/2003_10.html#004900
Weblogs and journalism
In relation to the weblog assignment, take a look at Rebecca Blood's
Weblogs and journalism in the age of participatory media, July 2003
This also links to a section on Weblog Ethics, where she comes up with 6 standards that weblogs should follow:
Weblogs and journalism in the age of participatory media, July 2003
This also links to a section on Weblog Ethics, where she comes up with 6 standards that weblogs should follow:
- Publish as fact only that which you believe to be true
- If material exists online, link to it when you reference it.
- Publicly correct any misinformation.
- Write each entry as if it could not be changed; add to, but do not rewrite or delete, any entry.
- Disclose any conflict of interest.
- Note questionable and biased sources.
How Real Are Internet Friendships?
Another article by Jeremy Stangroom, this time in the sophists philosophy forum, "How Real Are Internet Friendships? 06/02/04 which points out that it is both easier to deceive other people on the internet than in face-to-face contact, but that also it can release us from some of the distortions of face-to-face relationships
"It does seem to be true that we can have a certain kind of confidence in people we meet in person which is not available in online relationships. Particularly, the opportunity for gross deception is minimised in a face to face situation....it is very easy to deceive people on the internet by inventing wholly imaginary personas - something which it is much more difficult to achieve in the non-virtual world"
But also....
"non-virtual relationships are subject to kinds of distortion which are largely absent from internet relationships......For example, as a consequence of what psychologists call a ‘positive halo effect’, attractive people are considered more intelligent, more moral, better adjusted, nicer, more sexually responsive and more competent than their less attractive fellows. And, of course, it isn’t only attractiveness that influences the judgements we make about people. We also take our cues from, amongst other things, age, sex, racial characteristics, style of dress, accent and social class"
"It does seem to be true that we can have a certain kind of confidence in people we meet in person which is not available in online relationships. Particularly, the opportunity for gross deception is minimised in a face to face situation....it is very easy to deceive people on the internet by inventing wholly imaginary personas - something which it is much more difficult to achieve in the non-virtual world"
But also....
"non-virtual relationships are subject to kinds of distortion which are largely absent from internet relationships......For example, as a consequence of what psychologists call a ‘positive halo effect’, attractive people are considered more intelligent, more moral, better adjusted, nicer, more sexually responsive and more competent than their less attractive fellows. And, of course, it isn’t only attractiveness that influences the judgements we make about people. We also take our cues from, amongst other things, age, sex, racial characteristics, style of dress, accent and social class"
How civility can be lost in cyberspace
In interpreting the difference between online and offline communities we also need to consider the way in which we use email. Jeremy Stangroom, in "How civility can be lost in cyberspace.", "TPM Online, Word of Mouse Issue 24", makes the following points about the difference between offline and online communication due to the informality and speed of email :
"First, email is pretty much instantaneous. Therefore, it is just more likely with email that things will be said in haste which would not have been said had more time been taken for reflection.
Second, the internet facilitates relatively anonymous communication. Consequently, in our virtual lives, we’re more likely to be interacting with people we’ve never met, we’re never going to meet, and whom we don’t know anything about. In such a situation, there is more chance that we will treat them as though they are not quite fully human subjects.
Third, internet communication involves geographical distance, which removes many of the barriers to aggressive behaviour which exist in the non-virtual world. Not least, you’re not likely to get hit for sending someone an abusive email, whereas this is certainly a possible response to abuse in a face-to-face situation"
"First, email is pretty much instantaneous. Therefore, it is just more likely with email that things will be said in haste which would not have been said had more time been taken for reflection.
Second, the internet facilitates relatively anonymous communication. Consequently, in our virtual lives, we’re more likely to be interacting with people we’ve never met, we’re never going to meet, and whom we don’t know anything about. In such a situation, there is more chance that we will treat them as though they are not quite fully human subjects.
Third, internet communication involves geographical distance, which removes many of the barriers to aggressive behaviour which exist in the non-virtual world. Not least, you’re not likely to get hit for sending someone an abusive email, whereas this is certainly a possible response to abuse in a face-to-face situation"
spam update
"The volume of spam shows little sign of diminishing. MessageLabs scans 65 million e-mails a day and in August found 84% of them were spam."
Source - BBC News, Wed. 8/09/04
If you look at the MessageLabs website they give a daily update on levels of spam. Today, for example (11/09/04) spam is running at 80% of all email messages
Source - BBC News, Wed. 8/09/04
If you look at the MessageLabs website they give a daily update on levels of spam. Today, for example (11/09/04) spam is running at 80% of all email messages
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
Powerpoint presentations
Most of you will most likely use Powerpoint presentations for the class presentation part of your second assignment. It is a useful skill to acquire but you should be aware of some of its drawbacks. It is estimated that PPT is used in some 30 million presentations each day and is certainly in danger of being over used.
Powerpoint can be distracting and coercive. As the lights dim for the presentation, any little interaction that remains between the speaker and the audience disappears. It makes it far too easy for both parties to stop paying attention. (Politics of PowerPoint, John Saunders, 21/11/03)
Powerpoint can be distracting and coercive. As the lights dim for the presentation, any little interaction that remains between the speaker and the audience disappears. It makes it far too easy for both parties to stop paying attention. (Politics of PowerPoint, John Saunders, 21/11/03)
At just over 200 words, Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address in which he defined what the American Civil War was about, is rated as one of the great feats of concise speech-making. If you want to see what the Gettysburg Address looks like on PowerPoint have a look at a version on PPT by Peter Norvig. Especially good is the introduction:
"Good morning. Just a second while I get this connection to work. Do I press this button here? Function-F7? No, that's not right. Hmmm. Maybe I'll have to reboot. Hold on a minute. Um, my name is Abe Lincoln and I'm your president. While we're waiting, I want to thank Judge David Wills, chairman of the committee supervising the dedication of the Gettysburg cemetery. It's great to be here, Dave, and you and the committee are doing a great job. Gee, sometimes this new technology does have glitches, but we couldn't live without it, could we? Oh - is it ready? OK, here we go....",
The Gettysburg Powerpoint Presentation, Peter NorvigFor a list of articles discussing the impact of PowerPoint, look at the Powerpointless website
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
